Good for you Spoty! But if Apple made something that you charge for, for free..... you would be crying really LOUD!
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 Set to Rival Apple Podcasts Subscriptions With New Service That Won't Charge Content Creators
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Do you honestly think big podcasters like Joe Rogan will give 30% profit to Apple for doing absolutely nothing. He will stay with Spotify.
It is kinda of joke that Apple demands 30% from Joe Rogan if he ever decides to also stream his podcast threw this app.
To put it simply, if Spotify was to collect 30% like Apple it would mean that Podcasters would be left with 40%. 30% to Apple through an in Spotify app subscription and another 30% to Spotify.
So basically due to Apple App Store policies Spotify has no option but not to tax podcasters
in order to compete.
Has I’ve said before digital services and creators need to be where they customers are. This necessity has little to do with Apple value, it’s intrinsic to any digital service business reaching consumers. But the fact that their customers own and are using Apple devices and through it can be siphoned.
This reasoning applied to Epic too.
The crux of the main problem with App Store policies. Is that it charges for things that it does not deliver or sell in any shape or form. It hosts, catalogues and distributes apps, nothing more.
It should be illegal for a business to be able to force another business to share revenue for things that it does not create, produce or distribute through any kind of artifice.
It’s all stacked.
So basically due to Apple App Store policies Spotify has no option but not to tax podcasters
in order to compete.
Has I’ve said before digital services and creators need to be where they customers are. This necessity has little to do with Apple value, it’s intrinsic to any digital service business reaching consumers. But the fact that their customers own and are using Apple devices and through it can be siphoned.
This reasoning applied to Epic too.
The crux of the main problem with App Store policies. Is that it charges for things that it does not deliver or sell in any shape or form. It hosts, catalogues and distributes apps, nothing more.
It should be illegal for a business to be able to force another business to share revenue for things that it does not create, produce or distribute through any kind of artifice.
It’s all stacked.
Last edited:
Ahhhhh, they want to be MORE like the record companies. “Hey, we know we’re not paying you a lot of money, tough deal on that. BUT, if you create a podcast and get folks to subscribe to the podcast, we won’t take ANY of that, that’s all yours!
I mean, sure, that’s not supportable for us in the long run especially as we’re losing money and if you hit it big, we’ll figure out a way to grab that money, too, but… you know… go for it. Spend more money and time creating this podcast rather than actually creating new content! Hey, grab the audio of your last live stream and post it as a podcast, that’s easy right?”
I think a lot of folks are pretty much ok with the Patreon sidechain, but we’ll see!
Yeah, there’s no Amazon-type world dominance waiting in the wings at the end of these continuous losses.
All i see here is that popular podcasters will be on both services, the only difference being that Apple will be making money off of them and spotify won't. Dumb move.
It is a misleading statement; Spotify pay less per stream, but attract far more streams for the artist, so actually, Spotify pays the artist more than any other platform.
A better thought would be how does Apple with half the [paying] subscribers, paying far more per stream is making money from Streaming when Spotify does not? Perhaps picking up commissions from all the other providers?
Aside from the point that for the vast majority of artists neither Apple or Spotify [or others] pay anything like a figure comensurate with the talent on offer.
Is it dumb? Perhaps Spotify think more developers will be attracted to the platform and it will generate more paying subscribers, good for Spotify and good for the developer?
Apple does the same thing... they value the work of women less than men.
Here are the gender pay gaps at Apple, Facebook and Google
The latest figures show that gender pay gap remains a major problem in the technology industry
Apple’s figures from last year revealed that women earned a median of 76p for every £1 men earned. Women at Apple were also less likely to receive a bonus than men – 88 per cent got a bonus compared to 94 per cent of men. Those bonuses were also significantly lower, 57 per cent, on the median. This year the median pay gap has fallen to 15 per cent (85p to every £1). A gap remained between bonus pay, only 85 per cent of women received a bonus compared to 93 per cent of men. In terms of bonus pay, Apple has a 42 per cent median difference between men and women.
How men and women's salaries compare at Facebook, Google, Apple, and other top tech companies
Top tech CEOs are appearing before Congress to discuss antitrust issues, but the pay gap is another key problem plaguing the industry.
www.businessinsider.com
Women at Apple make $12,000 less than their male counterparts.
