Spotify Launches Limited Time Holiday Offer: Get One Year of Premium for $99

[MacRumors]

Spotify today announced a new limited time holiday offer for new and existing Premium subscribers, allowing them to purchase a full year of the service for $99.00. The new price is $20 down from the $120 that users would pay by subscribing to the service on a month-by-month basis of $9.99 (via Engadget). The offer expires December 31, 2017, and after the 12 months is up Spotify will return users to their previous subscription billing at the then-current price.

The offer is only for new or existing individual plans (so Spotify Family plans are not eligible), can not be paid for with Spotify gift cards or prepaid cards, and will not be available to users who subscribe to Spotify through a third-party offer. Find more details about the yearly offer in Spotify's terms and conditions right here.

With Spotify's new offer, the company is matching Apple Music's $99.00 12 month subscription that users have been able to purchase for just over a year, effectively netting subscribers 12 months of music streaming for the price of 10. Spotify's deal doesn't come in the form of a physical card, but the company does offer retail cards with credit tiers that are used to pay for subscriptions before the credit card on an account is charged.

Visit our Deals Roundup for more sales and discounts going on this week.

Article Link: Spotify Launches Limited Time Holiday Offer: Get One Year of Premium for $99

 

[dannyyankou]

Apple Music has the same deal all year round right?

Edit: Yep, mentioned in the article.

 

[Christian 5G]

Still doesn’t beat my $4.99 for Spotify and hulu as a student. Capital one Card drops it down to $2.99 a month.

 

[Release]

Awesome, my subscription renews in 2 days so I'll do it and take the 2 free month savings.

 

[testcard]

Tempting.

 

[JM]

Too little too late. Doomed.

*meant as a joke... but it's probably not...

 

[OldSchoolMacGuy]

Spotify is struggling. This will help them bring in new customers but won't help them make money. They lost over $500 million in 2016. They pay artists the least of any streaming service too, so there's no room for them to cut artists commissions in order for them to make more.

Adding more customers won't help. It might get investors to keep kicking in money but won't help them become profitable. They need to find a new structure or they will die.

 

[Michael Scrip]

Spotify is struggling. This will help them bring in new customers but won't help them make money. They lost over $500 million in 2016. They pay artists the least of any streaming service too, so there's no room for them to cut artists commissions in order for them to make more.

Adding more customers won't help. It might get investors to keep kicking in money but won't help them become profitable. They need to find a new structure or they will die.

Yep!

Basically... a person can pay $100 for a year of Spotify... but it actually costs Spotify $150 to provide that service!

That's a helluva business plan!

What's that old saying? "We'll make it up in volume!"

 

[convergent]

Too little too late. Doomed.

How exactly is this "too little, too late" and Spotify is "doomed"?

I recently switched from Apple Music to Spotify and love it. Its way more widely supported across a wide array of devices and services. Need to get your head outside the Apple walled garden... there is a whole world of choices out there.

http://www.hypebot.com/hypebot/2017...e-57-billion-in-revenue-says-midia-study.html

 

[Michael Scrip]

How exactly is this "too little, too late" and Spotify is "doomed"?

I recently switched from Apple Music to Spotify and love it. Its way more widely supported across a wide array of devices and services. Need to get your head outside the Apple walled garden... there is a whole world of choices out there.

http://www.hypebot.com/hypebot/2017...e-57-billion-in-revenue-says-midia-study.html

Yes... Spotify makes $2.7 billion in revenue.

But they have $3.2 billion in expenses.

There's a problem with that...

 

[ArtOfWarfare]

Yes... Spotify makes $2.7 billion in revenue.

But they have $3.2 billion in expenses.

There's a problem with that...

Yeah, but their expenses are flexible - they can negotiate cheaper deals with the music companies. As their user base grows, music companies become increasingly dependent on Spotify to actually make money, and are more willing to negotiate cheaper prices.

Apple might put some pressure on Spotify to accept higher prices from the music companies, but not much - most people recognize Spotify as the superior offering.

 

[macs4nw]

Spotify is struggling. This will help them bring in new customers but won't help them make money. They lost over $500 million in 2016. They pay artists the least of any streaming service too, so there's no room for them to cut artists commissions in order for them to make more.

Adding more customers won't help. It might get investors to keep kicking in money but won't help them become profitable. They need to find a new structure or they will die.

Yap, the pitfalls of being a single-revenue-stream entity.... competing against multi-revenue-stream titans.....
Diversify or perish.

 

[neuropsychguy]

Yap, the pitfalls of being a single-revenue-stream entity.... competing against multi-revenue-stream titans.....
Diversify or perish.

Which is what they are trying to do. I use both Spotify and Apple Music. There are things I like better about each.

 

[Michael Scrip]

Yeah, but their expenses are flexible - they can negotiate cheaper deals with the music companies. As their user base grows, music companies become increasingly dependent on Spotify to actually make money.

Doesn't Spotify already pay the least in royalties to the record labels? I wouldn't imagine there is much room to improve their situation.

Also... I think Spotify has to give 80% of their earning to the record labels. And Spotify loses money in the end.

You're right... nobody wins if Spotify disappears... neither the record labels nor Spotify themselves.

But Spotify has to start making a profit someday. They can't keep living off investor money.

 

[Ukyank1]

Personally I don’t know why anyone would choose Apple Music over Spotify.

 

[JM]

How exactly is this "too little, too late" and Spotify is "doomed"?

