Thank You Apple!

[bobenhaus]

http://bgr.com/2015/05/15/apple-beats-music-vs-spotify-free-streaming/

It seems that Apple is getting part of its wish and Spotify will at least severely restrict users’ ability to stream songs for free. Digital Music News’ sources claim that Spotify is planning to limit users’ ability to stream music for free to just three months. After this, they’ll have to pay a subscription fee to continue having unlimited access to the service.

RELATED: If Apple kills free Spotify streaming, it will make Beats Music even more hated than Tidal

Apple has reportedly been pushing record companies to end their agreements with Spotify to allow for a free streaming tier that relies on ad-supported streaming to generate revenue. This particular restriction is short of what Apple was calling for and is apparently being pushed by major labels Universal Music Group and Sony Music Entertainment, who are not happy that an estimated 75% of Spotify’s 60 million users don’t pay a time in subscription fees.

Nonetheless, this is a win for Apple, which is planning to unveil its own Spotify-like music streaming service at WWDC next month. Recent reports have suggested that while Apple won’t offer a free unlimited streaming tier for the service, it will offer some limited free streams as well as a free trial period for prospective subscribers. Apple is also expected to rely on artist exclusives as a way to reel in new subscribers.

 

[2984839]

No need to build a better mousetrap when you can ruin everyone else's mousetraps.

 

[jamezr]

http://bgr.com/2015/05/15/apple-beats-music-vs-spotify-free-streaming/

It seems that Apple is getting part of its wish and Spotify will at least severely restrict users’ ability to stream songs for free. Digital Music News’ sources claim that Spotify is planning to limit users’ ability to stream music for free to just three months. After this, they’ll have to pay a subscription fee to continue having unlimited access to the service.

RELATED: If Apple kills free Spotify streaming, it will make Beats Music even more hated than Tidal

Apple has reportedly been pushing record companies to end their agreements with Spotify to allow for a free streaming tier that relies on ad-supported streaming to generate revenue. This particular restriction is short of what Apple was calling for and is apparently being pushed by major labels Universal Music Group and Sony Music Entertainment, who are not happy that an estimated 75% of Spotify’s 60 million users don’t pay a time in subscription fees.

Nonetheless, this is a win for Apple, which is planning to unveil its own Spotify-like music streaming service at WWDC next month. Recent reports have suggested that while Apple won’t offer a free unlimited streaming tier for the service, it will offer some limited free streams as well as a free trial period for prospective subscribers. Apple is also expected to rely on artist exclusives as a way to reel in new subscribers.

We are the Borg......you will be assimilated! We will make you buy OUR services!

 

[Lloydbm41]

And just like that, I'll never use Apple's service again. Google All Access for me.

 

[tbayrgs]

I'm confused why all of the hate is being directed at Apple in this scenario vs. the music label that are actually forcing this change. Why exactly are the labels actually submitting to Apple? Last I read, iTunes sales are decreasing every quarter, specifically due to the prevalence of streaming services, thus reducing what could have been Apple's key point of leverage. Seems like Spotify should have more influence here considering the alternative if they cut off whatever income the labels make from Spotify is people just pirating more minutes music.

I'm not saying Apple is absolved in this issue but it seems like the other parties involve should actually have more influence and are just as, if not more accountable for this change of direction.

 

[Rogifan]

And how exactly is this Apple's fault?

 

[Lloydbm41]

And how exactly is this Apple's fault?

We'll wait for the FCC to rule and the DOJ to conclude their investigation into Apple regarding this to see the full impact Apple has had in trying to erase free internet radio listening.

But considering Beats Music streaming was a failure and iTunes Radio has been a failure, in large part because of Spotify and Pandora, it stands to reason that Apple is trying to work its magic on the record labels and artists by dangling money in front of them. If people don't have the choice for free (ad supported) music, then Spotify and Pandora become less attractive and current iPhone users will simply use the default app on their phone (which is Apple's of course) and as a result, Apple now has a successful music streaming service. All because they used their money and influence to ensure free radio streaming was destroyed.

 

[apolloa]

Why is this thread in this forum? I thought this forum was for non iOS devices, not reports on how Apple is manipulating and corrupting markets for its own gains by destroying consumer choice.

So why post the story in this forum? Is their not another forum in here where it fits better?

 

[gotluck]

And how exactly is this Apple's fault?

