Showing posts with label music subscription. Show all posts
Showing posts with label music subscription. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 19, 2016

Amazon Prime Music Takes Another Baby Step

Amazon Prime Music logoIf you've been following this blog for any length of time, you know that I've been saying all along to watch out for Amazon Prime Music as the next big disrupter in the streaming music space.

Why? Prime Music is part of the popular Amazon Prime subscription service that already has a reported 75 million subscribers (although Amazon isn't saying just how many). Amazon is also dabbling in its own record label, and is generally getting into the mainstream music distribution waters one toe at a time.

Well, maybe two toes, as the company recently dropped a few new nuggets of what might come next.

First of all, T-Mobile must added Amazon Music to its data-free music streaming program called Music Freedom. This is the first instance of Prime Music being available to off-the-platform users.

What might be more an indicator of the future is the fact that Amazon just made it's Prime Video service available as a stand-alone product for $9 a month. For $11 a month you could also buy the full Amazon Prime membership complete with Amazon Prime Music and 2 day shipping (which is more expensive than just paying the $99 a year fee for the same thing).

Although this last move has little to do directly with Prime Music, it's another baby step in the direction that we inevitably know Amazon will take. Don't be surprised if there's a big announcement about a free-standing Prime Music service in the next few months.


Tuesday, October 27, 2015

YouTube Will Cut Labels Off If They Don't Sign Up For Red

YouTube Royalties image
If you're a record label or an artist with a large YouTube following, you may find your videos are no longer available to view if you didn't sign up to be part of the network's new Red subscription service that will launch this week.

YouTube sent a letter to content creators a few weeks ago telling them if they didn't sign on by the October 22nd, their videos would be hidden from non-paying viewers as well as well as Red subscribers. Even if they're not hidden, they won't be available for monetization.

According to YouTube, 98% of content creators have signed on so far, but there are many holdouts, among them Disney and many indie labels.

These holdouts, like many of the creators who have signed on, claim that the 55% payout from YouTube is insufficient compared to virtually every other service (who pay at least 70%).

In fact, it's been estimated that the total monthly royalty payout from Spotify is 3 times as much as YouTube, despite having a tenth of the user base.

YouTube Red launches tomorrow, and it will be interesting to see what the reaction will be. Regardless of how the public feels, you can be that content creators will continue to be unhappy.

Monday, August 10, 2015

Apple Music Up To 11 Million Users

Apple Music image
The initial figures are in and after about a month, the number of Apple Music subscribers is up to 11 million, according to Apple.

While this may seem like a prodigious start to the service, that figure may be moot since all users are still within the 90 day trial period. The number that actually sign up for service after the trial ends will determine its success.

That said, industry insiders predict that the service will end up with around 20 million paying customers by the end of the year by virtue of the fact that iTunes already has 850 million accounts, complete with credit cards, and many of these are fans that automatically sign on to the latest offerings from the company.

Another reason is that Apple makes the service difficult to miss, as it's registration is front and center upon an operating system update if you've not already subscribed.

Apple Music's $15 a month Family Plan may be its greatest feature however, and while no official figures have been given, it's been reported that around 2 million have already signed up. The Family Plan provides separate accounts for up to 6 family members under the same $15 per month fee.

All that being said, Spotify continues to roll along with 75 million users, 20 million of which subscribe to the $9.95 per month premium tier.

Can Apple Music get people to change from Spotify or any of the other services? Industry pundits say that's difficult, as once a user has made a choice of services they're not likely to try another. Apple Music offers features the like Beats 1 global radio station that other services don't have though, so the logic of the past doesn't necessarily apply going forward.

Tuesday, May 26, 2015

Spotify Still Gaining Steam

Spotify headphones image
It's easy to look at the upcoming streaming music launches from Apple and Google and think that they'll automatically take the lions share of that end of the business, but that underestimates just how important Spotify is the current music industry.

Spotify is now responsible for 10% of the industry's total revenue as of the first quarter of 2015, if you can believe their Director of Economics Will Page. That's a number that few thought would ever be reached, at least from Spotify.

Considering that according to the IFPI, all streaming services combined equaled about 10.2% last year, that means that the company is a juggernaut in the space. Of course, it also means that the 10.2% mark has grown considerably in just 3 months.

Last year subscription music brought in about $1.5 billion, and Spotify accounted for about half that. According to Page, it also accounted for more than 90% of subscription music growth last year.

Granted, these numbers are coming from Spotify, so they're most likely biased, but it does show that the service has a real hold on the market that might be tougher to dislodge than any of the potential upstarts realize, regardless of how deep their pockets might be.