Average salary: $123,000
Average men's salary: $121,000
Average women's salary: $109,000
Can’t the artist not allow Spotify to stream their music? What the get paid is not my problem
My god. Don’t worry about what Spotify does. Especially if you dont use it. Then insecurity of some Apple fans is incredible
Spotify not taking a cut of podcast subscription fee or charging podcast creators a monthly fee for the privilege of charging their listeners a subscription fee (Podcasters will pay Apple $19.99 a month to enable subscriptions, and set their own prices for listeners. Apple will take a 30% cut of subscription revenue the first year, and a 15% take thereafter)...
means more podcast creators on Spotify (i.e. exclusive podcasts/bonus material)...
which means more Spotify subscribers...
this results in more money for Spotify (i.e. the positive result)
From WSJ article:
For years, competition in podcasts has been a lopsided one: Apple—responsible for the namesake of the industry, a portmanteau of “iPod” and “broadcast”—enjoyed its status as the default destination for listening while doing relatively little to enhance offerings or profits. Spotify, meanwhile, has lavished hundreds of millions on popular creators and companies—sparking an arms race among iHeartMedia Inc., Audacy Inc. (formerly Entercom), Sirius XM Holdings Inc., and Amazon.com Inc., which all now see podcasts as vital for keeping customers engaged with their services.
“For any industry to be sustainable, we have to be able to generate revenue from more sources,” said Donald Albright, co-founder of Tenderfoot TV, the maker of hit shows including “Up and Vanished,” “To Live and Die in L.A.” and “Atlanta Monster.” Tenderfoot will keep its shows free for now, but will explore releasing exclusive bonus content and early access to subscribers via Apple’s new program, he said. “It creates a more healthy industry.”
Spotify now carries more than 2.2 million podcasts on its service, up from 450,000 in 2019. The Swedish streamer’s podcast listenership in the U.S. is on track to overtake Apple Podcasts’ this year, according to a forecast from research firm eMarketer. Though Apple’s service has grown along with the medium, it has lost market share, falling to 24% in 2021, from 34% in 2018.
Last edited:
It's no different than what Apple does with their user data
Apple Plans to Expand Ad Visibility in App Store
Apple is planning to boost its advertising business through a new ad slot on the App Store search page which will allow developers to promote their...
www.macrumors.com
Spotify makes money through subscribers and ads.
If Spotify can attract more podcast creators or having exclusive content by not taking a cut of podcast subscription fee or charging podcast creators a monthly fee just so the podcast creator can offer a podcast subscription plan (pay Apple $19.99/mo for privilege of enabling subscription? Seriously?
)Podcasters will pay Apple $19.99 a month to enable subscriptions, and set their own prices for listeners. Apple will take a 30% cut of subscription revenue the first year, and a 15% take thereafter.
then Spotify will be able to keep and even bring in new subscribers/listeners thereby making them more money.
My theory is that Apple Music subscribers overwhelmingly tend to be iphone users, who mostly hail from developed countries and have more expendable income. As such, these people are more likely to be paying the full $10 a month for Apple music (or as close to that amount). So Apple still has a decent chunk of money left over even after paying the record labels their cut.
They also don’t have a free tier that would otherwise just eat into their overall profitability.
That’s the reality of Apple’s business model. They don’t bother going after raw profitless market share, and they don’t need to.
Conversely, a large proportion of Spotify’s subscriber base is likely to come from developing countries who are paying highly discounted rates. The double whammy here is that Apple Music is also stealing all the lucrative customers from Spotify, further depriving them of income.
If you ignore free streams and bot traffic, then it should be about the same.
The "free" tier is still a paid tier! Advertisers pay for streaming; the artist receives exactly the same; as for "developing" countries:
- 345 million Spotify users in Q4 2020, 155 million subscribers
- Spotify users by region Q4 2020: Europe, 121 million; North America, 83 million; Latin America, 76 million; rest of world, 66 million (Spotify)
- Spotify subscribers by region Q4 2020: Europe, 62 million; North America, 45 million; Latin America, 33 million; rest of world, 17 million (Spotify)
- Spotify market share estimated at 32-34% (Midia/Counterpoint)
Apple will be maintaining customer subscriptions and processing payments. 30% is a huge take for this service though.
I don’t see any downside for the Podcaster. They get to target a much larger audience with Spotify than Apple and get to keep all the subscription revenue.
So one thing I'm curious about with this new podcast subscription model from Apple. Currently you can subscribe to an artists' podcast (from their website), and add a private stream to the Podcasts app (admittedly I've not done this so not entirely sure how you add them to the app, but regardless). I wonder if this new subscription model from Apple is going to a) allow this to continue or b) remove the ability to subscribe from somewhere other than in the app (thus forcing artists to use their method and giving apple a cut).
It’s just similar to the record companies. The profits from the sales of the album, you wouldn’t get BUT if you did concerts, any swag you sold at those were your money.