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's iTunes Radio Terms With Record Labels Revealed
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No you don't... You lose access to Spotify's library. It was never your music to begin with. And why would it be? You're paying the price of one album per month for access to hundreds of thousands of albums, that you can pick and choose when and where you listen to. I'm pretty sure that's worth $10/month. A lot of listeners these days don't buy an album to listen to it over and over for decades... They'll listen to it 4 or 5 times then move on to the next favorite for the week.
I use iTunes Match. So, clearly it isn't nobody.
Don't say "nobody" as you sound as though you are 100% sure that "nobody" uses a service that I happen to know is used by "somebody."
Oh wait ... who are you ?
Are you a user of iTunes Match?
People don't? What people? Your people? You (Likely)? I love discovering new music and I love having multiple ways of discovering new music. I'm a person and therefore, the people you know may not want to discover something other than what they listen to or what they find cool. If I were listening to things like LilWayne, Pitbull, and Bieber, I would probably skip discovering anything new because there is only so much trash I can handle in a day.
As for the contract, this seems like it will cost Apple a fortune. Are iAds that profitable?
Small or large band, there's never any money in radio or Internet streaming. It's a well known fact. That's not the purpose of the service -- the idea is to generate sales through introducing people to new music. If people don't know about it, they can't buy it. Think of it as advertising music.
Services like Pandora and iRadio streamline the purchasing process too -- I'd be curious to see the statistics on click through purchases from these services.
On a related note, most artists typically get shafted on profits because of the deals with the record labels, managers, recording studios, etc. Once everyone gets their (large) share of the pie, the artist gets very little, even from bulk CD/mp3 sales. Hence why touring is the only real form of revenue for most bands (though merch and touring are still subject to record label agreements...)
These money sucking deals are in part why a lot of new artists are trying to go independent.
0.13 cents per song. Assuming 4 minutes per song, 2 cents per hour. Say 10 cents per day, $30 a year for an extreme listener. Much much less for the average (100 days, two hours a day, equals $4). Each case would make it worthwhile for many to buy an iPhone just for that.
Maybe down the road they will introduce Spotify-like features at extra cost.Given their built in market of iOS devices,ATV included,and computers with iTunes they may be able to do it more cheaply.That would be more attractive to me.
----------
Actually since the price of the phone before iRadio and after iRadio is unchanged,iRadio is by definition free.
http://www.aux.tv/2013/06/crackers-...-on-pandora-and-the-band-was-only-paid-42-25/
Cracker's Low was played 1,159,000 times on Pandora, the band collected $42.25 for this. $0.000036 per play. It's really pathetic.
Cracker's Low was played 1,159,000 times on Pandora, the band collected $42.25 for this. $0.000036 per play. It's really pathetic.
I thought the same thing at first, but then thought about how much more music sales they will get from iTunes. Perhaps that is what they are betting on.
Unless you paid all cash, as long as you are paying your mortgage the bank technically owns your home.
Google didn't do it better they took a different approach. Google did a streaming service for $9.99 a month where the user can listen to anything in the Google Music library as they wish.
Apple decided to do the free music discovery service where users are played targeted songs based on music in their library or interest. Apple will pay for the service via adverts and referrals to iTunes store purchases.
It's $25 a year to keep your entire library on every device. Why *wouldn't* you use iTunes Match?
Post taxes? What cut did the record label, studio, and management teams get?
As I mentioned before, a lot of the reason artists get peanuts for anything but touring is the terms of their contracts. That's not to say that they'd be making big bucks with Internet streaming anyways, but that's not the purpose of radio or streaming anyways -- it's meant to drive music sales through reaching new audiences, who otherwise wouldn't have heard them.
I have iTunes match and use it. Am Canadian, so it is likely that I will not get iRadio before the end of the year.
Even if Canadians get iRadio and do not have advertising I have no reason to be interested in it if it has limited skips. Just not interested if I can't select my music.
For me, iRadio is....nothing.
Tom
Even if Canadians get iRadio and do not have advertising I have no reason to be interested in it if it has limited skips. Just not interested if I can't select my music.
For me, iRadio is....nothing.
Tom
First, Spotify has a free service. You can pay if you want to get rid of ads, increase streaming quality, or use it on mobile.
But second, much like renting (if we want to continue your analogy here), ownership doesn't always make sense: I can discover dozens of new tracks per month for less than $10 even at Spotify's highest subscription, which with many of iTunes' selections would be like buying about 7-14 songs. For some people they break out better than even, plus get to discover and listen to a lot more music. If not or if you already know what you want, maybe buying is better, but it's hardly fair to slam Spotify here. You don't have to pay, and if you do, you can downgrade to the free service at any time with no change except the lost features. It's really nice to have access to something comparable to the iTunes library in size but with free, on-demand listening whenever I have a computer and and Internet connection. (I've used Spotify Premium, too, and offline mode is great for traveling.)
That's the amount on his actual royalty check, pre-taxes I would believe. It's just meant to show how little the artists actually receives. Of course bigger artists have stronger contracts-more of the revenue. But regardless, for a band to receive $42 after there song was played over 1 million times, it's pretty shocking.
It's a hit or miss, sometimes I'll get explicit songs, other times I won't. It seems that the Apple TV beta does have an option for enabling explicit songs (or to disable).
Definitely. iTunes Match costs only $25 per year.
It would seem that if I listened to 150 songs in a year on iTunes Radio that I would easily exceed that $25. And iTunes Match subscribers get iTunes Radio without commercials.
Something cannot be right about these figures.
UPDATE: Never mind... I read that as $0.14 per song, not $0.0014 per song (or 0.14 cents).
Perhaps, but among all my friends using Apple products no one is even thinking about using iRadio where they love Spotify way better simply because iRadio lacks everything Spotify can offer. I dig music, like my friends, but I'm not even thinking about using iRadio for a second. First of all it's only usable using iTunes which I don't like at all, secondly I like to create my own music list with numbers I choose and on top of that Spotify offers all the possibilities iRadio has to offer plus lot's more.
So why on earth should I abandon a way better product for iRadio?
Because it's free? So is Spotify if you dig the commercials and are in no need to listen to music offline.
If Apple wanted to make a giant statement and become once more extremely popular among the masses (because it's loosing ground in that context big time) it should have offered users a membership possibility just as cheap as Spotify or rather a bit cheaper for unlimited music access. Then, only then iRadio would have become a serious player because all tough I really dislike iTunes as a program (bad GUI and poor scaling options when using other formats) I can't deny that Apple's music story accessible using iTunes has way more to offer then Spotify when it comes to amount of music.
I was thinking costly for Apple. I'm down with the price of their Radio, which is free.
i really love the itunes radio, really flat and organized design, easy to use and perfomance is whooping fast. it's definitely my favorite music app.