Spotify Increasing Subscription Prices in the US Again

[mw360]

I wish most of that money went to smaller artists, not execs.
Not to say they don’t deserve it, but the big artists make money from other sources too. I think it’s the indie artists —who their livelihoods depend on this income— who should really benefit from these price hikes.

The answer is to spend more time listening to Indie artists. But the pay-per-listen does disadvantage artists who a bit more of a gamble. In the old days you could buy a CD on a whim, and barely listen to it, and they'd get the same royalty as an artists whose CD you listen to every day.

 

[LeeW]

What they just increasing every year now...

I know, right? I mean, imagine you were expecting a raise from your employer every year! Where would it end!

 

[Jolly-boo]

People complaining are being absurd. I listen to Spotify at least 6+ hours a day, every day. And I pay 20$ each month? Oh my god what a crime. How spoiled can people be?

 

[ajf.350d]

Those that say buy physical media, what if you only like one or two songs on an album?
My playlists cover probably 100+ albums but rarely any more than 3 songs from any given album. I set the playlist to offline as well, so still available without internet once downloaded initially.
Physical media is good, but not necessarily that cost effective.

 

[Mrkevinfinnerty]

People complaining are being absurd. I listen to Spotify at least 6+ hours a day, every day. And I pay 20$ each month? Oh my god what a crime. How spoiled can people be?

You're right people should pay more because you use it a lot.

 

[frozencarbonite]

I will never subscribe to a music streaming service. Music is too important to me.

I like owning the music I purchase and listen to. I rip my CDs and vinyl to FLAC files and run my own Plex server. As long as I have internet, I can play music anywhere. If I know I'm going to have spotty internet, I will download songs beforehand.

 

[Radin.Y]

Spotify has about 70 million premium subscribers in the United States, about 280 million world-wide. Thats a hell of a lot of money for "inflation".

They have employees who need salaries. They pay artists who deserve more. All of these need to be adjusted every once in a while to match rising cost of living.
My wish is that the money goes where it is needed deserved, not in execs’ pockets.

 

[frozencarbonite]

Those that say buy physical media, what if you only like one or two songs on an album?
My playlists cover probably 100+ albums but rarely any more than 3 songs from any given album. I set the playlist to offline as well, so still available without internet once downloaded initially.
Physical media is good, but not necessarily that cost effective.

It's all or nothing for me. 😆 If I like a couple of songs on an album, I buy the entire album. Unfortunately, I'm a completest.

Besides, that was the artists' intention when they wrote the album; to be heard as a whole.

 

[Radin.Y]

Inflation has been back to the usual 2-3 percent for a few years now.

take $9.99 from 2011 (when it was introduced) to 2026. Comes out to $14.4. They raised it to $12.99, which means the cost of the subscription has not kept up with inflation.

 

[xxray]

Meanwhile, you can still get Apple Music at the equivalent of $9/month with the annual plan. I just hope they don’t increase that soon. Though, arguably, the cost of these subscriptions have not kept up with inflation.

 

[mouselett]

So Apple TV+ has had 3 price increases in the U.S. to date.

Apple Music has increased twice.
Apple One has increase twice.

Actually, Apple Music has had only one increase, from $9.99 to $10.99 in October 2022.

 

[Slix]

Those that say buy physical media, what if you only like one or two songs on an album?
My playlists cover probably 100+ albums but rarely any more than 3 songs from any given album. I set the playlist to offline as well, so still available without internet once downloaded initially.
Physical media is good, but not necessarily that cost effective.

The iTunes Store still lets you purchase individual songs for $1.29. Even cheaper than getting complete albums if you want to get only certain tracks.

 

[jkratz.36]

They have employees who need salaries. They pay artists who deserve more. All of these need to be adjusted every once in a while to match rising cost of living.
My wish is that the money goes where it is needed deserved, not in execs’ pockets.

"They pay artists who deserve more."

Do they? Last time I looked Spotify was the bottom of the barrel for payments to artists: $0.003 to $0.005 per stream in general.

You've got to be a huge artist to make any money off of Spotify and even those folks aren't making all that much.

