Spotify 30M Songs
Apl music 30M Songs
Groove 38M Songs
Cause it's all about quantity isn't it? You just don't get it.
Spotify 30M Songs
Apl music 30M Songs
Groove 38M Songs
I don't know about mostly. They aren't a new company with a ton of promotions out there anymore. They have 30 million more than Apple. That's a lot.Subscribers =/= Paying Subscribers
it's clear even from their tweet. It's mostly free promotions from carriers, etc, good to inflate the upcoming IPO offer.
that depends who is paying for it.
Often times, when a 3rd party offers a "free" subscription somewhere, that company is paying for that subscription out of pocket. So while the end user might very well have been given a free subscription, that subscription is still being paid for, just by someone else.
Apple does the same thing, but that just makes me want to switch to Spotify. lolCant beat the family plan for 15 bucks on spotify. Havent even used my apple free trial promotion.
Also anyone on a Rogers Share Everything Plan gets Spotify Premium for free. Wonder if those are included too.Neil Cybart (Very smart apple analyst) made a note on his podcast that "paying" includes people who got Spotify for free because they subscribed to the NYTimes.
Can anyone verify?
If that is the case then the number Spotify gives is not nearly as valuable as it would seem on the surface.
There is no competition - right back to spotify after trial - it really is the best service hands down. I have a family plan with 3 members... Not sure how that works when they count.
I don't know about mostly. They aren't a new company with a ton of promotions out there anymore. They have 30 million more than Apple. That's a lot.
I agree 100%. I just wish artists would be paid properly. There wouldn't be any of this without them.Well, Apple Music is good. Spotify is good too. They're both good!
Not so long ago, there was no legal way to listen to an album, a band, or even a song, without buying the single or album — or hoping the radio plays it.
It's much better now. I love how easy it is these days for people to legally discover and listen to new music. And sure, it may not financially benefit the artist as much as they'd like.
But simply a confirmed number of song plays on a streaming application is infinitely more tangible than an album floating on a torrent website.
I do not listen to music enough to justify subscribing. Plus, I already have a large collection of music that I can listen to when I do feel like listening.
I agree 100%. I just wish artists would be paid properly. There wouldn't be any of this without them.
Yes. I'll ask my buddy John Mayer later on to double check, but I think the way artists make money has changed to being concerts primary.True! But for the people who love the music; well, they'll buy the album. They'll go to the concerts and they'll buy the shirts. Or at the very least, they'll recommend the band to their friends. Even more people will listen to the songs.
Streaming fundamentally enables people to discover these songs, properly listed, with half-decent quality, even with the free tiers.
Again, not perfect, but I'd argue that the music industry is much better with the digital age in 2017 than it was in 2000 (Metallica vs Napster is just one of many examples!)
How many readers do you think have subscribed to NYC? It certainly won't be anywhere close to even a millionNeil Cybart (Very smart apple analyst) made a note on his podcast that "paying" includes people who got Spotify for free because they subscribed to the NYTimes.
Can anyone verify?
If that is the case then the number Spotify gives is not nearly as valuable as it would seem on the surface.
Cause it's all about quantity isn't it? You just don't get it.