Apple in Talks With Florence and the Machine, Taylor Swift About Exclusive Beats Content

[Rafterman]

Nothing pizzzzzes me off more than "exclusivity". Going back to the original iPhone and AT&T, DirectTV and the NFL packages, Verizon and the NFL for streaming on phones, and now a lot of music is going "exclusive". There's no better way to say "we love money more than the customer" than an exclusive agreement.

 

[fermat-au]

My admiration of Florence and the Machine just dropped a couple of notches.

 

[oldmacs]

Ooooo Florence + the machine... Bring it on ###

 

[bobthedino]

Another big win for Apple would be to collaborate with Taylor Swift on computer security matters: https://twitter.com/swiftonsecurity

 

[skellener]

....which also hopes to attract subscribers....

More like which also hopes to get bought out fast...

 

[psylence2k]

There's still the who renting bit. I want to move/copy/transfer my purchases, when and where I want.

I think that's one of the main points/benefits of streaming services. You dont have to keep up with searching, downloading, copying, and moving files. All your stuff is automatically on all your devices for instant access.

Wouldn't Flava Flav be more appropriate for Beats than Flo?

Why? Beats is not centered around one genre/artist. Dont really know where you're going with this...

Well, that's boring.

How about more contemporary and relevant artists like Adele, Bette Midler, Queen, The Black Eyed Peas, Daft Punk?

Bette Midler and Queen are more contemporary and relevant than Taylor Swift ?

Not so sure 'exclusive content' will be the best content; Target has been doing that trick for years (bonus disc only for Target), it's usually remixes and tracks which didn't make the main cut

I'm surprised how much I enjoy Florence and the Machine music

it usually isn't but it's still extra content. I dont think anyone has really ever tried to pass off bonus tracks as the best tracks on an album.

Great... Make ever song exclusive to this or that platform. Its really pissing me off and somehow Spotify is always painted as the bad guy. Ill just go back to torrenting in that case. I aint gonna pay for 3+ different streaming services just to listen to certain artists. Idiots! They just dont get it. That new TIDAL crap being the worst of them all. And speakinf of Taylor Swift, she already put her discography up on Tidal so it makes no sense

I dont think this deal is to exclusively hold her catalog but to the rights of certain future content.

 

[yg17]

Interesting article, but I'd pay $10 a month to not ever have to hear Taylor Swift ever again.

 

[mariusignorello]

I get a complimentary subscription with Rdio for being an independent artist. They do not lock me in to an exclusive contract for distributing my content. I like TIDAL because of the sound quality, something I'm hoping Rdio gets on board with, considering they charge $15 a month for the Unlimited plan. I would have to be begged to give up Rdio due to their actual care and concern about artist royalties.

 

[uid15]

Florence and the machine:

 

[Robert.Walter]

I'm wondering where the Balkanization of content in TV and music is going!

I really fail to see how customers are going to embrace a patchwork of several content distributors with some degree of original, unique or exclusive content, but none having all.

It would seem like all the a la carte options will get expensive and in so doing, open up space for someone to unify these at a decent price.

My guess is that Apple can push the content owners with both the full content themes and cheaper prices by leveraging the scale of its installed customer base.

Tricky balancing act and negotiation.

 

[ThunderSkunk]

If it actually puts some revenue back in the pockets of artists and allows them to keep doing what they do, then great.

The difference between this being good for music and being a cash-in, is if we see Apple and Amazon and Google Play fund some promising independent artists recording sessions or performances, instead of just throwing even more sweetheart deals to the same old corporate-backed JayZ's and people who've already made the millions, and who really don't need even more of the help and market share.

For the money involved, you can either hand U2 & Jay Z another million they don't need, or put HUNDREDS of up & coming bands in the studio to make EP's & albums, & promote them on iTunes, & better your odds of having several hits & make the $.

----------

I'm sorry to hear that Florence and the Machine may have sold out Great band back in the day.

Back in what day? 2009/2010? O my gods, it's a miracle you can remember back that far! Back in the day...

 

[pauliaK]

This is bad for every single of us and I would never pay money for a service like this. I'll keep on supporting Spotify and no matter how much harm Apple is able to do to services like Spotify there's no way I'm going to Apple for music as long as they have policies like this in place. Makes me really sad when you think about this whole thing.

 

[Artimus12]

What The Hole in the ground?

Who in the holy moses is Taylor Swift when she's at home? and who's the minted individual that's going to pay 10$£€ per month (120 p/a mind you) for music that they'll never be able to hold [Vapourware!]? and then theirs Radio ...remember the free music streaming service that's been around for decades?

Why stream? I probably don't spend that much buying music that I can re-encode to any format I wish, and own forever. For 25$£€ per year I can stream my own music from the cloud via iTunes Match ...or is that another Apple dead end that'll get me a free year of the new service when they kill it?

