Spotify Tests $0.99 Subscription Tier With Ads But Fewer Playback Limitations

[MacRumors]

Spotify is experimenting with a new ad-supported subscription tier that gives listeners more freedom over what they listen to compared to the existing free ad-based plan.

Called Spotify Plus, the tier costs $0.99 per month and lets users pick which songs they want to stream between ads, with unlimited skips and on-demand listening.

That's in contrast to Spotify's free ad-based tier, which limits users to skipping no more than six tracks every hour, and only lets them listen to tracks from 15 pre-selected playlists. If they don't want to listen to the playlists, they're limited to shuffling between tracks.

The streaming service confirmed to The Verge that it was piloting Spotify Plus with a limited number of users, but cautioned there was no guarantee that it would get a full rollout and that it "routinely conduct tests to inform our decisions."

Spotify in February announced plans to introduce a new "HiFi premium" tier later this year, but despite some indications that it's been in testing, we've still to see the high-definition plan go live. Since then, Apple Music has launched Spatial Audio with Dolby Atmos and ‌Apple Music‌ Lossless, two features that became available to subscribers in June for no additional fee.

Article Link: Spotify Tests $0.99 Subscription Tier With Ads But Fewer Playback Limitations

 

[BvizioN]

Ads don't bother me as much as not being able to choose what to listen to next. Sounds like a good idea to me.

 

[mungo2k]

Will artists get the subscription rate per play (which is already low with Spotify Premium) or the even lower rate that the free tier pays per play?

 

[kiranmk2]

Is this just for the mobile app? I've been using Spotify free on the Mac since 2009 and have no issues selecting and skipping tracks.

 

[JippaLippa]

I don't get using the free tier...it's quite a miserable experience.
I prefer the Apple Music approach, being one thing only at one price for it all.
It makes it feel more serious and premium, instead of splitting the offer into various tiers (from hi-fi to free) each vorse than the previous one...

 

[darkcompass]

"pick which songs they want to stream between ads"

Sounds like you're going to get more ads than music with that statement.

 

[jamcgahey]

It sounds like it would be a solid value for some people; however, I feel like the market might be small for this type of product. I know the cost difference from $.99 to $9.99 isn't small I feel like if someone is going to pay for music they would more likely just go all in. But maybe the .99 plan could tease people with just enough features to convert more previously free users to paid subscribers?

 

[saudor]

It sounds like it would be a solid value for some people; however, I feel like the market might be small for this type of product. I know the cost difference from $.99 to $9.99 is small I feel like if someone is going to pay for music they would more likely just go all in. But maybe the .99 plan could tease people with just enough features to convert more previously free users to paid subscribers?

yeah it's definitely a gateway drug. Within my group of friends - rich and not as rich - most of them say stuff like "Who pays for music when you can watch it on youtube 4 free" etc

 

[BigKahunaBurguer]

I think this is a first step to remove the free tier.

 

[Apple$]

While this could be great for converting free users, I don't think there would be many takers. This would be useful if you have a big data plan or unlimited data, but for those who have to conserve every megabyte, get the top tier.

 

[siddavis]

It sounds like it would be a solid value for some people; however, I feel like the market might be small for this type of product. I know the cost difference from $.99 to $9.99 is small I feel like if someone is going to pay for music they would more likely just go all in. But maybe the .99 plan could tease people with just enough features to convert more previously free users to paid subscribers?

This is right in my wheelhouse. I don't listen to enough music to justify unlimited access to everything. I bounce around between Amazon Music (with Prime Sub), Pandora, and my own Apple Music library. This sounds like it would give me access to any song I want to hear that might be excluded from my library or Amazon Music basic.

Also, the cost difference from $.99 to $9.99 is 10x. $12/year vs $120/year is a big difference. Given my listening habits, I can handle the ads (I think!)

 

[jamcgahey]

This is right in my wheelhouse. I don't listen to enough music to justify unlimited access to everything. I bounce around between Amazon Music (with Prime Sub), Pandora, and my own Apple Music library. This sounds like it would give me access to any song I want to hear that might be excluded from my library or Amazon Music basic.

Also, the cost difference from $.99 to $9.99 is 10x. $12/year vs $120/year is a big difference. Given my listening habits, I can handle the ads (I think!)

Haha it was a typo I meant to say the difference ISN'T small!!!

 

[Morgenland]

Buy advertising on subscription base? LOL
I don't really want to know the people who come up with this.

 

[coolman124]

Once you get someone to pay $1 vs $10 isnt that big of a difference if you have already gotten them to pay

 

[tongxinshe]

It’s less and less likely that Apple Music would ever catch up with Spotify at paid customer numbers, the gap between them is just getting bigger and bigger. I guess the real question is, will the music subscription industry be able to accommodate two players or just one? Similarly another question is, how many players could video subscription industry accommodate? Seriously, I seriously wonder whether Apple Music and Apple TV+ could eventually survive.

 

[JippaLippa]

It’s less and less likely that Apple Music would ever catch up with Spotify at paid customer numbers, the gap between them is just getting bigger and bigger. I guess the real question is, will the music subscription industry be able to accommodate two players or just one? Similarly another question is, how many players could video subscription industry accommodate? Seriously, I seriously wonder whether Apple Music and Apple TV+ could eventually survive.

I don't think so; Apple has decades of experience in the music business and removing the Apple Music service from the ecosystem would be fatal for them.
It would still be better for them to keep it even if it didn't generate a profit in itself, to give more prestige to the ecosystem.

Microsoft is doing a similar thing with the xbox gamepass, which definitely doesn't generate a profit (yet), but it's designed to bring more people into the ecosystem and I expect it becoming more expensive in a few years.

Also let's remember Apple is so big and they have so much money...
You'd also have to consider the Apple One subscription.
For example I have the 15$/month Apple One tier and it gives me a lot of stuff for that value.
100GB icloud storage (Pretty useful), Apple TV+ (that I watch from time to time), Apple Music and Apple Arcade (That I din't use but I like to have).