I recently switched from Apple Music to Spotify and love it. Its way more widely supported across a wide array of devices and services. Need to get your head outside the Apple walled garden... there is a whole world of choices out there.

http://www.hypebot.com/hypebot/2017...e-57-billion-in-revenue-says-midia-study.html

See my edited post it was a joke.... but in light of what Irvine said about how Spotify does t offer anything else and how they're bleeding money.... it's just difficult to image they'll make it in the long run.

But, my business related imagination might be poor, and/or Spotify turns to dominate the streaming landscape. (They might have made more of a splash undercutting Apple with maybe $90 for a year)
[doublepost=1512149643][/doublepost]

Personally I don’t know why anyone would choose Apple Music over Spotify.

Yeah why is that? I asked for Apple Music for Christmas. What is better about Spotify?

 

[BWhaler]

Yeah, but their expenses are flexible - they can negotiate cheaper deals with the music companies. As their user base grows, music companies become increasingly dependent on Spotify to actually make money, and are more willing to negotiate cheaper prices.

Apple might put some pressure on Spotify to accept higher prices from the music companies, but not much - most people recognize Spotify as the superior offering.

You should read the interview with Jimmy about the challenges pure-play streaming companies face.

The problem is the price dynamics you describe are not what is playing out in the market. First, labels always want more, not less. Honestly, they haven’t learned much from the Napster disaster.

But more importantly, Apple, Google, Amazon, Samsung, et al.make hundreds billions elsewhere, so they are less price sensitive, and even have strategic reasons to make music a Loss-leader. It’s caledl “commodifying the compliment” strategy which means if the attached goods are cheap, I can sell more of my product. Microsoft did this back in the day when they helped drive down PC prices to sell more windows licenses. A $1000 PC in a home was worth one $50 Windows license to Microsoft, but 3 PCs at $333 each, one for each member of the family, was worth $150 to Microsoft.

Honestly, I’m just waiting for the day that Amazon bundles unlimited music into Prime for free. Today, you already get a decent library to stream. It’ll drive the whole market to zero, and poor Spotify won’t have a business anymore.

I agree Spotify is better. And I agree with you most people think this also. Apple Music still is a dumpster fire of the worst of Apple”s software problems and is a foolish walled garden strategy.

But as a jimmy points out, Music is music, and every company has basically the same library. So, price soon will be the deciding factor. It’s just how consumers behave.

https://www.billboard.com/articles/...view-whats-wrong-music-streaming-defiant-ones

 

[ELman]

Personally I don’t know why anyone would choose Apple Music over Spotify.

Carpool Karaoke

 

[nburwell]

There are things to like about Apple Music and Spotify. I have used both services at different points. Apple Music, in my opinion, has improved since it originally launched. Their curated playlists (ie. New Music, Favorites) is on par with Spotify.

Although Spotify still has a leg up on the social aspect over AM, particularly the user curated playlists.

Competition is good, so even though Spotify is losing money, I wouldn't want to see them go under since they provide really the on viable competition to AM (this is coming from a current AM subscriber).

 

[Rigby]

You should read the interview with Jimmy about the challenges pure-play streaming companies face.

Hardly an unbiased opinion.

But more importantly, Apple, Google, Amazon, Samsung, et al.make hundreds billions elsewhere, so they are less price sensitive, and even have strategic reasons to make music a Loss-leader.

Loss leader for what? Apple Music does not have any unique killer features, so it's unlikely to significantly increase sales of Apple hardware. I think it's mostly a defensive play for Apple to try and compensate for sagging iTunes Music sales since Spotify et al. came along.

 

[Harmonious Zen]

Yep!

Basically... a person can pay $100 for a year of Spotify... but it actually costs Spotify $150 to provide that service!

That's a helluva business plan!

What's that old saying? "We'll make it up in volume!"

It reminds me of Dropbox. This is a feature, not something you build a company around. The world is quickly being dominated by the few companies with the scale and resources to do whatever is popular

 

[Rigby]

There are things to like about Apple Music and Spotify. I have used both services at different points. Apple Music, in my opinion, has improved since it originally launched. Their curated playlists (ie. New Music, Favorites) is on par with Spotify.

I couldn't disagree more. I'm currently trialing Apple Music and it's nowhere near as good when it comes to new music discovery.

Although Spotify still has a leg up on the social aspect over AM, particularly the user curated playlists.

This may be part of the reason why Spotify's discovery playlists are so much better. They probably leverage the vast amount of user-generated playlists to fine-tune their recommendations (e.g. if you like a song, they can look for other songs in playlists of other users who also like the same song). Crowd intelligence.

 

[Harmonious Zen]

Yap, the pitfalls of being a single-revenue-stream entity.... competing against multi-revenue-stream titans.....
Diversify or perish.

Yeah, which is a shame because there are a lot of things Spotify does so well.

 

[Rigby]

Yeah, but their expenses are flexible - they can negotiate cheaper deals with the music companies. As their user base grows, music companies become increasingly dependent on Spotify to actually make money, and are more willing to negotiate cheaper prices.

Apple might put some pressure on Spotify to accept higher prices from the music companies, but not much - most people recognize Spotify as the superior offering.

It seems what's happening is exactly the other way around. Apple uses the cheaper rates that Spotify pays to negotiate down their own:

https://www.macrumors.com/2017/09/06/apple-music-streaming-deal-warner-music-group/

As of now, they still seem to pay a little more because they don't have the scale of Spotify.

 

[Ukyank1]

[doublepost=1512149643][/doublepost]
Yeah why is that? I asked for Apple Music for Christmas. What is better about Spotify?

The music selection is basically identical but for me it’s the ability to play music on any brand of streamer (Apple, Amazon, google, etc) and to escape apple’s awful user interface.