I'm not interested and don't want it on my idevice, so don't waste space by bundling it with iOS ...and besides, didn't Microsoft get spanked in Europe for bundling Internet Explorer with Windows? Do I smell another anti-trust lawsuit?

I make that an even 10 questions, how about you?

 

[inscrewtable]

Taylor Swift.....music loving subscribers.

I don't see how those two concepts go together. Maybe Apple should get into the music production business with their own label.

 

[nick42983]

It'd be funny if they paid off Taylor Swift, while continuing to pay other artists the pennies she was complaining about.

 

[localman]

...They're preparing to move to HD Audio...

If they already offer FLAC, as you indicate, there's no such thing as real HD Audio beyond that. 44.1/16 is already well beyond the limits of human hearing (yes, even yours). Sample rates and bit depths beyond that are a gimmick.

If you don't believe me, believe the people who work with audio algorithms for a living: http://xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

 

[MrCrowbar]

Can we just move on, as a society, from exclusive content?

Absolutely. The music business, as it is right now, is disgusting. Somehow the industry manages to convince people that certain songs are good and you should want to buy it. But then you can't buy it because the service or device ecosystem you're using doesn't have it. And even if they have it, you don't actually buy it, but just rent it or have a license to play it on a few devices. You can't ever re-sell it (not even the license), you can't give it away, etc.

The high-rollers in the business can't deal with the fact that their business model doesn't work anymore, just like retailers can't accept that buying something online is such a better and cheaper experience and they're whining and complaining about bad sales.

I stopped supporting the music industry years ago. Every couple of years there's a major label song I actually like, then I listen a couple of times on youTube and then I'm satisfied and never wanna hear it ever again. Independent music is different, I buy (and sell) lots of stuff on bandcamp.

I think if music was cheaper (just as technology gets cheaper), it would sell just as well but get more exposure. Kid rock did it right for concerts, ticket price went from 60 to 20 dollars and they make just as much from a concert but instead of having a few richards in the audience, there's a lot of people, fans and people only knowing one song. Performing in front of a big enthusiastic (and young) crowd is much more fun too.

 

[Mildredop]

Sorry but I'm just not willing to rent content, especially considering my data plan's limitations.

So you'll never use Spotify/Play Music etc either?

 

[JAT]

Well, if we could rename apps this wouldn't be so bad. Because we'd have to rename iTunes, iHeartRadio, etc, to artist names...so we can remember which damn app we have to open to hear the music we want that day!!

 

[Michael CM1]

I thought iTunes was supposed to pull people away from illegal downloading with a simple one-time purchase so you can own the song. Now to hear certain exclusive songs you have to pay monthly to rent it. I can't afford to have multiple subscriptions to multiple steaming music services, so I guess I'll be missing out on new content somewhere. Makes me miss Limewire.

"Exclusive" is likely to mean just what it did for the Beyonce album or HBO Now -- exclusive for a few months and then it's available everywhere.

 

[FrankieTDouglas]

Millions of people own iPhones and iPads, and Apple can create a streaming music app that's heavily integrated within iTunes and installed on Apple devices automatically.

Awesome, another app I can add into my "Apple Crap" folder of un-deletable apps.

The Music app also comes automatically installed on my iPhone, with the whole Radio feature built in. Number of times I've used it? Once. Then it joined the previously mentioned folder, and I resumed my music listening in Spotify, something I CHOOSE to have on my phone.

 

[iBreatheApple]

So you'll never use Spotify/Play Music etc either?

I use spotify, but not solely. And I don't pay for it. If the plans were cheaper, perhaps. I've thought about the $4.99 student plan. And I only use it on the desktop or when connected to wifi. I'm just not liking of all of these little subscription services that are taking over. I guess we just consume so much content nowadays.

Even YouTube is about to start a monthly plan (if you don't want ads)

 

[MacrumoursUser]

Since when taylor swift is a singer?

 

[thekeyring]

Lots of naysayers here.

My girlfriend loves Spotify but admits that the playlists can seem a bit random, and that the Beats curation had her interested.

Re: people not renting music. I don't think this is intended to replace your media library, but rather act like on demand radio. If there's a song, album or artist you love you can still own their music, but you can discover new things (which you might learn you hate) without having to buy them.

Like having a personalised radio station just for you while you workout or whatever.

 

[springsup]

Apple is a US company. They will always do things in the US first and / or have the power to negotiate here first. Should not be surprising.

No, they're not. All multinationals (Apple included) are stateless. They have no roots or emotional attachment or sense of belonging to the communities they situate themselves in.

And if they want to keep themselves at the top of the global pile, they will have to start thinking globally. They treat China with an enormous amount of deference but the EU is almost insultingly ignored.