Spotify Has Twice as Many Paid Subscribers as Apple Music

[UbuntuFu]

Just glancing over this thread, seems like a lot of people prefer Spotify over Apple music.

I myself like Spotify wayyy more than Apple music. I signed up for the free 3 month trial and the only pro it has over Spotify is Siri integration. I can tell Siri to play Shake it off by Taylor Swift.

I compared some of my playlists on Spotify and Apple music was missing a few indie songs and dance remixes that Spotify has. So given that I don't care that much about Taylor Swift or other Apple "exclusives", I'm sticking with Spotify.

Spotify just has a better app and system. I can control playback on any of my devices - laptop, iPad, iPhone, Android. so basically turns my speakers into a wireless setup. I think Apple just has the name due to all the iPhones out there that's how they are able to grow so fast. I seriously hopes Spotify eliminates or reduces the free tier, when TS said no to Spotify free, I was like why doesn't Spotify just makes her music only available to paying users?!

 

[littyboy]

Apple Music is one year old = 15 million paid subscribers.
Spotify is TEN years old = 30 million paid subscribers.

So, next year, if all goes as it has been going, Apple Music will have 30 million subscribers which would've taken them two years, it's taken Spotify ten years to reach that many (granted, things were different 10 years ago, but still).

A few things to also consider. Spotify just matched Apple's family pricing which is a huge plus. So we might see an even increase in both sides. However, I believe Apple will have a slight edge since it's pre-installed.

 

[Zirel]

1. Yes it does.
2. People actually listen to Beats 1?
3. Not true, Spotify has more.
4. I disagree, good for discovering new music.

1. No, it doesn't
2. Yes, they have great presenters and even greater shows
3. Yeah, sure /s
4. You're in your right.

 

[littyboy]

Just glancing over this thread, seems like a lot of people prefer Spotify over Apple music.

I myself like Spotify wayyy more than Apple music. I signed up for the free 3 month trial and the only pro it has over Spotify is Siri integration. I can tell Siri to play Shake it off by Taylor Swift.

I compared some of my playlists on Spotify and Apple music was missing a few indie songs and dance remixes that Spotify has. So given that I don't care that much about Taylor Swift or other Apple "exclusives", I'm sticking with Spotify.

Spotify just has a better app and system. I can control playback on any of my devices - laptop, iPad, iPhone, Android. so basically turns my speakers into a wireless setup. I think Apple just has the name due to all the iPhones out there that's how they are able to grow so fast. I seriously hopes Spotify eliminates or reduces the free tier, when TS said no to Spotify free, I was like why doesn't Spotify just makes her music only available to paying users?!

HAHA totally agree with you on the TS comment. She is stingy as hell.

 

[bladerunner2000]

I'm sticking with Spotify. Sorry Apple, you lost me as a consumer when you released literal garbage for trash can looking Mac Pro a few years back.

 

[Winni]

Give it 2 years and Apple will be in the lead. Much to the chagrin of many an Apple-hating MR regular.

And then the world will be a better place?

I certainly won't vote for Apple with my wallet. Their "radio" station is as far away from my music taste as it gets and everything else that they showcase is somewhere in that same galaxy, far, far away. I'm definitely not their target audience and for me, Apple Music just couldn't be more unattractive. Even if they had everything that I wanted, out of principle I'd rather support the underdog instead of the multi-billion-dollar corporation that doesn't even know what to do with all its money anymore.

 

[Michael Goff]

1. Yes it does.
2. People actually listen to Beats 1?
3. Not true, Spotify has more.
4. I disagree, good for discovering new music.

How do you upload tracks? The closest I found was to make a playlist of the music and the playlist would sync the music. That is hardly a good solution.

 

[remydlc]

Like we've said... Spotify is "big" but they've also got some scaling problems as they keep getting "bigger"

"Number of users" means nothing if they don't bring in the dollars.

Apple may have hesitated... but they decided to launch a paid-only streaming service that has none of the baggage Spotify has to deal with (losing money on a free-tier)

Would Spotify be as "big" today if they didn't have the free-tier?

And yes... the market is shifting. But Apple has its feet in both camps. iTunes Music is profitable... and Apple Music streaming is likely profitable too. ( I don't know why it wouldn't be)

But nothing Spotify is doing is profitable as of yet.

