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

[roland.g]

Lol. Are you kidding me? Her album has been out since October 2014 and she currently has the #2 best selling album this week. Most albums fly out the Billboard Top 200 after a couple of months. The fact that she is STILL Top 5 after eight months is unreal!

No, the fact that Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon was on the Billboard Top 200 for 741 straight weeks from 1973 to 1988 is unreal. 8 months pales by comparison. Appetite for Destruction, another fairly big album spent 147 weeks, almost 3 years on the Top 200, from 1987 to 1989.

 

[yg17]

According to Time magazine, Spotify paid her just $440,000 in 2014. She publicly stated that she dislikes streaming because all streams have the same value (she thinks her songs are worth more than others) and decided to pull her music from Spotify. If her income was based solely on streaming, it'd be just a few million a year which would likely be operating at a loss considering how much R&D etc goes into creating her music. So I think she's resistant to streaming because she wants be a billionaire. According to Forbes her net worth is $200 million dollars. Much of that came from touring, album sales, and her partial ownership of Big Machine records.

Ha, worth more than $440,000? You'd have to pay me to listen to her garbage.

 

[MH01]

No, but 3 months of totally free will probably do it. At the very least, people will stop using Spotify for a bit to try out Apple Music while it's free. If it ends up being the same as far as they're concerned, they may just stick with Apple Music since it's what they were using most recently.

Spotify are doing 2 months free. Google music might have deals also .

Next week I'll know if I am at all interested in apple music. Going to give them all a go while they have trials and choose the one I enjoy using the most.

 

[thekeyring]

To Spotify, streaming is their product. To Apple, streaming is just a feature. It is one of dozens of features designed to sell more Apple hardware products.

That's not the case with this one. Apple Music is not like iMessage or FaceTime, designed to make people flock to iPhone and Mac. It is a product like Spotify, and is cross platform.

 

[AlexH]

Hmm... Very interesting. Well played, all parties involved.

 

[theSeb]

This all feels very manufactured and planned.

 

[thekeyring]

Hmm...cmon, you think she's doing this out of the goodness of her heart? This whole escapade has been a marketing plow. Trust me, money has been exchanged...months ago. Apple doesn't have a superior product... they have a superior bank account.

There's a reason why her album has not been available for streaming before...cuz Apple got to her first. when she pulled her album is when Apple bought her.

They have more songs to stream. They have social integration. They have the talent that will ensure artists use features like Connect. They will have a huge install base on Day 1. They even made it cross platform. It either costs the same or less money.

The only edge Spotify has is a free tier. It's hard to argue they don't have a superior product.

Also, I wasn't saying Taylor Swift was doing this out of the goodness of her heart.

 

[BrennerM]

Pretty sure if Spotify dropped their free tier, she would have her music back on Spotify as well.

But skeptics will always be skeptics and they'll believe that Taylor and Apple planned out this whole thing. Probably while laughing maniacally in their island lair compound.

 

[HenryDJP]

To Spotify, streaming is their product. To Apple, streaming is just a feature. It is one of dozens of features designed to sell more Apple hardware products.

I would have to respectfully disagree with this. People on Windows computers can simply sign up for Music. Android users in the fall can sign up. No Apple hardware sold. I suspect within 12 months Apple will be expanding where Music can play without any Apple hardware, such as SMART TV's. You may not find Music on a Roku device but some wifi high-end audio and gaming systems have Spotify. I'm sure Apple would love to be added in a software update.

 

[theSeb]

According to Time magazine, Spotify paid her just $440,000 in 2014. She publicly stated that she dislikes streaming because all streams have the same value (she thinks her songs are worth more than others) and decided to pull her music from Spotify. If her income was based solely on streaming, it'd be just a few million a year which would likely be operating at a loss considering how much R&D etc goes into creating her music. So I think she's resistant to streaming because she wants be a billionaire. According to Forbes her net worth is $200 million dollars. Much of that came from touring, album sales, and her partial ownership of Big Machine records.

I think that I am going to regret asking this, but tell me more about this research and development that goes into creating another whiny and catchy pop number about one of her ex boyfriends?

 

[mariotr87]

They have more songs to stream. They have social integration. They have the talent that will ensure artists use features like Connect. They will have a huge install base on Day 1. They even made it cross platform. It either costs the same or less money.

The only edge Spotify has is a free tier. It's hard to argue they don't have a superior product.

Also, I wasn't saying Taylor Swift was doing this out of the goodness of her heart.

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 may have better deals with music labels, mostly due to the size of their bank account, but they need to get this right, and Apple are not famous for providing excellent online services. Some of their apps are even quite lacking.

 

[Celf]

This whole thing was set up... every move choreographed like one of her performances. Everything from her getting upset at Apple, to Apple contacting her directly by phone, to changing paying artists during the free period, and now--so magically, her 1989 album is now going to be on Apple Music. Apple/Swift isn't fooling anyone. It's just for publicity. Nothing more. I'll be skipping her songs, like I normally do.

I fully agree. Swift is distributing her music by Big Machine. Big Machine is independent, and her family owns part of the company. It's still a rumor (?) that Apple wants to buy Big Machine. Next to that Swift rejects 0,2 ct per stream from Spotify ("not a fair compensation") but fully agrees to Apple 0,2 ct per stream...hmmm.

