Apple Asking Music Labels to Cut Prices on Music Streaming Subscriptions

[kerrikins]

Exactly. People don't want to pay for content any more. And why should they? They get it entirely free and this will never change. So trying all this weird stuff to try to get people to pay for content again, is simply

INSANE


Apple is now insane. This would scare the pee out of me if I was at all invested in Apple beyond being a regular consumer.


As an example, I just thought of a song to illustrate:

Here it is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUecUKa_yqo

Did you listen to it? How much did you pay to listen to it?

I think you missed the part where I said that this is a *problem*. People not paying = less money, less money = fewer artists, fewer artists = less music. I mean that's just the way it goes.

Also, you realise that songs on Youtube are put there with the intention of getting views and raising money through ads, right? Also the intent of getting awareness and the person hopefully purchasing the song on iTunes...

No matter how people try to justify the fact that they are cheap and want artists to create for free, the fact remains that it's crappy and it's impacting all sorts of creative people.

 

[iolinux333]

I think you missed the part where I said that this is a *problem*. People not paying = less money, less money = fewer artists, fewer artists = less music. I mean that's just the way it goes.

Also, you realise that songs on Youtube are put there with the intention of getting views and raising money through ads, right? Also the intent of getting awareness and the person hopefully purchasing the song on iTunes...

No matter how people try to justify the fact that they are cheap and want artists to create for free, the fact remains that it's crappy and it's impacting all sorts of creative people.

I disagree. Since quality recording has become free, there has been a MUSIC EXPLOSION. It's phenomenal how much stuff is out there now, more than I could listen to in several lifetimes.

Truly creative people can't help but put their stuff out there. And they're doing it! They just have to make room and board the regular way. Maybe I'm one of those people.

Maybe you've heard some of my stuff. Maybe I don't give a frack whether I get paid for it cause I have other skills too, some that people are still willing to pay for. And if I didn't I'd be trying like heck to accumulate some more marketable skills.

I don't try to make buggy whips (or musical recordings) for a living because the risk is too high now that I'd starve to death trying. There's probably some people out there making buggy whips as hobby though. I'm sure they don't expect to pay the mortgage with it.

 

[chasemac]

And the Beats goes on. I tried it and it just isn't very good.

 

[CurtisCalderon]

Seeing so many of you defending musicians is really great! Since I don't sell millions and am not a famous musician, this doesn't affect me but it's so hypocritical of apple to do this. They charge a premium for everything they make because they consider it quality and increases the quality of life, yet they lowball music!!! They lowball everyone. They have Billions in cash or cash equivalents and they want to make even MORE!? WTF Apple? I've been loyal since 1993 when I got my first computer, real computer and now that you've made an enormous/glutenous amount of money, you want to make sure everyone else is poor except you? Makes me sad and disappointed.

I'm a professional musician full-time and always have been and over the years, seeing how you abandoned graphic artists in favor of more money, when they were the ones who were supporting you during the lean times. You abandoned musicians as well as photographers, videographers, etc... All of the arts Instead you focus on the general public because that's where the money is. Don't you have enough money already?

 

[chasemac]

Seeing so many of you defending musicians is really great! Since I don't sell millions and am not a famous musician, this doesn't affect me but it's so hypocritical of apple to do this. They charge a premium for everything they make because they consider it quality and increases the quality of life, yet they lowball music!!! They lowball everyone. They have Billions in cash or cash equivalents and they want to make even MORE!? WTF Apple? I've been loyal since 1993 when I got my first computer, real computer and now that you've made an enormous/glutenous amount of money, you want to make sure everyone else is poor except you? Makes me sad and disappointed.

I'm a professional musician full-time and always have been and over the years, seeing how you abandoned graphic artists in favor of more money, when they were the ones who were supporting you during the lean times. You abandoned musicians as well as photographers, videographers, etc... All of the arts Instead you focus on the general public because that's where the money is. Don't you have enough money already?

Although I have much respect and admiration for you (I am a musical and graphic artists myself 23 years). No company will ever give a flying feather about you. You make your own way and pluck those feathers that die.

