MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
54,154
15,958



Apple bought Beats Music to improve its standing in the streaming music marketplace, but the Cupertino company has its work cut out if it wants to compete with high-profile rivals Spotify and Pandora. According to App Annie metrics cited by CNET, Beats Music continues to trail its rivals in two important App Store metrics -- downloads and revenue.

app-annie-music.png
In the App Annie download rankings, Beats Music places ninth behind other music apps such as Shazam, GarageBand, SoundCloud and iHeartRadio. This lower ranking is undoubtedly affected by service pricing, as Beats Music requires a subscription while both Pandora and Spotify offer free, ad-supported options in their mobile apps.

By revenue, Apple's Beats Music benefits from its subscription model, ranking third behind market leaders Pandora Radio, which grabs the number one spot, and number two Spotify. The revenues measured in these metrics compromise only App Store payments to download the app and in-app purchases which include monthly subscription fees. It does not account for additional sources of revenue, such as advertising which is used extensively by Spotify and Pandora. Still, Beats is showing some improvement according to App Annie's statistics, moving up three spots on the revenue chart.

Apple purchased Beats Music as part of a larger $3 billion acquisition that also included Beats' popular line of audio products. Apple reportedly is planning to overhaul the Beats Music service with a refresh slated to debut early next year. The company allegedly also is in negotiations with music industry executives about slashing the monthly subscription cost, perhaps as much as in half to $5 per month.

Article Link: Pandora and Spotify Lead App Store Music Rankings as Beats Continues to Lag
 

bushido

Suspended
Mar 26, 2008
8,070
2,754
Germany
Can't stand the Beats app. Looks like an android app. They need to integrate in into iTunes

I LOVE spotify though
 
Comment

RhythmGuru

macrumors member
Nov 7, 2010
87
8
I'm a long time user and fan of Rhapsody. That being said, I'm surprised it's even on the list, since the media hardly even acknowledge their existence when talking about streaming/downloading music. I've tried the competition, I keep coming back to Rhapsody. Love their model. All you can download for free to your device, unlimited streaming, ad-free, millions of songs, for 9.99 per month. I hate the interfaces of the competition too.
 
Comment

BillyMatt87

macrumors 6502a
Dec 23, 2013
636
823
Apple needs to improve their own default music app before they can even think about improving somebody else's.
 
Comment

Menel

macrumors 603
Aug 4, 2011
6,221
1,167
I ended by Pandora subscription for iTunes Match/add-free Radio. While it's not quite as good, it's good enough.

As long as they don't take at least this basic service away when they add whatever rumored new Beats integration paywall, I'll be fine.
 
Comment

aajeevlin

macrumors 65816
Mar 25, 2010
1,239
559
I'm a long time user and fan of Rhapsody. That being said, I'm surprised it's even on the list, since the media hardly even acknowledge their existence when talking about streaming/downloading music. I've tried the competition, I keep coming back to Rhapsody. Love their model. All you can download for free to your device, unlimited streaming, ad-free, millions of songs, for 9.99 per month. I hate the interfaces of the competition too.

Wow, all you can download to your device? That's good to know. Besides that functionality it sounds similar to Spotify. Can't comment on the UI, that's more of personal preference.
 
Comment

stumpapi

macrumors member
Aug 1, 2010
45
51
Maine
I find this interesting, when it comes to streaming I mean. So far I haven't bought in yet. I find it hard to justify $120 a year or so just to listen to music. Especially once you listen if you don't renew is it all gone.

I wonder what thinking goes into a streaming subscription? Curious how others use it? Do others plan never to stop renewing? At least with purchased music it is always there.

Although, since there price is now a$1.29 pre song, my purchases have greatly decreased in number.
 
Comment

Klae17

macrumors 65816
Jul 15, 2011
1,122
1,343
If Apple gets $5 a month plans then Spotify will too. $5 a month and I'm in for life with Spotify!
 
Comment

RhythmGuru

macrumors member
Nov 7, 2010
87
8
Wow, all you can download to your device? That's good to know. Besides that functionality it sounds similar to Spotify. Can't comment on the UI, that's more of personal preference.

Yes, I use the desktop app to stream. On my iPhone and iPad I can download music to keep on my phone for when I don't want to use mobile data or when I'm not in cellular range. Pretty slick.

----------

I find this interesting, when it comes to streaming I mean. So far I haven't bought in yet. I find it hard to justify $120 a year or so just to listen to music. Especially once you listen if you don't renew is it all gone.

I wonder what thinking goes into a streaming subscription? Curious how others use it? Do others plan never to stop renewing? At least with purchased music it is always there.

Although, since there price is now a$1.29 pre song, my purchases have greatly decreased in number.

I switched to streaming because I was spending a lot more than 120 per year on purchased music. My Rhapsody library is hundreds of albums long, and I can use on any device. It saves me money, but I listen to a lot of music.
 
Comment

BMcCoy

macrumors 68000
Jun 24, 2010
1,682
3,357
Music is at a crossroads of sorts..