Thursday, April 9, 2015

Apple's New Streaming Service May Have A Rough Start In Europe

Apple Beats image
Regulators in the European Union may throw a roadblock into Apple's upcoming launch of its new streaming music service.

Reports from both the New York Times and Wall Street Journal have sited multiple sources that say that the computer giant is increasingly under examination in Europe in its dealing with record labels. As a result, EU regulators have sent questionnaires to major labels and other streaming services regarding their dealings with Apple.

The supposition is that the tech giant hasn't been entirely truthful with the record labels in the past and regulators want to get to the reality of the situation before the new streaming service is launched. The streaming network is expected to be part of iTunes and is based upon the infrastructure of Beats Music, which Apple purchased last year.

There have been reports that Apple has been pushing the labels hard for a new deal that would enable the company to lower the monthly subscription rate for the upcoming service from the industry standard $9.95 per month to $7.95.

While $4.95 is thought to be the pricing sweet spot, major label licensing deals have made that price point impossible except for limited feature tiers or introductory pricing. Read more on Forbes.

You should follow me on Forbes for some insights on the new music business, Twitter and Facebook for daily news and updates on production and the music business.

Monday, November 4, 2013

3 Tips To Make The Most Of Spotify

Spotify logo image
There's been a lot of discussion over the financial value of Spotify for artists, and while that subject alone is worth a number of columns (I've written a book about it, in fact), the fact is that you can make money on the platform. How much money naturally depends upon the number of plays a song gets, and if there are others (like a record label) getting a split of the revenue.

Since it all comes down to how much you songs are getting played, here are a few tips on how to maximize your plays.

1. Include your Spotify destination in all communications with your fans. That includes newsletters, websites, blogs, posts and emails. The more people that know where to find your music, the better.

2. Create Spotify playlists. Playlists are a great way to help fans discover your music. You can post some that consist of only your songs, but it's better to mix in other songs from other similar artists or artists you like.

3. Release your music to all platforms at the same time. It makes no sense to give an exclusive to iTunes or another platform (even though they didn't ask for it) for a period of time before it's available on Spotify. Having your music available on both at the same time will reinforce your numbers on both platforms.

Remember, your music is your marketing! The more people that hear it, the better it is for any artist or band as it increases the demand for your catalog, show tickets and merch. Don't hold back your music from subscription platforms because the income is small right now. If people like what they hear, you'll find it will increase soon.
----------------------------------

Follow me on Forbes for some insights on the new music business.

You should follow me on Twitter for daily news and updates on production and the music business.

Check out my Big Picture blog for discussion on common music, engineering and production tips and tricks.

Thursday, March 28, 2013

The Upcoming Subscription War

Digital Music image from Bobby Owsinski's Music 3.0 blog
There's no doubt that we're headed for a battle that will be nearly as epic as any in past music business history. As the world slowly but surely shifts from a download "ownership" model to a rental "access" model, the parameters that we know today regarding the online and offline music business will be redrawn. It may happen incredibly fast, or it could happen so slowly that you hardly notice it, and that's what makes how the whole thing plays out so interesting.

Let's take the big premise first, that subscription will solve the music industry's problems and restore the revenues to what they once where. The dream all along of record label execs and insiders is to have 50 million US subscribers each pay $10 a month, which would give the listeners access to all the music they can listen to. That would generate around $6 billion a year, which is okay when you compare that the total US industry revenue in 2012 was $5.35 billion. What is usually forgotten is that the entire $10 isn't going to the record labels, it's going to be split with the service provider and the publisher. I'm not sure what the split would end up being between them, but if you put it at 50%, you get $3 billion. That could end up just offsetting the decline in download and CD sales, and basically it a wash. I don't see how that restores the industry to its former glory even if it does increase a little.

The labels are smart when it comes to subscription though, and they don't want to get caught in the Apple trap again where there's one big dog distributor that controls the supply chain. That's why they're eager to make deals with any number of potential or real competitors, like Google Play, the new Beats offering, Amazon, whomever. One thing's for sure, there's going to be a lot of alternatives for listeners to choose from in the future.

And what does that mean for Apple? There's a big change a-comin', because don't forget that Apple's fortunes aren't so much tied to the software that is iTunes as much as it's a vehicle for people to buy their hardware. Thanks to the reality of music streaming, there won't be a need for any new and improved dedicated hardware like the iPod soon, thank you very much. That means they need a new plan going forward if they want to control the music world as they have.

Amazon is a little different. Their model has never been tied to hardware, although the Kindle was used to kick start the ebook market for them. That said, they don't really care what hardware you use, as long as you buy from them. That means they're a lot less vulnerable to any forthcoming change. They also have the infrastructure in place to implement a subscription service in a flash.