As to "employees who need salaries" and such: yeah I get it. But instead of continuing to increase the cost to subs maybe they should be adjusting ad revenue and other things that can be done.

I wouldn't have any issue with it if they were actually paying the extra money to the artists, but we all know that's not happening.

 

[FattiesGoneWild]

These companies can never get enough

Neither can consumers.

 

[Jeeve Stubbs]

Increasify

 

[Mojohanna32]

Apple Music is $16.99 for a family, so five bucks less than this new rate. Is there a big advantage to going with Spotify?

no

 

[Wollombi]

Apple Music is $16.99 for a family, so five bucks less than this new rate. Is there a big advantage to going with Spotify?

Having had both, I don’t find many advantages of Spotify over Apple Music unless you’re wanting to connect to less mainstream devices/speakers to stream. Spotify is the grandfather of the bunch and this connects with a variety of platforms/speakers/devices. That said, I have had zero issues not front using Apple Music. I only switched because it was included in Apple One and I saw no reason to pay for two services, but with Spotify continuing to raise prices so frequently, I’m not inclined to ever go back unless they can provide a value proposition for those price hikes.

 

[Wollombi]

Buying music ≠ owning the music.

It's a license (for personal use) you're buying. And if it's in physical form, you're buying that packaging.

Buying music doesn't mean, for instance, that you can edit/mix the music and then legally sell it.

You know what he meant, so why be pedantic?

 

[clive27]

Love my Youtube Premium Family plan. My extended family enjoys all the Youtube video without ads and get to listen to all the music. We don't have any other streaming subscriptions. Youtube will have contents that will summarize all other interesting shows into like 20-30 minutes videos. New show from Disney+? I'll watch the summary video of the whole season (or two) in 30 minutes.

 

[picpicmac]

Given the tidal wave of generative AI tracks that have overcome Spotify, the additional revenue is certainly not because there will be more money going to real artists.

 

[OliOliOliOli]

What they just increasing every year now...

Because you paid…

 

[lostPod]

Spotify have a good service, but I really like YouTube music. I pay once a year for YouTube premium and get YouTube without ads and YouTube Music. a sensational value for me.

How much do you pay for the year if you dont mind me asking? im grandfathered with the original monthly payment ... I'm wondering if its near what you have.

 

[Radin.Y]

"They pay artists who deserve more."

Do they? Last time I looked Spotify was the bottom of the barrel for payments to artists: $0.003 to $0.005 per stream in general.

You've got to be a huge artist to make any money off of Spotify and even those folks aren't making all that much.

As to "employees who need salaries" and such: yeah I get it. But instead of continuing to increase the cost to subs maybe they should be adjusting ad revenue and other things that can be done.

I wouldn't have any issue with it if they were actually paying the extra money to the artists, but we all know that's not happening.

That was my whole point. Money should pay decent salaries for the employees instead of exec bonuses, AND should go to the artists. The artists deserve more. The payout model, in my opinion, should be kinda like reverse tax-bracket. The millionth stream of a song doesn’t have to pay as much as the 100th.. This way smaller artists will be able to earn more than they do now.

 

[SBlue1]

Spotify have a good service, but I really like YouTube music. I pay once a year for YouTube premium and get YouTube without ads and YouTube Music. a sensational value for me.

I was a YouTube premium user just for getting rid of the ads and found out about the music service a year after I signed up! LOL! Its great. Wish it had any integration with my HomePod minis though.

 

[Radin.Y]

Having had both, I don’t find many advantages of Spotify over Apple Music unless you’re wanting to connect to less mainstream devices/speakers to stream. Spotify is the grandfather of the bunch and this connects with a variety of platforms/speakers/devices. That said, I have had zero issues not front using Apple Music. I only switched because it was included in Apple One and I saw no reason to pay for two services, but with Spotify continuing to raise prices so frequently, I’m not inclined to ever go back unless they can provide a value proposition for those price hikes.

I have heard people complain the Apple Music algorithm lacks in comparison. Having used both, did you notice a difference?