Yeah, I'm dropping Spotify and using Amazon Music again. I recently checked and there was only one album that they don't have, that I normally listen to. Cheaper just to buy that one album then pay even the $5 student rate I still pay with Spotify.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Amazon Music Unlimited Launches With $3.99 Echo-Only Subscription Option
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah, I'm dropping Spotify and using Amazon Music again. I recently checked and there was only one album that they don't have, that I normally listen to. Cheaper just to buy that one album then pay even the $5 student rate I still pay with Spotify.
I'm not an audiophile, and having that, without an external speaker would sound good enough for me.
I don't need to advertise SiriusXm; I have the service and can get it anywhere. What I like from it is good enough for my tastes and don't need another streaming service. If I did want another streaming service I would have gotten apple music.
Is it called Echo (Echo) because now you get to pay Amazon for music twice (twice)?
It's not a slap in the face - this service needs to pay artists, and it's not going to be able to do that when a prime membership costs less than other subscription services even by itself.
The 3.99 prices is for Echo only and I do not think it will be a big hit. I actually think Amazon Echo could be in a lot of trouble with Google Home coming out. Google to me is the one company who I think is really suited to do that product right. They have all the pieces in place, especially the knowledge base from Google Search they can leverage.
Get to pay twice. If you already pay for Prime, but want this as well, then you pay twice. It was mostly a light-hearted gag though, don't worry about it
Anyway, I'm not saying it's a bad thing necessarily, I don't use Prime music enough to begin with to even consider paying more money to them for this, so I'm glad they didn't just include it in Prime and bump the price up.
I guess they had the courage to charge 3.99
Seriously, that's a great price, and even for prime members that's a nice price.
I know Apple doesn't compete on price, but if they want to continue to be players in this market they will
It only plays on echo for that price.
Understand what you're both saying. I posted my thoughts earlier in post #15 on where I think the music industry is (rightly or wrongly) going for artists.
Post #15 link
Yes I know. I've already said that I know you its for echo only multiple times in the thread already
[doublepost=1476274614][/doublepost]
I don't see this any different then apple's services. Prime has some benefits, and music service has some benefits.Get to pay twice. If you already pay for Prime, but want this as well, then you pay twice. It was mostly a light-hearted gag though, don't worry about it
Nice idea. But $3.99 or $10 or $20 for getting music to playback technically is not the point. But paying license fees, which quickly exceed this small amount to publicly playback is in that case. Not sure how's the situation in the US, but at least in most European countries you have to pay additional licensing fees for publicly playing back music from most artists – that is, if the artist is member of a collecting company, which most artists are. Usually doctors or shopping centers like to buy royalty free music from musicians not being members of any collecting companies.
It's the same like if you go to a club, the club doesn't only pay 99 cent on iTunes for the track but licensing fees for each playback on top of the cost of buying the track.
Not so. The rest of the business is profitable, although very low margin. AWS is a huge profit generator. But Amazon's strategy has always been to forego excess profits in favor of funding growth. Amazon is now the dominant player in retail, at least in the US, and its position is strengthening.
Amazon proves once again that big companies _can_ innovate.
Setting a great example for Apple to emulate
Proves? For mono music coming out of a can? Yup, they certainly beat Apple on that.
Setting the "innovation" and quality bar as low as it can go...
Not sure I see a huge benefit here. Maybe if it were automatically built into the Prime service. I'd rather pay $6 more to play music anywhere I want.
I guess they had the courage to charge 3.99
Seriously, that's a great price, and even for prime members that's a nice price.
I know Apple doesn't compete on price, but if they want to continue to be players in this market they will
The problem is, music lovers who care enough to pay a subscription for music will generally want to hear it on quality speakers, not Echo, and want access to their music everywhere. I don't think the market for this will be that big and will have a negligible impact on Apple.
Don't worry, like most Amazon things we won't get it here in the UK for a while yet. And when we do it'll probably be priced to bend us over
I enjoy music and I think a 3.99 price is better then what apple charges. Don't sell this service short, music subscriptions isn't about catering a small niche of audiophiles. Given the millions of subscribers on Spotify, Apple music and Pandora. Clearly Amazon is looking to tap that customer base and with what they're offering, they'll be very successful imo.
I do believe Apple has to worry about Amazon, they're a huge organization that has shown themselves adept at entering into markets and being successful.
How it is in the UK is expensive. £79/year compared to €49/year for pretty much the same service.
My thoughts exactly. I foresee artists abandoning this service for others that pay them more.