Exactly my point also against Apple. Music already comes preinstalled, users might play with it at first, but doesnt mean they are going to stick with it. Its like Internet Explorer, it comes preinstalled with windows, so is the "Most installed/used" browser at some point. I can see this type of practice bringing Apple some issues, at least in Europe, kinda like what MS dealt with few years ago for pre-installing IE and WMP.

 

[TallManNY]

They charge the right amount. The problem is not enough people are paying.

There are 100 million people listening to Spotify... but only 30 million people are paying the bills.

The free tier is killing them. The ad revenue is not enough to offset the cost of those 70 million free listeners.

Royalties ARE expensive when you stream to 100 million customers yet only 30 million pay for it. It's a balance problem.

And it becomes a scaling problem as more free customers are listening.

My objection is that calling the royalties expensive and the cause of the lack of profit implies that the problem is the content owners are charging too much for their content. I don't think that is the issue. The issue is the one you address above, Spotify gives away its service to 70 million users in return for the right to broadcast some very occasional ads.

Spotify continues to operate at a loss due to expensive royalties and revenue sharing with music label partners.

It is the "due to" part of the sentence that I don't like. It makes the reader think that if only poor Spotify was cut a break by the music labels then Spotify could earn a profit and stay in business. But the problem is Spotify giving away the milk for free. And no one should be shocked that it is hard to earn a profit on something that is given away. Not impossible since obviously ad revenue supports two of the most successful companies in the world, Google and Facebook; not to mention over the air TV. But Spotify is content on demand which is typically something that folks have always paid for. Alternatively, and we see this on YouTube or even regular TV, the ads are a much higher percentages of the available content. Maybe Spotify should run an ad ever third song on its free tier.

I suspect that Spotify has much more a revenue problem than a cost of doing business problem. Apple could also give away its service for free and even have its hardware profits subsidize the Apple Music business. But they intentionally didn't. I think that is better business model and ultimately better for consumers since they get more transparency in their services and the cost of providing them.

 

[MH01]

1. Doesn't let you upload your music from the desktop app
2. Doesn't have beats 1 radio
3. Doesn't have the high-profile exclusives that Apple has
4. Spotify Radios throw a lot of crap at you

Both Apps are good as it gets, specially the iOS 10 version. It's more a question of content.

You may find that had it not been for Beats 1 and the "awesome non crap" it throws at us, a lot more people on here would have joined Apple Music

 

[winston1236]

FYI: You're not allowed to DJ using Spotify or Apple Music. Public performances are explicitly prohibited. There's no use complaining about a lack of a feature that would enable you to illegally use the service.

Yeah, he's probably talking about listening on his work computer...

 

[umairhanif]

Spotify confirmed to The Telegraph today that it now has more than 100 million monthly active users worldwide, including approximately 30 million monthly paying subscribers.

Comparatively, Apple services chief Eddy Cue announced at WWDC 2016 last week that Apple Music has 15 million paying subscribers, just two weeks before the streaming music service turns one year old. Apple Music was at 13 million subscribers in April and 11 million subscribers in February, meaning that it has been growing at a rate of about 2 million subscribers every two months.

Spotify, which launched in Europe in October 2008 and expanded to the U.S. in July 2011, thereby remains the world's most popular streaming service, but Apple Music is quickly closing the gap. Both services cost $9.99 per month for individuals and $14.99 per month for families, while only Spotify offers a free ad-supported tier.

Nevertheless, Spotify recently said that Apple Music has helped, not hurt, its business. Since Apple Music launched on June 30, 2015, its European rival has grown at a faster pace than beforehand. Spotify has now surpassed Skype as the most lucrative European startup, with an estimated valuation of roughly $8.5 billion.Despite rising users and revenues, Spotify continues to operate at a loss due to expensive royalties and revenue sharing with music label partners. The report claims Spotify's losses rose by 10 percent to $195.7 million (173 million euros) last year, prompting some investors to question the viability of its business model.

Article Link: Spotify Has Twice as Many Paid Subscribers as Apple Music

[doublepost=1466458698][/doublepost]

Spotify confirmed to The Telegraph today that it now has more than 100 million monthly active users worldwide, including approximately 30 million monthly paying subscribers.

Comparatively, Apple services chief Eddy Cue announced at WWDC 2016 last week that Apple Music has 15 million paying subscribers, just two weeks before the streaming music service turns one year old. Apple Music was at 13 million subscribers in April and 11 million subscribers in February, meaning that it has been growing at a rate of about 2 million subscribers every two months.