Google may be caught in the middle here. They want to do some big subscription things with a combination of YouTube and Google Play and can easily roll that out. The problem is that they're not good at charging end users for their services. YouTube is a huge music discovery engine, but primarily because it's free. Try charging people and watch what happens.

That leaves Spotify, Deezer, Rhapsody, Rdio, et al. Some of these will fall by the wayside, some will stick around, but most likely none will grab a larger market share than the biggies mentioned above.

So what's the answer? If I had to guess I'd say the winner will be the best bundler. When you buy a device you get the service thrown in (or least for a period of time). That would put Apple on top, but don't discout Google (who owns Motorola) or Samsung, Google or even Beats. The phone is the center of everyone's lives right now and he who owns mobile owns the music business.

All we know for sure is that two years from now the industry could look completely different. And I can't wait for that day.

----------------------------------

Interested in the Music 3.0 archives? Buy The Music 3.0 Guide To Social Media. The best of over 800 posts.

You should follow me on Twitter for daily news and updates on production and the music business.

Check out my Big Picture blog for discussion on common music, engineering and production tips and tricks.

Wednesday, March 6, 2013

The Next Era Of The Music Business

Cloud Music image from Bobby Owsinski's Music 3.0 Blog
Regardless if you're a musician or music consumer, your music life is about to change. Slowly but surely digital music distribution has been evolving from downloads to streaming, but that transition has been really picking up speed over the last 12 months. With Spotify leading the way thanks to reams of publicity, more and more consumers are finding that the joy of renting music beats owning it by a long shot.

While it's been long rumored that Apple has their own streaming service up their sleeve, several developments reveal the change that is about to come.

First is the fact that Jimmy Iovine's Daisy project (named after the first computer generated song) just received a $60 million injection from the likes of Warner Music Group's owner Len Blavatnik, Fort Worth billionaire Lee Bass and Australian financier James Packer. This is a serious investment by some deep pockets that know what they're doing and don't like to lose. Then comes word that Apple's Tim Cook recently took a meeting with Iovine to be briefed on the project. Does that mean a collaboration? We don't know, but at the very least, Apple has a good working relationship with Iovine, since he was one of the first to sign Universal Music onto iTunes back in 2001. Together they'd be a powerhouse, a true 1200 pound gorilla. Chances are that Apple will chose to go it alone and just stay at 800 pounds though. It doesn't need a partner, but if there's something there worth buying, they have lots of money.

Then comes word that Google has been quietly making deals with all the major labels for their own YouTube-based subscription streaming service to be launched later in the year.

If all this were happening a couple of years ago we would've looked to only one of these prospective services to be left standing at some point, with the others falling by the wayside. But this is a different time, with the streaming business far more mature thanks to the likes of Spotify, Pandora, Rdio, Slacker, et al. It's now probably possible that all of these new services survive if they're at least half-way decent in their user operation and offerings.

This is definitely going to be a big win for consumers, with nearly an unlimited selection of songs available for a relatively small monthly fee (not sure what the price point will end up being, but $9.95 keeps being mentioned). Consumers are quickly seeing the advantages of renting their music.

It will be a different story for artists and songwriters however. By now everyone knows how little the royalty can be from a stream, with stories abounding about income lost by the writer and artist. Although a full transition to streaming will be a godsend for the labels, with steady monthly income actually bolstering their bottom line, you can bet that not much of that will trickle down to the artists - at least at first.

It's not going to happen overnight, but within a matter of time, you'll see the entirety of the management and law categories of the music business devise a better way to get paid, and eventually force the labels to fall in line. And when that happens, it will trickle down to the DIYers who insist on doing it their way. To what degree this all takes place, we'll have to wait and see.

While this blog is aptly named Music 3.0, we're about to see the next stage of the music business. Welcome to Music 3.5!
----------------------------------

Interested in the Music 3.0 archives? Buy The Music 3.0 Guide To Social Media. The best of over 800 posts.

You should follow me on Twitter for daily news and updates on production and the music business.

Check out my Big Picture blog for discussion on common music, engineering and production tips and tricks.

Monday, August 8, 2011

Spotify Is A Hit So Far

Spotify logo image from Bobby Owsinski's Music 3.0 blog
Despite some different numbers from different sources, it looks like Spotify has found an audience, at least in the early going. While Billboardbiz.com estimates that the music service, which launched on July 14th, has amassed at least one million total users in just three weeks, AppData claims the total is closer to 2.1 million total users.

Either of these are impressive stats, but the most important figure is 70,000. That's the number of paying subscribers to Spotify after only the first week that it was available in the US.