Apple pushing music labels to kill free Spotify streaming ahead of Beats relaunch
http://www.theverge.com/2015/5/4/8540935/apple-labels-spotify-streaming

even the verge can't make this look good

 

[jamezr]

Apple pushing music labels to kill free Spotify streaming ahead of Beats relaunch
http://www.theverge.com/2015/5/4/8540935/apple-labels-spotify-streaming

even the verge can't make this look good

Then there is this....

Remember a few years ago when Apple got in trouble for conspiring with book publishers to raise ebook prices to hurt Amazon and the public? Apparently the company hasn't learned very much. Today comes a report from the Verge, claiming that the DOJ is now investigating Apple for conspiring with the major record labels to get them to kill off Spotify's free tier, in an effort to better promote its own Beats Music service, which has no free tier.

Apple has been using its considerable power in the music industry to stop the music labels from renewing Spotify’s license to stream music through its free tier. Spotify currently has 60 million listeners, but only 15 million of them are paid users. Getting the music labels to kill the freemium tiers from Spotify and others could put Apple in prime position to grab a large swath of new users when it launches its own streaming service, which is widely expected to feature a considerable amount of exclusive content. "All the way up to Tim Cook, these guys are cutthroat," one music industry source said.
And it's not just Spotify. Apparently, Apple was trying to get labels to pull music from YouTube too:

Sources also indicated that Apple offered to pay YouTube’s music licensing fee to Universal Music Group if the label stopped allowing its songs on YouTube. Apple is seemingly trying to clear a path before its streaming service launches, which is expected to debut at WWDC in June. If Apple convinces the labels to stop licensing freemium services from Spotify and YouTube, it could take out a significant portion of business from its two largest music competitors.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/2...ee-tier-doj-now-investigating-antitrust.shtml



The EU is investigating as well...

http://nypost.com/2015/04/01/competition-commission-probing-music-streaming-services/

 

[I7guy]

Why is this thread in this forum? I thought this forum was for non iOS devices, not reports on how Apple is manipulating and corrupting markets for its own gains by destroying consumer choice.

So why post the story in this forum? Is their not another forum in here where it fits better?

Thread was moved, but if everyone stopped using the services of every company accused of something; we wouldn't buy anything or use the Internet.

 

[Badrottie]

Why is this thread in this forum? I thought this forum was for non iOS devices, not reports on how Apple is manipulating and corrupting markets for its own gains by destroying consumer choice.

So why post the story in this forum? Is their not another forum in here where it fits better?

I have no idea and I don't know why.

 

[phrehdd]

Wow, nice to see Apple using old Microsoft tactics to crush ideas, innovations and superior consumer products delivered by other than themselves.

 

[Rogifan]

We'll wait for the FCC to rule and the DOJ to conclude their investigation into Apple regarding this to see the full impact Apple has had in trying to erase free internet radio listening.

But considering Beats Music streaming was a failure and iTunes Radio has been a failure, in large part because of Spotify and Pandora, it stands to reason that Apple is trying to work its magic on the record labels and artists by dangling money in front of them. If people don't have the choice for free (ad supported) music, then Spotify and Pandora become less attractive and current iPhone users will simply use the default app on their phone (which is Apple's of course) and as a result, Apple now has a successful music streaming service. All because they used their money and influence to ensure free radio streaming was destroyed.

Sure seems to me Apple wouldn't need to twist the arms or pay off record labels to try and kill off free streaming. Last time I checked record labels weren't exactly best buds with Apple. I mean isn't that why Apple bought Beats in the first place - to hopefully get better deals for a streaming music service?

----------

Wow, nice to see Apple using old Microsoft tactics to crush ideas, innovations and superior consumer products delivered by other than themselves.

I'm sorry where has it been proven Apple is behind this? What happened to innocent until proven guilty? Or does that not apply when it comes to Apple?

----------

Apple pushing music labels to kill free Spotify streaming ahead of Beats relaunch
http://www.theverge.com/2015/5/4/8540935/apple-labels-spotify-streaming

even the verge can't make this look good

It's alleged at this point. And I highly doubt Apple would need to push record labels to kill free streaming. I wouldn't be surprised if record labels are completely behind this but would love nothing more than Apple to take the fall for it.

 

[Lloydbm41]

Sure seems to me Apple wouldn't need to twist the arms or pay off record labels to try and kill off free streaming. Last time I checked record labels weren't exactly best buds with Apple. I mean isn't that why Apple bought Beats in the first place - to hopefully get better deals for a streaming music.