Spotify, which launched in Europe in October 2008 and expanded to the U.S. in July 2011, thereby remains the world's most popular streaming service, but Apple Music is quickly closing the gap. Both services cost $9.99 per month for individuals and $14.99 per month for families, while only Spotify offers a free ad-supported tier.

Nevertheless, Spotify recently said that Apple Music has helped, not hurt, its business. Since Apple Music launched on June 30, 2015, its European rival has grown at a faster pace than beforehand. Spotify has now surpassed Skype as the most lucrative European startup, with an estimated valuation of roughly $8.5 billion.Despite rising users and revenues, Spotify continues to operate at a loss due to expensive royalties and revenue sharing with music label partners. The report claims Spotify's losses rose by 10 percent to $195.7 million (173 million euros) last year, prompting some investors to question the viability of its business model.

Article Link: Spotify Has Twice as Many Paid Subscribers as Apple Music

 

[MH01]

At the same pace as Apple?

October 2015 : Apple had 6.5 million paid subscribers, Spotify had 20 million paid subscribers [source]
June 2015: Apple has 15 million paid subscribers, Spotify has 30 million paid subscribers.

8 months period
Apple growth rate: 130%
Spotify growth rate: 50%

1 month period
Apple growth rate: 11%
Spotify growth rate: 5%

At this rate, Apple will catch Spotify in about 12-13 months!

Speaking of rates, of the 1 billion installations on active Apple devices, and constant hints for users to join, your gloating at 15 million conversions . Some quick maths will tell you that is an awful conversion rate.

given it was free for three months , that's a lot of people saying NO.

 

[marmiteturkey]

At the same pace as Apple?

October 2015 : Apple had 6.5 million paid subscribers, Spotify had 20 million paid subscribers [source]
June 2015: Apple has 15 million paid subscribers, Spotify has 30 million paid subscribers.

8 months period
Apple growth rate: 130%
Spotify growth rate: 50%

1 month period
Apple growth rate: 11%
Spotify growth rate: 5%

At this rate, Apple will catch Spotify in about 12-13 months!

Your analysis is misleading and simplistic.

E.g. Spotify is growing at 10m users per 8 months v. Apple's 8.5m; so the gap is actually widening
Apple has done all its converting of captive iOS users, so growth may now slow
Anyone who was going to leave Spotify for Apple Music has now done so, so ditto

The truth is more complex than a percentage growth rate. 2 users from 1 user is a 100% growth rate; but it's not as good as 1.5m from 1m users, which is 'only' 50%. And there are many more reasons why apples growth rate will now slow.

I'm an Apple Music subscriber. It's okay, not great. It needs to be a LOT better than it is to continue to grow. I hope they do improve it, but at the moment it's buggy, ugly and non-differentiated.

 

[Rigby]

At the same pace as Apple?

October 2015 : Apple had 6.5 million paid subscribers, Spotify had 20 million paid subscribers [source]
June 2015: Apple has 15 million paid subscribers, Spotify has 30 million paid subscribers.

Yeah, but you can't completely ignore the ad-supported customers, even if you assume they have significantly less weight than the paying ones. The ad revenue that Spotify generates from them is growing. I also believe that Apple Music's growth will slow unless Apple dramatically improves the service.

 

[Popeye206]

Did you ignore the part of the article where Spotify said they are growing faster now thanks to Apple Music. So, not really any revenue loss to speak of yet.

If you read on, you'll see that Spotify is loosing over $180 Million a year.... so they have a business model that increases their loss with every customer.

Personally, I think Apple was last on the scene for just that reason. Apple does not seem to want to get into any business where they will loose money. So I think they waited until they could get royalty deals that made sense.

 

[0029937]

most used app on my iPhone and so easy to use.

AM doesnt even have a browser interface. Therefore impossible to consider for listening to music at work

I didn't even think about this. Meanwhile I use the Spotify desktop app all the time at work. For that alone I wouldn't switch to Apple Music. It's not even integrated into iTunes?

 

[Michael Goff]

If you read on, you'll see that Spotify is loosing over $180 Million a year.... so they have a business model that increases their loss with every customer.

Personally, I think Apple was last on the scene for just that reason. Apple does not seem to want to get into any business where they will loose money. So I think they waited until they could get royalty deals that made sense.

They're actually losing more since they go by euros.

 

[NachoGrande]

I will never "lease" my music without additional benefits. Amazon prime is a nice alternative.

