2 ms·
apple fitness I imagine has a pretty small opex (sure they pay trainers, but that doesn't scale linearly with subscriptions. the videos themselves are limited i
by endisneigh 4y ago
apple fitness I imagine has a pretty small opex (sure they pay trainers, but that doesn't scale linearly with subscriptions. the videos themselves are limited in scope and could be cached pretty trivially. the actual fitness tracking happens on device), same with apple arcade which I highly doubt has any additional expensive over the app store in general.
I can see it - "Siri+", pay $5 a month for fine tuned model upgrades straight to your device and remote fallback. local inference available for Pro devices only.
- brundolf 4y agoYou don't need a subscription to track and view your data (I've got an apple watch and no subscription). I think all the subscription gets you are the training courses (videos, but also live events and stuff)
- endisneigh 4y agomy point was more around how you need apple fitness + subscription to do relatively trivial things like show your health metrics on a TV (which you also need an apple TV for).
- smugma 4y agoIf you look at Peloton’s financial statements, you’ll see that your assumptions are off. For one thing, music costs are significant (Peloton had to settle a $200M law suit for not doing it right). In addition to the trainers, you have producers, graphic designers, artist spotlights, celebrity interviews, etc. Yes, some costs are fixed so with more subs you get higher profitability but that’s really different than charging for something that doesn’t have a variable cost.