Apple wants people to pay for streaming music. Google, Spotify and Pandora have better streaming algorithms, interface and hundreds of millions of subscribers at the free tier. Only about 20% of those subscribers pay, opting for ad free music. How do you suppose Apple can compete with this? Only one way. Force everyone to pay for streaming music and then make all iPhone users default to iTunes Radio and then hamstring the competitors apps (much like Apple does with Chrome/Firefox). All of a sudden, Apple has millions of new users. And all Apple had to do to achieve this? Get artists and record labels to increase the costs of music and have exclusivity deals... Just like Apple is doing right now!

 

[tdale]

I'm confused why all of the hate is being directed at Apple in this scenario vs. the music label that are actually forcing this change. Why exactly are the labels actually submitting to Apple? Last I read, iTunes sales are decreasing every quarter, specifically due to the prevalence of streaming services, thus reducing what could have been Apple's key point of leverage. Seems like Spotify should have more influence here considering the alternative if they cut off whatever income the labels make from Spotify is people just pirating more minutes music.

I'm not saying Apple is absolved in this issue but it seems like the other parties involve should actually have more influence and are just as, if not more accountable for this change of direction.

Whats wrong with free Spotify? It suits Spotify as it generates revenue, it suits the users who want/need free, it doesn't suit another company that wants everyone to pay for everything. A free option works

----------

We'll wait for the FCC to rule and the DOJ to conclude their investigation into Apple regarding this to see the full impact Apple has had in trying to erase free internet radio listening.

But considering Beats Music streaming was a failure and iTunes Radio has been a failure, in large part because of Spotify and Pandora, it stands to reason that Apple is trying to work its magic on the record labels and artists by dangling money in front of them. If people don't have the choice for free (ad supported) music, then Spotify and Pandora become less attractive and current iPhone users will simply use the default app on their phone (which is Apple's of course) and as a result, Apple now has a successful music streaming service. All because they used their money and influence to ensure free radio streaming was destroyed.

Smart users will revolt and illegally download the music and add it to their iPhone, which Apple allows

 

[Rogifan]

Apple wants people to pay for streaming music. Google, Spotify and Pandora have better streaming algorithms, interface and hundreds of millions of subscribers at the free tier. Only about 20% of those subscribers pay, opting for ad free music. How do you suppose Apple can compete with this? Only one way. Force everyone to pay for streaming music and then make all iPhone users default to iTunes Radio and then hamstring the competitors apps (much like Apple does with Chrome/Firefox). All of a sudden, Apple has millions of new users. And all Apple had to do to achieve this? Get artists and record labels to increase the costs of music and have exclusivity deals... Just like Apple is doing right now!

And the record companies love Spotify and Pandora? Seriously? How sustainable is free streaming with ads? No one talks about that because people want something for nothing and hey if they can paint Apple as a bully in the process all the better. If all Apple needed to be competitive was to pressure record labels into increasing costs/removing free tiers they certainly wouldn't have needed to spend $3B on Beats.

Also how exactly does Apple force people to default to iTunes? I am an iPhone user but I don't use iTunes at all. I get all my music from Spotify. If Apple was as anti-competitive as you suggest why do Google and Microsoft have dozens of apps on the app store? When the maps debacle happened Tim Cook's apology letter encouraged people to use competitor apps. When Office debuted on iPad Tim Cook tweeted about it. What's most important to Apple is selling as many iOS devices as possible. I mean Apple is posting record revenue and profits even though iTunes sales are declining. Revenue from streaming music is not that meaningful in the grand scheme of things. But if Apple Music is actually good and becomes successful that's a problem for Spotify so I can see why they'd be pushing the meme that Apple is being anti-competitive.

----------

Whats wrong with free Spotify? It suits Spotify as it generates revenue, it suits the users who want/need free, it doesn't suit another company that wants everyone to pay for everything. A free option works

How does free Spotify benefit artists or record labels? And what company are you talking about that "wants everyone to pay for everything"? iTunes Radio is free/ad supported. And let's not forget one of the rumors was Apple wanted to charge $5.99 for their music service but the record companies said no way.

