Taylor Swift Criticizes Apple Music's Free Trial in Open Letter

[TallManNY]

But if you think about it... she wasn't getting anything from Apple Music subscriptions before it was a thing. In 3 months time, she will start getting money from Apple Music subscriptions.

How is it putting people out of jobs when they got 0 before and will get 0 for free months and then something?

Swift does get paid from streaming services. Folks are going to switch over to Apple Music during the trial service so there will be less streaming on, for example, Pandora, where Swift is paid. I as customer will be getting Swift's songs streamed to me, but she will not get paid for three months. It is as simple as that.

She clearly is ready to support Apple Music, for various reasons, not the least of which she is super rich and can easily take the hit. But she is speaking up for other folks who are living closer to paycheck to paycheck and who are going to see smaller checks from iTunes and other streaming services for the next three months.

Also Apple is using the content to build Apple's service. Why does the very rich Apple company need that content donated for three months? You haven't addressed that point. Though in some ways the answer is easy, it saves Apple money to get the content donated for free for a few months. And also most of the content comes from the big labels and this is indirectly how Apple is getting the big labels to chip in some cost for building this service out.

 

[Frazzle]

A while ago, my local supermarket offered a free hammock with 50 euros spent on groceries. I don't think the manufacturer of the hammock offered the product to the supermarket for free. After all, it's about getting customers into the supermarket - not about promoting hammocks.

The same goes for Apple. Even though I love (most of the) products they make, as a company they're becoming less and less sympathetic. The new CEO seems to be Scrooge McDuck.

Actually it's sad to see that any company that becomes too rich and powerful starts behaving exactly like IBM and Microsoft in their heyday, by more or less betraying the trust of their best customers.

 

[Gildarts]

Can someone explain this maybe. Can't artists just choose to not stream their music on Apple (that is what she's doing anyway right?)

They could just have a collective strike right? Or are the labels signing away their music anyways?

 

[marc55]

Oh, they are all so poor! Way too much greed

 

[johngordon]

I like Swifty, and if nothing else, fair play to her for speaking out for something she obviously believes in. Especially as there was speculation she only pulled out of Spotify because she had struck some exclusive deal with Apple.

But I do think there is a bit of a contradiction here:

On the one hand streaming is bad because artists, especially lesser known artists, make virtually nothing from streaming services.

But on the other we are to believe that the free trial is bad because it will have some significant negative financial impact on artists.

So which is it? Are artists making virtually nothing from streaming, or is a free trial of a streaming service costing them dearly? Because presumably it can't be both.

 

[Mr Fusion]

But if people want to keep listening to those albums, add them to playlists etc then they will have to pay monthly eventually, OR buy them in the traditional sense. And they will still be paid via other services like Spotify and rdio.

Money artists got from Apple Music before it was launched: 0
Money artists get after 3 months after Apple Music launch: Actual money

Wow if that's the type of logic you employ, do I have a job offer for you!!! It pays ABSOLUTELY NOTHING for the first three months, but after that I promise I'll start paying you.

Sign here:


_____________________

 

[kwokaaron]

Wait... I thought it said somewhere that her music wasn't going to be on Apple Music regardless.

 

[maflynn]

But if people want to keep listening to those albums, add them to playlists etc then they will have to pay monthly eventually, OR buy them in the traditional sense. And they will still be paid via other services like Spotify and rdio.

Yes, but the fact remains apple is gaining a benefit, the consumer enjoying music and yet the people who worked at creating the music are not getting their fair share.

 

[1JJJ]

I've a 6+ 128GBs I don't care about apple music or spotify. I just torrent everything.

 

[Pakaku]

It's called a loss leader... Don't worry you'll be back to pulling in 100's of millions after this terrible trial period.. I hope you can make it until then.

You are a wonderful example of someone who would not read the article.

Swift, who calls Apple one of her best partners in selling her music, says that while she is able to take care of herself and her band, crew and management with money from live shows, indie artists do not have the same luxury.

 

[iConnected]

It's called a loss leader... Don't worry you'll be back to pulling in 100's of millions after this terrible trial period.. I hope you can make it until then.

Oh, they are all so poor! Way too much greed

Read her letter:

"This is not about me. Thankfully I am on my fifth album and can support myself, my band, crew, and entire management team by playing live shows. This is about the new artist or band that has just released their first single and will not be paid for its success. This is about the young songwriter who just got his or her first cut and thought that the royalties from that would get them out of debt. This is about the producer who works tirelessly to innovate and create, just like the innovators and creators at Apple are pioneering in their field…but will not get paid for a quarter of a year’s worth of plays on his or her songs.

These are not the complaints of a spoiled, petulant child. These are the echoed sentiments of every artist, writer and producer in my social circles who are afraid to speak up publicly because we admire and respect Apple so much. We simply do not respect this particular call."

http://taylorswift.tumblr.com/post/122071902085/to-apple-love-taylor​

 

[johngordon]

I have to agree with her, those folks work hard at their craft, why give away their stuff for 3 months without payment.