Without a clear and reasonable revenue model, where will we see new creative musical voices coming from?

iTunes has kept things going longer than many anticipated, by giving users a realistic alternative to illegal downloading/sharing.

I'm not sure anyone knows what to do next?
Which may mean the decline of music creation, which was already difficult enough to avoid poverty and obscurity.

The talent and creativity is still out there, but is it valued in the way it once was?
 
Comment

macduke

macrumors G4
Jun 27, 2007
11,679
16,156
Central U.S.
I've never looked at the charts, so I'm surprised that Rdio isn't higher on the list. Love that service.The design is a lot better than Beats.
 
Comment

TsMkLg068426

macrumors 65816
Mar 31, 2009
1,464
311
If only Beats was part of iTunes or iTunes Match it would make great success instead Tim Cook thinks having another music service people will just pony up and pay for it.
 
Comment

Mak47

macrumors 6502a
Mar 27, 2011
751
32
Harrisburg, PA
None of this matters until Apple figures out what it's going to do with Beats Music. At this point they've done nothing--yet it still generates more revenue than Slacker, Rdio and Rhapsody--competitors who have been around much longer and have embedded user bases.

It'll be interesting, but with the things Beats has on its platform that competitors don't (and are currently underutilized), a decent rebranding and marketing push is all it needs to dominate the others.
 
Comment

Mak47

macrumors 6502a
Mar 27, 2011
751
32
Harrisburg, PA
Music is at a crossroads of sorts..

Without a clear and reasonable revenue model, where will we see new creative musical voices coming from?

iTunes has kept things going longer than many anticipated, by giving users a realistic alternative to illegal downloading/sharing.

I'm not sure anyone knows what to do next?
Which may mean the decline of music creation, which was already difficult enough to avoid poverty and obscurity.

The talent and creativity is still out there, but is it valued in the way it once was?

It's definitely not valued like it once was, but there are reasons for that. Labels blame piracy, I blame the labels.

First, they stopped investing in real artists long ago. Since the 80's, major labels have only been interested in momentary one hitters. They can sign them cheap, make a bunch of money and then move on to the next one.

Second, they're so scared of piracy that they've retooled their entire business model to try and lure pirates into paying for music. It's incredibly stupid, totally naive, and doomed from the start. The entire streaming thing is a monster of their own creation and now they're realizing that it's going to eat them.

I say good. Let them be eaten, let the major labels die. Streaming works for small artists. They can refer people to these services to hear their music for free, and then as they build a fan base, can sell them records and other merchandise and attract them to shows. These artists are largely independent and don't care if they make money from streaming, whatever comes in is a bonus.

That's the model, it works, it's been working and it's been growing. There's no room in it for Miley Cyrus, Kesha or the other autotuned flavors of the week--who's fans aren't interested in investing in a physical product like a record--but there's plenty of room for lots of others.
 
Comment

zhenya

macrumors 604
Jan 6, 2005
6,825
3,509
Not surprising since almost nothing has been done to Beats since Apple acquired it. Nor does it have a free option as both Pandora and Spotify do which inevitably draws in paying customers.

I just hope Apple doesn't screw up Beats when they do get to working on it.

----------

Looks like Apple bought the wrong company.

As a heavy user of all 3 of those main services, I'd say Apple bought exactly the right company. Beats is a much better cultural fit for Apple than either Pandora or Spotify.
 
Comment

Parasprite

macrumors 68000
Mar 5, 2013
1,698
144
Ever since I bought a semi-decent pair of headphones* I'm amazed at how horrible the quality is on Pandora. I'll try out Beats at some point but Spotify or iTunes Radio seem like the only viable options for myself right now (outside of purchasing).

*They're not Beats.
 
Comment

Parasprite

macrumors 68000
Mar 5, 2013
1,698
144
As a heavy user of all 3 of those main services, I'd say Apple bought exactly the right company. Beats is a much better cultural fit for Apple than either Pandora or Spotify.

Beats said:
"We're popular with people who have expendable income."
Spotify said:
"We eat into iTunes sales"
Pandora said:
"post this coment to 7 songs, say you're lovers name 7 times and an ipod clasic will apear under your pillow tonite"

Maybe you have a point.
 
Comment

Traverse

macrumors 604
Mar 11, 2013
7,233
3,652
Here
As a heavy user of all 3 of those main services, I'd say Apple bought exactly the right company. Beats is a much better cultural fit for Apple than either Pandora or Spotify.

I can't say because I don't use any of them. I've only ever used iTunes Radio briefly.
 
Comment

zhenya

macrumors 604
Jan 6, 2005
6,825
3,509
Ever since I bought a semi-decent pair of headphones* I'm amazed at how horrible the quality is on Pandora. I'll try out Beats at some point but Spotify or iTunes Radio seem like the only viable options for myself right now (outside of purchasing).

*They're not Beats.

Pandora is especially low quality, especially on mobile devices.

Beats has a very high quality option that is equivalent to Spotify and better than iTunes Radio.
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.