 

[Zirel]

Yeah, but you can't completely ignore the ad-supported customers, even if you assume they have significantly less weight than the paying ones. The ad revenue that Spotify generates from them is growing. I also believe that Apple Music's growth will slow unless Apple dramatically improves the service.

It's growing... until the labels take out their music from there...

Your analysis is misleading and simplistic.

E.g. Spotify is growing at 10m users per 8 months v. Apple's 8.5m; so the gap is actually widening

That's no how it works.

Apple has done all its converting of captive iOS users, so growth may now slow

15 million = all captive iOS users???

Anyone who was going to leave Spotify for Apple Music has now done so, so ditto

Don't think so, if AM keeps getting better and better, while Spotify keeps being the same, and musicians attacking it.

The truth is more complex than a percentage growth rate. 2 users from 1 user is a 100% growth rate; but it's not as good as 1.5m from 1m users, which is 'only' 50%. And there are many more reasons why apples growth rate will now slow.

If you have 1 consumer and now you have 2 costumers, yes, it's a 100% growth rate. What's the problem?

I'm an Apple Music subscriber. It's okay, not great. It needs to be a LOT better than it is to continue to grow. I hope they do improve it, but at the moment it's buggy, ugly and non-differentiated.

What exactly AM is not!

Speaking of rates, of the 1 billion installations on active Apple devices, and constant hints for users to join, your gloating at 15 million conversions . Some quick maths will tell you that is an awful conversion rate.

given it was free for three months , that's a lot of people saying NO.

Again this tired argument.

Spotify is pre-installed in hundreds of millions of devices, from PC's being sold, PlayStations, lots of smartphones that come with Spotify installed...

You may find that had it not been for Beats 1 and the "awesome non crap" it throws at us, a lot more people on here would have joined Apple Music

"On here", like MacRumors is any representation of the real world!

 

[Michael Scrip]

Speaking of rates, of the 1 billion installations on active Apple devices, and constant hints for users to join, your gloating at 15 million conversions. Some quick maths will tell you that is an awful conversion rate.

given it was free for three months, that's a lot of people saying NO.

How many people should be paying for Apple Music?

Someone posted a link earlier that said only 68 million people on Earth are paying for any streaming music.

That sounds awfully low given that there are billions of people who listen to music and who have a device or multiple devices that can stream music.

This isn't necessarily an Apple problem... it's a paid-streaming-music problem. Maybe it's just not a product/service that everybody needs. Did you ever think about that?

You can keep railing on Apple for only having 15 million paid Apple Music customers... but I don't think paid streaming music is as big an industry as you think it is.

That said... Apple with 15 million out of 68 million is pretty damn good. That's 22% in less than a year.

 

[Rigby]

If you read on, you'll see that Spotify is loosing over $180 Million a year.... so they have a business model that increases their loss with every customer.

That is actually not true. They pay a share of the total revenue that they receive to the rights holders, including both subscription fees and advertising income. They make much less money from the free tier customers (which probably makes their negotiations with the rights holders more difficult), but contrary to many claims they don't lose money per free-tier customer.

http://www.spotifyartists.com/spotify-explained/#royalties-in-detail

 

[Tikistand]

I've stuck with Spotify because they offer $5/mo for students. Once Apple makes this happen, I'll switch to them!

 

[MH01]

Again this tired argument.

Spotify is pre-installed in hundreds of millions of devices, from PC's being sold, PlayStations, lots of smartphones that come with Spotify installed...

Hundreds of millions ? Do tell, and quote your source.

I've had to install Spotify on a Windows, android , ps4..... I'm yet to buy a device with it installed. You are making up numbers .

The only promotions I've seen so some telcos that offer Spotify as part of a package, I'm sure you have to install it.

 

[Rigby]

The issue is the one you address above, Spotify gives away its service to 70 million users in return for the right to broadcast some very occasional ads.

Let's not forget that the ad-supported users are not getting the same service, especially on mobile devices (where they can only play in shuffle mode and have limited skips).

It is the "due to" part of the sentence that I don't like. It makes the reader think that if only poor Spotify was cut a break by the music labels then Spotify could earn a profit and stay in business. But the problem is Spotify giving away the milk for free.

By the same logic you could claim that radio stations are "giving away the milk for free".
[doublepost=1466460944][/doublepost]

It's growing... until the labels take out their music from there...

Given that subscriptions are currently their only revenue source that is growing, I really doubt they will.