With billions in the bank why not pay the artists what they're due during the free trial period.

The answer is because the free trial will likely bring on board millions, heck possibly tens of millions, of paying subscribers, and in a very short space of time match and likely surpass the current total number of people paying a subscription for a streaming service, and so open up a new and ongoing revenue stream for those artists.

Basically exactly the same benefit as any other free trial offer.

I mean the clue is in the name: free trial. That's kind go how they work.

This is not some devilish ruse dreamt up by Apple, but the oldest marketing trick in the book.

 

[jpgr15]

she needs to back off the streaming industry...NOW

Seriously? She deserves to be paid for her work just like anyone else. She also has the right to set what she believes is a fair price for her content. It's nasty that Apple is using everyone's music and telling them they won't be paid royalties. Who does Apple think they are?

Good for her.

 

[captain cadet]

But if people want to keep listening to those albums, add them to playlists etc then they will have to pay monthly eventually, OR buy them in the traditional sense. And they will still be paid via other services like Spotify and rdio.

Money artists got from Apple Music before it was launched: 0
Money artists get after 3 months after Apple Music launch: Actual money

Be honest - Do you still listen to an album as much after maybe 2 months of owning it?
Probably not as you will have more music which you will listen to... And that's the killer

 

[amoda]

To all of you making jokes about how all she wants is a bigger mansion, or how she's greedy or attention seeking:

A. She specifically sates "that while she is able to take care of herself and her band, crew and management with money from live shows, indie artists do not have the same luxury."

B. Even if she is doing it to buy herself a bigger mansion, so what?! That's her music and her effort why shouldn't she buy a 3rd, 4th or 5th mansion if people are willing to pay? If you're happy to give away your work for free after a certain income good for you, but that doesn't mean she or the other artists have to.

 

[iConnected]

I've a 6+ 128GBs I don't care about apple music or spotify. I just torrent everything.

So you just "steal" everything?

 

[Small White Car]

People who don't want to pay for music have plenty of ways to get it.

If Apple can convert some percentage of those people into payers isn't that a good thing?

And you're going to b**** that it takes 3 months instead of happening instantly?

Give me a break. I guess you'd prefer they just remain pirates forever? How is THAT better?

 

[spiral8]

These artists don't realise that more alternatives of music streaming services and easy access (by giving free taste of streaming service to customers) will help the music industry in longer run by attracting pirates to pay for music in some form!

 

[mejsric]

I just wonder if Spotify, Apple, Google.. etc.. Will dump Taylor on streaming music service.

What will happen?

 

[Abazigal]

Without "free" streams (which generate some revenue at least) people would just go back to piracy, which provides better quality anyway.

Not enough to let Spotify turn a profit.

The problem is that under the free tier, I understand that companies are still paying out more than what they earn via advertising (because you still need to pay labels for the music your customers listen to). So it appears that doing away with the free tier might actually improve their bottom line.

 

[4mat]

I was already sold on AppleMusic. Now I find out I won't find Swift's latest album won't be on there, how much better can it get?

 

[maflynn]

The answer is because the free trial will likely bring on board millions, heck possibly tens of millions, of paying subscribers, and in a very short space of time match and likely surpass the current total number of people paying a subscription for a streaming service, and so open up a new and ongoing revenue stream for those artists

Basically exactly the same benefit as any other free trial offer.

I mean the clue is in the name: free trial. That's kind go how they work.

This is not some devilish ruse dreamt up by Apple, but the oldest marketing trick in the book.

So apple is basically giving away someone else's work and you're saying that its ok for the folks not get paid. If they'll reap millions then they can add their work after the free trial

Free trials usually work by having the author give away the product for a period of time, not some third party unwilling to pay the actual content creators.

 

[Shirasaki]

I've a 6+ 128GBs I don't care about apple music or spotify. I just torrent everything.

I also torrent everything. I don't trust streaming services. Therefore Apple may never be able to grab even a cent from my pocket to streaming service, although I will then purchase their products.

 

[ikir]

Eddy Cue needs to go. He's accomplished nothing: Siri still sucks, constant outages to Apple network services and no innovation in his department. He likes to brag about owning a Ferrari and on stage he comes off as a complete tool compared to the other, pretty down-to-earth Apple executives.

He thought buying Beats and Jimmy Iovine is going to be some magical thing that saves his ass. I can't believe Cook fell for his BS. Cut the losses, integrate the headphone business and let Cue go along with Jimmy and Dre.

Siri is quite an accomplishment, Apple services are one of the most reliable on this planet.

 

[ikir]

I also torrent everything. I don't trust streaming services. Therefore Apple may never be able to grab even a cent from my pocket to streaming service, although I will then purchase their products.

And you know torrent is not legal, right?