If you are an artist, you don't have money to hire anyone normally (assuming you aren't already established) that's why it's somewhat of a reverse relationship, artist gets discovered, an advance and studio time plus additional work related to PR and so forth.
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.
Apple Asking Music Labels to Cut Prices on Music Streaming Subscriptions
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you are an artist, you don't have money to hire anyone normally (assuming you aren't already established) that's why it's somewhat of a reverse relationship, artist gets discovered, an advance and studio time plus additional work related to PR and so forth.
I am currently using Google Play because of a free 6 mo. promotion. Prior to that I used GrooveShark (free). I don't even pay $10 a mo. for all you can watch movies/TV shows. I've said all along the ONLY way I would pay for a "premium" streaming service is if Apple did it right and had full iOS integration. Then it MIGHT be worth it.
P.S. I do like Google Play - but UI is pretty clunky
P.S. I do like Google Play - but UI is pretty clunky
They aren't the ones paying the artists. The label is in charge of that. Apple is just trying to justify the cost of lowering the subscription to win over users from Spotify and Rdio.
So the label is the real bad guy here.
Agreed
However, I think there's a big difference between radio where the listener has little control over what is being essentially DJ'd vs a service where the listener can pick and choose and create playlists as if the entire pool of music is theirs.
I'm not saying that streaming is bad or doesn't play a role in marketing, however, I don't think emerging artists can afford to loose out on potential cd and song sales because ..."I already have it on my streaming service" ...
I was paying 7.99 for Google Play, but I hardly used it. If Apple offers something between 5 to 7 monthly I will do it...
It would be great if once downloading an album "fro free", you then sent the $10-12 direct to the artist.
The whole idea of purchasing content is dwindling.
More people are streaming everything in general. Movies, music, renting e-books. Everyone wants a buffet at a low price.
I know several independent artists who produce their music and sell it directly on iTunes through their own label because they want to maximize profits.
I agree with others that say if Apple can provide an all-in-one streaming service that provides everything I'd be willing to try it out.
PS - Now we know why they brought Iovine and Dre on board... to "negotiate"
More people are streaming everything in general. Movies, music, renting e-books. Everyone wants a buffet at a low price.
I know several independent artists who produce their music and sell it directly on iTunes through their own label because they want to maximize profits.
I agree with others that say if Apple can provide an all-in-one streaming service that provides everything I'd be willing to try it out.
PS - Now we know why they brought Iovine and Dre on board... to "negotiate"
That and all the promotion. Big labels have sway with the media and even though you can try YouTube or other social media, you would have more success being with a label in promoting yourself. Also they are able to bring together artists with producers other artists and tech people. They book and pay for your studio time as well.
Well they make their money on hardware so I'd prefer the higher prices instead of selling my information like Google just to hit a lower price point.
And if you were talking about the price of content in the iTunes store, it is set by the studios/publishers.
If Google actually did this your comment would have merit. But since they don't, well....
I have a pretty extensive collection but my number 1 played song has been out for 4 years now and i've played it 87 times. I still like the song at but my play count has declined in favour of other music.
The 10th (64 times) - 20th (50) - 40th (41) - 80th (19) and it trails off from there.
So while that 1 song may net that artist more money over the upcoming years it still doesn't account for the other 9 songs on their CD which are not as heavily played 2nd (32) 3rd (16) ....etc .
I also don't think the play count of the top 0.5% of my music collection really reflects the average artist play count in the indie scene.
Founders in other industries too don't have money to pay all the marketing, the technical facilities and accounts functions too. Think of someone like Zuckerberg or the Google guys. The initial support functions were provided for by VC's and others - but the founders dont get taken to the cleaners by the various hangers on to be left fighting for pennies....
They should follow apple and sell their product with hardly any profit margin.......wait, thats not right.
Exactly! A billion dollar company is asking them to lower their price..... How about you don't maximize profits at every turn apple, that will end up blighting you on the butt.
It's sad for the artists, but record sales profits have all but vanished, and concerts is where most of their money is made nowadays.
Whatever happened to buying a god damn song, organizing it on your iTunes library, and then syncing it with your iPod Classic?
A founder is usually someone with a business acumen, an entrepreneur. A musician is often not, and their motivation is often different. The amount of money that gets paid depends on what kind of contract you sign, and I think that differs somewhat between independent smaller labels and the larger ones. But you have a point, perhaps there is a different way to do essentially the same thing.
"We may share aggregated, non-personally identifiable information publicly and with our partners – like publishers, advertisers or connected sites. For example, we may share information publicly to show trends about the general use of our services."
If they didn't collect your data and sell it, how would they make money?
https://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/
All I'll say to Apple on that is... good luck with that one...
I can imagine the response they'll get, do they want to keep iTunes going?
I can imagine the response they'll get, do they want to keep iTunes going?
Last edited:
this. ive known plenty of talented artists who would have an audience, but have neither the interest nor the aptitude to do so. they are totally different worlds...
I can't think of any music worth downloading illegally.
Hey I downloaded Def Leppard.
Only because you can't buy or stream their older stuff online. I think they're one of the few holdouts (along with Garth Brooks).
Artists make the majority of their money on tours, secondly merchandising, ad campaigns (perfumes, commercials, food) etc.