 

[MH01]

They have more songs to stream. They have social integration. They have the talent that will ensure artists use features like Connect. They will have a huge install base on Day 1. They even made it cross platform. It either costs the same or less money.

The only edge Spotify has is a free tier. It's hard to argue they don't have a superior product.

Also, I wasn't saying Taylor Swift was doing this out of the goodness of her heart.

Is Connect not Ping v2? Cause ping sucked in a major way even with a huge install base.

Or have I got my services mixed up? The presentation did not help at the WWDC

 

[Soni Sanjay]

How will Apple Music sound quality compare with Spotify (using HQ setting)? Quite frankly, that means a lot more than if yet another generic and forgettable pop artist's music is available or not.

It will be better, or at the very least, equal.

AAC 256 kbps > Ogg 320

 

[thekeyring]

Is Connect not Ping v2? Cause ping sucked in a major way even with a huge install base.

Or have I got my services mixed up? The presentation did not help at the WWDC

No. Connect is mainly for artists to share content. If artists do, it has a good chance of succeeding. This is a product created by music experts at Beats and Apple. Not by Steve Jobs' Apple.

Not all social networks, even if similar in some areas, are the same. Facebook and Google+ are a good example.

There is a difference between Connect and Ping, and it would be nice if people stopped being so cynical and actually used their brains. Even if you ignore Connect completely, Apple has a wider selection of music, and more talent at their disposal for curated playlists.

 

[HenryDJP]

This whole thing was set up... every move choreographed like one of her performances. Everything from her getting upset at Apple, to Apple contacting her directly by phone, to changing paying artists during the free period, and now--so magically, her 1989 album is now going to be on Apple Music. Apple/Swift isn't fooling anyone. It's just for publicity. Nothing more. I'll be skipping her songs, like I normally do.

I've called it multiple times but the naysayers keep shooting down the idea. It makes a ton more sense than a simple pop artist worth only $200m (that will no doubt become less relevant in a few short years) bullying a multi-billion dollar company (that could buy her out 1000+ times over and will outlast her by many many many years) into reversing a contracted business decision within 24 hours. Couple that with one of the Apple execs posting on her Twitter page "Okay Taylor we hear ya, we'll go ahead and reverse the decision". Just like that. LOL.

 

[MH01]

I would have to respectfully disagree with this. People on Windows computers can simply sign up for Music. Android users in the fall can sign up. No Apple hardware sold. I suspect within 12 months Apple will be expanding where Music can play without any Apple hardware, such as SMART TV's. You may not find Music on a Roku device but some wifi high-end audio and gaming systems have Spotify. I'm sure Apple would love to be added in a software update.

I wonder what percentage of iTunes users are windows based. Something to have a look at tomorrow I guess.

I'd be interested to look back 6 months from now and see how non Apple devices have performed in relation to apple music, doubt apple will make that public though.

 

[MarkNY]

Never realized the Apple TV version won't be available until fall. I wonder why? Doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense.

 

[thekeyring]

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 may have better deals with music labels, mostly due to the size of their bank account, but they need to get this right, and Apple are not famous for providing excellent online services. Some of their apps are even quite lacking.

Sure. When you look at Maps and iCloud you could really worry about their internet services. But the iTunes Store and App Store seem to be doing quite well.

Also, Maps usage has gone way up by just being default in iOS. Lastly, even if you think the team at Apple didn't have it in them to create a streaming service, they've acquired a ton more people with Beats. So they've got brilliant software engineers, they're capable of creating internet services, and they've got people who understand the music industry, and can convince artists to get on board.

The result so far is they've announced a cross-platform service with more songs than any other streaming service. It might fail, but do you have a reason for it to fail, other than a "well, icloud is a big buggy sometimes" and possibly an anti-Apple bias?

 

[MH01]

No. Connect is mainly for artists to share content. If artists do, it has a good chance of succeeding. This is a product created by music experts at Beats and Apple. Not by Steve Jobs' Apple.

Not all social networks, even if similar in some areas, are the same. Facebook and Google+ are a good example.

There is a difference between Connect and Ping, and it would be nice if people stopped being so cynical and actually used their brains. Even if you ignore Connect completely, Apple has a wider selection of music, and more talent at their disposal for curated playlists.

Fair enough. Just from personal experience, apple having had the resources and talent, Ping was a failure in my books. So I am somewhat skeptical about connect. Time will tell.

 

[Chacocliff]

Is Connect not Ping v2? Cause ping sucked in a major way even with a huge install base.

Or have I got my services mixed up? The presentation did not help at the WWDC

I think the thing to look at is that social networks are a lot more popular now then they were in 2010. Could make Connect much more successful.

 

[HenryDJP]

Pretty sure if Spotify dropped their free tier, she would have her music back on Spotify as well.

But skeptics will always be skeptics and they'll believe that Taylor and Apple planned out this whole thing. Probably while laughing maniacally in their island lair compound.

Exactly, just as naysayers will always be naysayers, blocking out any other possibilities to the equation out of fear of being wrong.

 

[MH01]

I think the thing to look at is that social networks are a lot more popular now then they were in 2010. Could make Connect much more successful.

Yeah that is true. Cannot wait to Tuesday to give it a go

 

[Keniutek]

LOL. Staged as f***.

 

[bushido]

cuz there used to be bad blood but you know they are back in mad love, look what they have done. they gave her a really deep cut.