上周，围绕苹果可能打算制造一款独立电视机的事出现了大量传闻：从百思买（Best Buy）所泄漏的顾客调查问卷到调研网站Globe and Mail所发布的相关报道不一而足。该报道称，加拿大电信公司已经开始在其实验室里测试苹果电视机。虽然众说纷纭，但咨询公司Jefferies International的彼得•麦塞克团队发布的长达23页的报告可谓鹤立鸡群。

    麦塞克没有分神去猜测这款电视机的控制方式是语音、键盘还是手势或至三者的结合，而是重点探讨了对所有网络电视制造商而言最难破解的问题：如何在用户希望的时间和地点（换言之，随时随地），向其提供足够多的高品质内容。

    麦塞克提到了苹果投资者们所热议的三种可能方式——创造内容、孵化内容、购买独家播放权。但他随后就否定了这些方案，转而将注意力集中在自己认为最可能的一种方式：购买非独家播放权，以避免刺激好莱坞制片商。

    “我们认为最可能出现的情况是（苹果采取）iTunes模式，这样一来，苹果公司只需为非独家内容支付较少的费用，从而使用户能收看更多的内容（创造更好的用户体验），并用一个出众的用户界面和生态系统来包装所有内容。我们认为，苹果有信心在争夺内容的公平竞赛中胜出。”

    虽然这个方案听起来很容易，但实现起来相当复杂。麦塞克列出了苹果获得非独家内容可能采取的五种方式，并逐一分析了它们的优缺点：

    • 1)与拥有视频传输能力的运营商合作：我们认为美国电话电报公司（AT&T）、威瑞森（Verizon）、加拿大贝尔（Bell Canada）和罗杰斯（Rogers）等公司已开始测试iTV。以上运营商不但具备有线视频传输能力，而且还具备苹果梦寐以求的无线传输能力。

    • 优点：执行简单。选择面广而且视频质量高。

    • 缺点：这些运营商的有线视频网仅仅覆盖了美国一小部分地区。

    • 2)与多业务运营商（MSO）合作：我们不确定有线电视公司是否会与苹果iTV合作。

    • 优点：选择面广而且视频质量高。

    • 缺点：虽然很多有线电视公司都已开始与无线运营商展开合作【例如，康卡斯特（Comcast）和时代华纳有线（Time Warner Cable）最近与威瑞森达成合作】，但不同设备之间的无缝衔接难度太大。

    Amid all the chatter this week about Apple's (AAPL) putative plans to build a standalone TV set -- from Best Buy's leaked customer survey to the Globe and Mail's report that Canadian telcoms are already testing the thing in their labs -- the 23-page report produced by Peter Misek's team at Jefferies International stands out.

    Rather than get distracted by speculation about whether it would be controlled by voice, keyboard, arm waving or all three, Misek focuses on the nut that will be the toughest for any Web-TV manufacturer to crack: how to deliver a critical mass of the best content to its users when and where they want it -- which it to say, anytime, anywhere.

    Misek raises and dismisses three approaches Apple's deal makers might take -- creating content, seeding content, buying exclusive access -- to zero in on what he believes will be the most likely: buying non-exclusive rights in a way that doesn't make Hollywood's content owners nervous.

    "We think an iTunes-type model is the most likely scenario as Apple will pay less for non-exclusive content, provide access to a broader range of content (creating a better user experience) and package everything with a superior user interface and ecosystem. We believe Apple thinks it can win on a level playing field for content."

    Sounds simple, but it gets pretty complicated. Below the fold: Misek's summary of five scenarios by which Apple could acquire non-exclusive content, with their pros and cons.

    • 1) Partner with carriers who have a video offering: we believe the iTV is in the labs at AT&T, Verizon, Bell Canada, and Rogers. All these carriers have fixed line video offerings in addition to the wireless capabilities that Apple desires.

    • Pros: simple to implement. High quality video with wide selection.

    • Cons: the carriers' fixed line video footprint covers only a small part of the U.S.

    • 2) Partner with MSOs: we are less sure if the cable companies will be involved in Apple's iTV plans.

    • Pros: high quality video with wide selection.

    • Cons: while many cable companies have wireless partnerships with a carrier (e.g., Comcast and Time Warner Cable recently linking with Verizon), a seamless hand-off between different devices would be more complicated.