Taylor Swift to Stream Top-Selling Album '1989' on Apple Music

[bpeeps]

I'd say it is a reflection of the state of music atm, I doubt spotify users are Taylor swift fans.

I guess you missed the outrage when she pulled her albums off of Spotify.

Uh, check your facts there. 1989 was released October 2014. Hardly best selling album of the last 2 years. Or did you mean, "1989 is the most successful-selling album within the past 2 years"?

Seriously, it's one album. You think that's going to hurt spotify's subscriptions?

The #1 selling album of 2014 and 4th in 2015. This is a huge win for Apple. People try to discredit her because they don't like her music, but numbers do not lie.

I think you are correct, Adele holds the top selling album in recent decade. And Frozen (Disney) had the 2014 record.

Incorrect. A simple Google could give you this answer. Jesus, people.

Those were different times in music - when people actually bought Albums.

Taylor Swift's 1989 has sold more than any album in the past 12 years.

But, don't sway from your agenda - make sure you stick to it regardless of facts.

Your understanding of the music industry, streaming, digital sales, singles, and the decline of the album is laughable.

 

[richman555]

This good for both Swift and Apple.

Kudos to Swift for writing this post and taking this on and kudos to Apple for taking immediate action.

Both sides get exposure, Swifts initiative helps indie artists, and Apple Music is now a legitimate contender in the streaming space.

 

[Arndroid]

So if the streaming fee Apple pays is similar to Spotify's, why is she suddenly ok with that?
Total PR stunt, but luckily I don't give a damn about this brat

It's not the same. Most Spotify customers are on ad tier and artists get only paid a small fraction of the amount of subscribers.

 

[Swift]

Hey, look, this is the first time I'm getting the idea that Apple Music may be something big. What the acquisition of Beats has given them is an idea how PR works in the record business. But what they will also need is a larger number of music shows from around the world, made by fans and businesses in the music cloud. More than three shows internationally. More diverse broadcasting, not all from Apple. World Music Fans. And a lot of podcasts. Fans of Queen to teeny-boppers. Lovers of Montand, Gillespie, Mozart and Tchaikovsky. Pay them in Apple Music Pay, let them have free music that Apple pays for. So everybody's got playlists, right?

 

[smorrissey]

Crisis averted. Now, who is Taylor Swift?

Ground control to Major Tom...planet earth here.

 

[Swift]

Poor Spotify. Apple Music now has the best selling album of the last 2 years at their disposal.

100,000 plays = $2000? (By the way, my nickname is for Jonathan Swift, not Taylor.)

 

[Luscious]

This whole thing smells like a giant PR stunt all the way around. Apple Music and Taylor Swift both walk away getting very good press and this all happens a few days before launch? Sure Apple has to pay more to launch the service than it would have by withholding payments from artists but for Apple it's a drop in the bucket and well worth it in the medium and long term if the service is a hit. Swift gets to reverse her dumb business decision to pull her music from streaming services under the guise that she was taking a stand for indie artists by pulling it in the first place. It's a win-win for Apple and Swift.

 

[nnn3]

Yes. iTunes Radio doesn't work anything like you imply. On Spotify you get to pick the songs you want to hear; on iTunes radio an algorithm picks the songs, based on your tastes. Spotify is a streaming alternative to song purchase; iTunes radio is just a highly customized form of radio. Paid Spotify is not the major problem; the ad-supported alternative is, as it is too directly competitive with purchased music, except with miniscule payments to the musicians.

Thanks. I have Spotify Premium, and forgot that you can search for songs even in the non-paid version. Case closed...

 

[cmaier]

Ground control to Major Tom...planet earth here.

No, really. What's a Taylor Swift?

 

[Rafagon]

Ahh, thank Heavens. I can sleep peacefully tonight. /s

 

[ke-iron]

Crisis averted. Now, who is Taylor Swift?

Lol I really don't know why she's headlines. I had no idea she was so popular. I can't name a single song she sang and I have a few thousands and at least a half dozen genres in my iTunes.

 

[flat five]

But is it really that huge? I'm pretty sure that most people that would care about this already own her album anyway.

maybe 30% of the songs in my beats library are songs i've bought previously.
(fwiw)

---
but if someone owns the album 1989 and they subscribe to applemusic, i'll pretty much guarantee they'll listen to the songs through the service even though they have it in itunes as well.

 

[flat five]

Seriously, it's one album. You think that's going to hurt spotify's subscriptions?

maybe not.. but applemusic will.
spotify is done.. sucks but they won't be able to compete with apple.

 

[Regbial]

I smell illuminatee... *gets shot*

 

[flat five]

When I come to MR I prefer to read more about Apple stuff like this:
<programing language>
Than about some flash in the pan nonsense like this:
<taylor swift>

idk.. flash in the pan might not be entirely related to the music/talent.. the image might have more to do with it.. lots of the past contenders for the next madonna(or whatever) just pile out and blow it.. britney spears, amy winehouse, miley cyrus (still in contention i suppose), lindsay lohan to an extent..

if she can avoid that fate and live up to stevie nicks' opinion then who knows..