 

[tdale]

And the record companies love Spotify and Pandora? Seriously? How sustainable is free streaming with ads? No one talks about that because people want something for nothing and hey if they can paint Apple as a bully in the process all the better. If all Apple needed to be competitive was to pressure record labels into increasing costs/removing free tiers they certainly wouldn't have needed to spend $3B on Beats.

Also how exactly does Apple force people to default to iTunes? I am an iPhone user but I don't use iTunes at all. I get all my music from Spotify. If Apple was as anti-competitive as you suggest why do Google and Microsoft have dozens of apps on the app store? When the maps debacle happened Tim Cook's apology letter encouraged people to use competitor apps. When Office debuted on iPad Tim Cook tweeted about it. What's most important to Apple is selling as many iOS devices as possible. I mean Apple is posting record revenue and profits even though iTunes sales are declining. Revenue from streaming music is not that meaningful in the grand scheme of things. But if Apple Music is actually good and becomes successful that's a problem for Spotify so I can see why they'd be pushing the meme that Apple is being anti-competitive.

----------



How does free Spotify benefit artists or record labels? And what company are you talking about that "wants everyone to pay for everything"? iTunes Radio is free/ad supported. And let's not forget one of the rumors was Apple wanted to charge $5.99 for their music service but the record companies said no way.

Free Spotify generates revenire, and no oentalks about that? They do, a recent article went over the business models. Apple doesn't want Spotify around as its free to end users and that makes it hard for Apple to compete, like in eBooks, and we know what happened there. Do you know for a fact the Spotify does not pay any money to artists for the free version? Do you know the rate of transition from free to pay for Spotify? Sorry, but I feel your comments are based more on being a n Apple fan, as am I, rather than seeing it for what it is, bully tactics.

 

[Rogifan]

Free Spotify generates revenire, and no oentalks about that? They do, a recent article went over the business models. Apple doesn't want Spotify around as its free to end users and that makes it hard for Apple to compete, like in eBooks, and we know what happened there. Do you know for a fact the Spotify does not pay any money to artists for the free version? Do you know the rate of transition from free to pay for Spotify? Sorry, but I feel your comments are based more on being a n Apple fan, as am I, rather than seeing it for what it is, bully tactics.

Apple doesn't want Spotify around yet it exists in the App Store. Apple cares much more about selling iOS devices than it does selling a subscription music service. Otherwise iTunes Radio would never have launched as a free, ad supported service. What evidence do we have that record labels and artists are happy with ad supported free streaming?

 

[tdale]

Apple doesn't want Spotify around yet it exists in the App Store.

If it didn't there would be hell to pay. Spotify is a standard, common app these days.

Apple cares much more about selling iOS devices than it does selling a subscription music service. Otherwise iTunes Radio would never have launched as a free, ad supported service. Why would they be investigated as to bullying Spotify, as they were with eBooks? Where there is smoke there is fire. Apple these days, and IMHO, is only about making money. Their disruption of the music industry has gone too far for them, they are seeing deceasing revenues due to competition, so they wish to reverse that. What evidence do we have that record labels and artists are happy with ad supported free streaming?

Record lables allow their copyright to be used by Spotify, hence they are happy. Happy? Dunno, but they allow it, so they must be happy enough, I expect there is a level of users trying free, then going to pay, adding mopre revenue. Apple should offer a free service. iTunes Radio appears to have failed, they need to offer a free music streaming service that is as good as the opposition or better.

 

[decafjava]

And meantime artists are screwed either way.

 

[Makendu]

i download all my music so idc. just use pandora.

 

[Darth.Titan]

In my opinion, I think people are giving Apple too much credit for Spotify's change to their free ad-supported streaming tier. I'm pretty sure it would have gone away on its own. While Spotify's service is great, it so far hasn't been very lucrative.

Free Spotify generates revenue, and no one talks about that? They do, a recent article went over the business models. Apple doesn't want Spotify around as its free to end users and that makes it hard for Apple to compete, like in eBooks, and we know what happened there. Do you know for a fact the Spotify does not pay any money to artists for the free version? Do you know the rate of transition from free to pay for Spotify? Sorry, but I feel your comments are based more on being a n Apple fan, as am I, rather than seeing it for what it is, bully tactics.

Are they really generating revenue? I've read several articles (here's one) stating that Spotify hasn't turned a profit in three years. Even though their revenue increases year over year, they can't manage to finish in the black.

That's pretty much the definition of a poor business model, and a much more likely explanation for the limiting of their free ad-supported streaming.