So I don't need to pay monthly for a service I don't need.
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.
Spotify Raising Prices in Multiple Countries
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Already covered, go back and read so I don't have to repeat myself.
Yeah, Apple chooses to host it for free because they benefit greatly from having a vibrant app store. Not sure why you think that matters in the context of the converstation.
Yup, again, because they benefit greatly from having an app store full of popular apps.
Pretty distasteful attitude to have.
Great, at least we can both agree that Apple and Spotify are bad in this regard. You're welcome to rank things how you see fit, I prefer to keep things simple; is this service paying artists enough — yes or no?
Not sure how this is relevant. Video and music streaming services operate differently, I don't see why Apple's TV strategy should earn them credit in their music strategy. If you have a larger point to this, maybe you could elaborate here.
Agreed. I have Apple music as part of a family pack, but still want to keep my music separate. I don't Apple music to mix my music in. Made that mistake once. It took forever to extract my music from some of the crap Apple mixed in there.
Point is Apple actually support content creators with free tools and make/buy tv content.
Spotify do what? Pay for a stupid pod cast?
Huge difference between the two.
More complex that "do they pay artists enough".
Sorry you think anyone unable to sign up for. a subscription on a webpage is ... distasteful.
It hasnt exactly held Spotify back.
Lack of hi res music and other long promised functions have probably done them more harm than signing up on a webpage.
What free tools?
I mean, Spotify has free podcast production tools. I don’t know how good they are, but they are free, since that’s your chosen metric. (Or at least they did have them when I last checked. Not sure if they’ve since been pulled).
To you, maybe. You’re more than welcome to explain your ranking system, otherwise I’ll stick with my opinions.
I didn’t say they’re distasteful, I said your opinion is. I’ll assume this time that it was an honest mistake and not you being purposefully rude.
How has lack of high res music that most people demonstrably can’t even identify harmed anyone? Really curious to hear the explanation behind that claim.
It's not hard to imagine since the last time I checked they had a larger market share.
Disappointing to hear about a price hike. However I don't use Spotify and hope that Apple has no immediate plans to raise prices of Apple Music or Apple One.
Whilst lacking the clear convenience of a streaming service, in nearly all instances it makes more sense to pay for music outright.
With any streaming service you're paying $144 a year to perpetually rent something you can buy and own. In fact music is the only digital file type you can do this with. MP3s are universally accepted on any portable device. Good luck playing your iTunes movies on an Android phone.
Even though an artist only receives $1 of a $10 album purchase due to the way record companies pay royalties, you'd have to stream that same album 110 times for the artist to make the same amount of money. (Go to gigs if you really want to support your favourite bands)
The biggest tragedy is the market of young people who have been duped into not realising they can actually own the music they stream.
With any streaming service you're paying $144 a year to perpetually rent something you can buy and own. In fact music is the only digital file type you can do this with. MP3s are universally accepted on any portable device. Good luck playing your iTunes movies on an Android phone.
Even though an artist only receives $1 of a $10 album purchase due to the way record companies pay royalties, you'd have to stream that same album 110 times for the artist to make the same amount of money. (Go to gigs if you really want to support your favourite bands)
The biggest tragedy is the market of young people who have been duped into not realising they can actually own the music they stream.
seriously... Apple give plenty of dev tools away for free.
it doesnt matter if people can hear the difference between hires and not but Spotify has been promising it for over two years. their promise.
Free with the purchase of hardware, and then with the purchase of a dev license to put your app in the store. That’s more freemium than free IMO.
You said it caused harm though. You weren’t just making stuff up were you? I want to understand how you think it causes harm.
If only they still sold music on physical media. Back in the days we had vinyls, then cassettes, then CDs, then illegal MP3s, and a “legal” digital file that we download. Music smh lost the space it was belonging to. I believe, if artists do not earn money from their productions they can abolish labels now and just post for free on Soundcloud. More free listens=more gigs=more fans. Many artists have long realized that and so nowadays you can listen for quite many songs on SC and not pay a cent, because artists value the added PR, publicity and opportunities more than some “boss makes a dollar, I make a dime” mindset that comes as an added bonus with streaming services and digital music distribution
In total per user, or total total?
Very very little more than 0. It’s quite clear this is a benefit for Spotify, not for content owners. I think the amount of musicians who are happy to earn a few dollars on people listening to their work for free is exactly zero.
I respect that, but that has nothing to do with the revenue discussion.
I have - some paid myself, some company paid, some complimentary - seven (yes, seven) different music streaming services currently. If you are a music enthusiast, and haven’t checked out Qobuz recently, you should - it has become way better over the last year, especially on music recommendations, and the way it presents info about what you are playing. They are on a roll. Yes, it is expensive, and not for everyone.
Nothing prevents you going back to a purchase model. Any music worth owning is still available on physical media, and several streaming services offer purchased content as an alternative.
But, the real answer to your question likely is that you actually get more value for money today, because you are more free to listen to different things. Before, you likely (like me) spent less money, but listened to the same albums over and over. Or not at all, or just listened to the radio. I’ll bet that if you switch your current listening habits over to a purchasing strategy, it would be s lot more expensive. Streaming has opened up a new approach to listening to music, which is why it is so successful.
That heavily depends on your approach to listening to music. If you want to listen to the same 200 albums the rest of your life, yes. If you like exploring new music, and not necessarily albums, streaming is far cheaper.
Before streaming, I would typically spend 30-50 USD per month buying CD’s, many of which I haven’t touched after the first week of owning it because it turned out to be crap. I have several friends who spent way more than that.
The new music I have listened to just this week (as of Tuesday morning!) would have cost me at least 50 bucks in the CD era.
Because there's a lot of music I enjoy from time to time but could easily live without so I don't need to own it.
Because for the same price as owning a handful of songs I can have access to orders of magnitude more, letting me explore new music, or enjoy something that I won't listen to 10 years from now.
Because I don't have to manage and curate my library, I can just stream whatever strikes me in the moment.
Because life is transitory and owning lots of "stuff" doesn't actually make me happy, I'm at the point in my life where aside from a handful of personal items that are meaningful and the ones that are practical and necessary, I'd rather focus on experiences than adding more "stuff" to my life.
Maybe none of that applies to you, and that's ok, if owning the music is what is important then go for it. Streaming services being an OPTION in no way prevents you from doing that, so why not just accept that not everyone's priorities are the same as yours?
If buying is not owning, then 🏴☠️ isn’t stealing.
Why do people still have Spotify in their local currency? Just claim your subscription via some poor countries like Turkiye, Columbia, Pakistan etc. my Turkish subscription is still going for more than 5years
Depends on how much music you buy. Also CD's don't last forever.
How about you accept that not everyone has the same priorities as you and for many of us streaming is a superior option?
Delete accounts, lose income, make up the lost revenue by increasing prices.
Never saw that coming.