 

[Marcus72]

This is why music today sucks. Artist don't get paid anymore on selling records/LP/ mp3 or whatever you call it. The only way the Artist makes any $$ is by touring. The only way to make MAJOR $$$ from touring is too turn your show into high tech, get naked, booty shaken broadway mess that cost $300 bucks per a show. The craft of musicianship is nearly gone, kids don't care about learning an instrument cause they make sounds on their Apple product, you don't even have know how to sing cause Apple can fix that too.

So sure make the music cheap, cause it sucks anyway.

 

[LastLine]

Spotify > anything Apple would ever try to make.

I'll take Napster personally....but yeah.

 

[Ramchi]

What about Apple?

Everyone has to cut prices from supplier till Music label so that Apple executives can have expensive lunch!

 

[luigi408]

Beats program is MEH. Glad Apple is looking to update it. I don't have a problem with the current fee they charge though either. It should be kept the same IMO.
I like to buy my music anyways from iTunes, Amazon, and I subscribe to iTunes Match (even if it sucks at matching and cleaning out my explicit music >:-|). I just like higher quality music, but I can see why streaming is loved, it is just simple to deal with than iTunes will ever be. Most of my family and friends that have iPhones never even open iTunes or sync their phones with iTunes (they are techie like myself).
They just don't care about iTunes at all. It's all about Spotify.

 

[chasemac]

I'll take Napster personally....but yeah.

Napster, really? Got a link?

 

[bpeeps]

There, fixed that for you.

Just because it's a cliche, doesn't mean it's true -- I fixed that for you ... THINK ABOUT IT!

Indie artists make most of their money from downloads. Downloads that come from programs like iTunes. Indies made about 80% of their revenue from downloads in 2011 and 70% in 2014. Streaming IS the future revenue source for smaller artists, s I doubt Apple will screw the artist here. Especially since they already support them pretty well with iTunes sales.

 

[buzzardo]

They gave away U2 for free. There's no reason people should expect to pay anything for lesser artists.

 

[TigerMSTR]

Am I the only person who loves beats music & thinks the 10 dollars a month I currently pay is worth it?

Nope. I agree as well

I can't believe that there are people who believe $10/month is too much. Thats the cost of less than 10 songs on iTunes... If you listen to 10 songs the subscription is already saving you money.

----------

Anyone who can't afford to pay $10 lousy dollars a month for an an "unlimited" amount of music, isn't a fan at all and just someone who is likely stealing it anyway. So basically Apple wants to try and bully the labels and get artists to work for slave wages so they can take their high markups? AIN'T GOING TO HAPPEN. NOR SHOULD IT.

Honestly I'd rather spend $10 a month than spend time hunting for good quality music downloads with metadata online. I guess I value my time more than I do my money.

Anyways once you go unlimited you can't go back. Having millions of songs in your library and being able to listen to any song whenever you want is a magical experience. I've been introduced to so much more new music since I've gotten Google Music All Access. It makes buying music seem so antiquated.

 

[chasemac]

Nope. I agree as well

I can't believe that there are people who believe $10/month is too much. Thats the cost of less than 10 songs on iTunes... If you listen to 10 songs the subscription is already saving you money.

10 bucks and music all you want. No brainer! The rest is history, besides my LPs.

 

[gnasher729]

Honestly, most streaming services are already only paying artists just more than 1 penny a play... That means you as a listener would have to listen to that song 70 times to give the artist even close to the 70 cents they make on 99 cent download today.

What makes you think that an artist gets anywhere near 70 cents from a 99 cent download? Any artist that is selling their music through a record company gets a few cents at most.

 

[TigerMSTR]

There is still a sizable fraction of folks out there, I'm one of them, who are not interested in streaming because they don't want to eat up all their data. I've never had an unlimited plan so I really do think about how much data I use each day and streaming music, much less video, would eat up my 1 GB/month pretty fast.

Google Play Music has munched through 300 MB of data on 7 days.. And that accounts for only about three hours of listening. But I have unlimited data so it's not a problem. Unlimited data + unlimited music is the perfect combo

----------

i subscribe.. beats is great.

just that i think we're way in the minority.. for instance, not a single one of my friends subscribes to a music service even though they're definitely music fans and are capable of paying 10/month..