Taylor reminds me of myself in her determination and her childlike nature. It's an innocence that's so special and so rare. This girl writes the songs that make the whole world sing, like Neil Diamond or Elton John. She sings, she writes, she performs, she plays great guitar. Taylor can do ballads that could be considered pop or rock and then switch back into country. When I turned 20 years old, I had just made the serious decision to never be a dental assistant. Taylor just turned 20, and she's won four Grammys.

I still walk around singing her song "Today Was a Fairytale." All of us girls want that boy to pick us up and think that we look beautiful even though we're in jeans and clogs. We want it at 14, and we want it at 60. Taylor is writing for the universal woman and for the man who wants to know her. The female rock-'n'-roll-country-pop songwriter is back, and her name is Taylor Swift. And it's women like her who are going to save the music business.

 

[Whimseh]

Pretty obvious this was all publicity.

 

[flat five]

Pretty obvious this was all publicity.

for who?
who's gaining what?

and a what risk?.. here's a different look at it..

ceo and senior exec of (possibly) the most effectively marketed brand of the century have decided to involve solely themselves in a little public relations stunt.

the goal of the stunt is to make apple appear classy

they just have to gain this image of class via one of the least classy manners possible.. pretending and deceiving

---
i mean, i get it that corporate images are masks and they're all deceptive but come on.. would tim cook actually agree to this and think it's a good idea?

there's really not much publicity happening here.. (well, here at macrumors there is publicity and a buzz but i'm pretty sure that doesn't translate accordingly to the rest of the world.)
it's like people are watching the drama unfold and having theories and it's exciting etc.. that's cool but still, keep it in perspective.

if it come out this was actually a stunt (and it will if it is), apple will look like total douchebags.. and that would probably gain more publicity than this little stunt.. the risk is high and the reward is low.. apple execs, i think, are smarter than that.


---------------------
edit-- not to say that apple didn't consider publicity with how they handled it and i think they came out on the positive side.. just saying i highly doubt this was pre-orchestrated between the three of them.

 

[SchneiderMan]

No question about it Apple probably made a special deal with her in the millions of $.

 

[jeffe]

No question about it Apple probably made a special deal with her in the millions of $.

Yep, this is great marketing for apple and falls right into their playbook.

 

[Michael CM1]

I know a lot of adults who love Taylor Swift. I'm 30 myself and really enjoy her music. Red was a better album tho.

SHE GOT ME!

 

[Infinitewisdom]

for who?
who's gaining what?

and a what risk?.. here's a different look at it..

ceo and senior exec of (possibly) the most effectively marketed brand of the century have decided to involve solely themselves in a little public relations stunt.

the goal of the stunt is to make apple appear classy

they just have to gain this image of class via one of the least classy manners possible.. pretending and deceiving

---
i mean, i get it that corporate images are masks and they're all deceptive but come on.. would tim cook actually agree to this and think it's a good idea?

there's really not much publicity happening here.. (well, here at macrumors there is publicity and a buzz but i'm pretty sure that doesn't translate accordingly to the rest of the world.)
it's like people are watching the drama unfold and having theories and it's exciting etc.. that's cool but still, keep it in perspective.

if it come out this was actually a stunt (and it will if it is), apple will look like total douchebags.. and that would probably gain more publicity than this little stunt.. the risk is high and the reward is low.. apple execs, i think, are smarter than that.


---------------------
edit-- not to say that apple didn't consider publicity with how they handled it and i think they came out on the positive side.. just saying i highly doubt this was pre-orchestrated between the three of them.

Thank you for injecting some rationality into the discussion.

 

[flat five]

Don't count your chickens before they hatch...for all we know, Apple don't even have a product as of now, and Spotify's is more than mature, and it works great.

apple has, at the very least, beats.. and beats is a direct competitor to spotify already..

even if beats.app remained exactly as it is and the only difference is apple backs it / integrates it/ markets it, spotify is still going to be hurting.

 

[moderately]

Hmm...and The Loop has a story up about how Apple has been working through these issues for weeks. More and more I'm starting to wonder if this wasn't just some big PR stunt.

http://www.loopinsight.com/2015/06/25/not-entirely-down-to-taylor-swift/

Who remembers New Coke?
A potential debacle transmogrified into a brilliant PR gambit.

 

[Arcady]

What if I already downloaded it from anywhere, copied it to 300 USB sticks, and then threw them all in the trash?

 

[thekeyring]

Back in 2003, Apple introduced iTunes for Windows. You can argue they did it to make the iTunes music store cross-platform, and that it was a product in of itself. But really, it was to drive more iPod sales, which in turn drove more Mac sales. Those hardware sale goals they accomplished perfectly with the Windows release.

The same strategy is unfolding here. Apple Music is a cross-platform feature - but it is nonetheless designed to drive iPhone, iPad, and Mac sales. The experience will be, without a doubt, richer on Apple devices as compared to Android/Windows. Also, just because it will be compatible with third-party devices doesn't mean it's not a feature designed to drive hardware sales. If anything, the fact that SmartTVs or high-end wifi-enabled home-theater equipment might support it is more an incentive for someone to buy an Apple phone or computer.

Just like iTunes did back in 2003, Apple Music will give Android users and Windows users a little taste of what it is to be in the Apple ecosystem, a taste designed to get them on board in the long term.

Yes but it's still a product in and of itself rather than part of iOS like FaceTime. Which is what the original comment was implying.