Does Apple need a content subsidiary?
Just reading the NBC and Apple brawling about the first (NBC) content in itunes, I got to the conclusion that Apple needs a content subsidiary.
A small but creative company that provides Direct to Itunes releases and search for new talents to be portrait in the store. A subsidiary that provides short films, cartoons and independents movies.
Steve Jobs acquired the experience in his days in Pixar, so it is not difficult to find talents unemployed and willing to have a project with the Jobso. Disney must has thousands of Curicullum Vitaes of those rejected, but highly skilled professionals needed for this new venture. so Steve gently can asks for them.
Apple should create something like Filemaker, that operates universally, but fully tied to Apple charisma, providing programs to other networks at the same time.
Can it be?
Of course and so easy for Apple that we can imagine, Apple has the ability to create marvel from a product, because it takes care of all the details, the marketing power it has can excel any company in the U. S. and the brand recognition will helps drive even more people to this new market for Apple.
Do not forget the relationship Apple has with movie producers, musicians, you just need to see any movie to realize that almost all computers are from Apple and if I don’t err here, Apple provides those equipments free. It is time to call those friends back.
So watch out for an Apple Content Subsidiary, small, creative, clean and ready to roll.
-
whataboutmac.com


No Comments, Comment or Ping
Reply to “Does Apple need a content subsidiary?”
You must be logged in to post a comment.