3.99/month or 39.99/year would bring in much more people (disclaimer-- this is a guess)

I've tried getting friends to sign up for a music service,but they'd rather pirate. I honestly don't get why they're willing to waste so much time to get a poor music experience just to save $10.

 

[gnasher729]

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.

Are you afraid the recording industry executives will have to cut down on their cocaine?

 

[TigerMSTR]

It's pretty sad the economy is so terrible that people think ten dollars a month is too much for almost every song you can imagine.

It's not the economy... People are cheap and don't see any value in buying music.

The people I know who'd rather pirate than join a streaming service are the same ones paying $7 at Starbucks every morning and lining up to get $1000 iPhones

----------

I am deluged with free streaming music - I'm so swamped with free music that while I was initially thrilled and fascinated, I'm now overwhelmed and even getting tired of it. Songza has superior 100%free, curated, and commercial free lists than Beats ever did and Google just bought them for more than 100x less the price than stupid Apple bought Beats for. There are dozens and dozens of free streaming music apps and other sources out there.


I'm sorry but people that pay for streaming music these days are not very bright and free commercial free streaming music is never going to go away. Companies thinking they're going to make a profit off of buying one of the streaming apps have idiots running the company (this is becoming quite obvious at Apple) - unless they pull a Google, who bought Songza to collect more data, not to sell music. Pirated music will never go away either.


If a musician wants to get paid, they're gonna have to go back to the old fashioned way, the way it was for 1000s of years, except for the 20th century which was a weird aberration: They are going to have to draw a crowd, and they are going to have to PERFORM well enough that people will buy tickets, or at least give them food.

Songza is great; its curated music is the best in the industry in my opinion. But I can't create my own playlists on it or save songs to a library, nor can I listen on demand

 

[chasemac]

Are you afraid the recording industry executives will have to cut down on their cocaine?

I am.

 

[Lictor]

I think there are opportunities in making a streaming service that pays more, not less.

Yup, exactly. It's cheap anyway, might as well pay a bit more for superior service...
For instance, I took Qobuz even though it was a bit more expensive at first (14€, but now they're only at 10€), because :

• They're French, might as well use my money to help a local startup (especially now that they're in financial difficulties)
• They were the first platform to sell DRM free lossless music
• They have always promoted high quality streaming - lowest is 320kbs mp3 but you can pay more (20€) to have lossless FLAC streaming
• They're also an editor (mainly classical, jazz and world), so they actually contribute to creation
• They're in the process of moving their catalog to 24/96
• They have a very complete offer on jazz and classical music

I think the race to the bottom is not a good thing. I mean, what's the point of save a couple of euros per month? I would rather have quality and a system that supports creation.

 

[AFDoc]

Are you afraid the recording industry executives will have to cut down on their cocaine?

LoL.... really? You're defending apple in this?

 

[Lictor]

I've tried getting friends to sign up for a music service,but they'd rather pirate. I honestly don't get why they're willing to waste so much time to get a poor music experience just to save $10.

Because the experience is actually better with piracy than with many streaming services... The quality is better (you can get excellent 24/96 vinyl rips, including packs with multiples masters). The description is often better. And finding the right stuff is no more difficult that with some streaming services that just don't bother with duplicates or missing songs...
Not to mention that many artists or label decide to opt-out of streaming so you can only get 30s extracts.

That has always been a problem with the legal offer. Same with VoD: why would people pay for legal VoD to get vidéos with compression artifacts, low resolution or bad subtitles, not to mention missing movies or TV shows due to the fragmentation of the offer, when piracy offers uncompressed bluray rips?

 

[The Phazer]

Lot of other founders hire administrative and financial support too . They just don't take over their client and throw them pennies to the dollar.

They do if the client needs access to start up capital.

Most bands would find the terms a bank would give to loan them enough money to record an album to be considerably worse than those a label gave them.

 

[misdreavus79]

So what I gather from this comment section

is that if there are any of you here who own a business, you'd be more than willing to cut your own profit margins "for the benefit of others."

 

[Lictor]

you'd be more than willing to cut your own profit margins "for the benefit of others."

Well, if the "others" are the people allowing me to run my business in the first place and if cutting my profit margin is a way to keep the "others" alive and productive, yes, that's only good business practice...