Some see paid subscription like this as the savior of the music biz, while others see it as just another boulder pulling it down. On the one hand, if there are enough paid subscribers, the music business could be considered healthy again. A round number thrown about is 100 million at $10 per month, which comes out to $12 billion a year. While this might be great for the major labels, it's yet to be determined just how much of that the artists, publishers, and indies will see. If history holds true, it will be a pittance as always.

Spotify expects to have 50 million users in the US within an year. How many of those will be subscribers? If today's numbers stay on course that only amounts to 3.5 million users, well below projected 100 million. Then again, if Apple supplements its soon to be launched iCloud with some sort of streaming subscription service, those numbers just may be within reach.

Once again, this is still probably not great news for the artist, since the streaming royalty rate is so small ($.0012 - or about a tenth of a cent per stream) that an artist with a giant hit may only expect enough money to buy a nice dinner, if that. Another example of Music 3.0, and why an artist's supplemental income is so important.
----------------------------------
Help support this blog. Any purchases made through our Amazon links help support this website with no cost to you.

You should follow me on Twitter for daily news and updates on production and the music business.

Check out my Big Picture blog for daily discussion of music, recording, and production tips and tricks.

Wednesday, July 20, 2011

Music Subscription Faceoff

Thanks to Ken Rutkowski for pointing out this infographic from Mashable that provides the best overview yet of the current music subscription services. Expect these numbers to be quite different in six months if the initial buzz from Spotify continues to carry on though. It shouldn't take long before they're the new king of the hill.

----------------------------------
Help support this blog. Any purchases made through our Amazon links help support this website with no cost to you.

You should follow me on Twitter for daily news and updates on production and the music business.

Check out my Big Picture blog for daily discussion of music, recording, and production tips and tricks.

Wednesday, February 2, 2011

4 Steps To A New Music Business

By now everyone has read a string of thoughtful predictions by many great music industry minds regarding the future of the music business, and most of them certainly have merit. Let me propose the 4 steps that I think would help thrust the music business truly into Music 3.0. Some of these you’ve no doubt heard before, but some you may have not.
1) New Blood For The Industry - The music industry was creatively at its best when the pioneers of the business (Berry Gordy, Ahmet Ertegen, Mo Ostin, Jac Holzman, etc.) were actively running their companies. They were fans first, businessmen second, and they intimately knew their audience well because they were part of it.
Everything changed in the 80’s when the increasing music industry revenue became so attractive that these entrepreneurs were bought out by multi-national corporations. From that point on, the quarterly bottom line was king, not the music. Where previously a label could wait as many as 4 or even 5 albums for an artist to break (as in the case of David Bowie, Alice Cooper, Fleetwood Mac and Red Hot Chili Peppers among others), soon the policy became one and done if sales were not immediately up to expectations. To make matters worse, MTV became a primary music promotional tool, so the development cycle soon spun around image, rather than music, which further depressed creativity.
But that’s beginning to change as we witness a big shakeout in the music industry right before our very eyes. With the music industry no longer the cash cow that it was, the big business that controls the industry will soon drop away, as will the old guard who ran it. In their place will be a new crop of music entrepreneurs who, like their early predecessors, love the music that they sell just as much as their customers do. They’ll nurture talent because they believe in them, just like before, and music will become vital and exciting again, and with that, will come back healthier (though probably not as profitable) than ever.
2) Micropayments Makes Sales A Snap. 99 cents per song download is a barrier. Even 69 cents is a barrier that gives a consumer pause before purchasing, which takes the impulse buy away. That’s because consumers are more keenly aware than ever that those amounts add up quickly, so as a result, there’s a built-in incentive to download the same file illegally or not buy at all. But what if the cost of a track was mere pennies, like a dime or a nickel, or even less? Would you be willing to purchase it then? And what if it could be easily charged to your phone bill or an online account like Paypal so the transaction was so easy, or even automatic, that you didn’t have to think about it? Would you go through all the trouble of finding it on a torrent and illegally downloading a file that might be corrupted?
I think the answer is that you’d take the easiest way and pay the few pennies. History has shown us that when the consumer is given the choice, convenience nearly always wins. 
OK, there are a number of problems with this scenario. The first is that the transaction fees with banks are so high (supposedly 10 cents of every iTunes transaction, and even higher in other online purchases), that transactions in cents are currently not feasible. This barrier seems like it will be broken soon, as rumor has it the new iPhone 5/iPad 2 will feature a new mobile payments system from Apple that will allow low cost direct transactions directly with your personal bank account.
But other barriers exist as well. A deal still has to be worked out with publishers, as mechanical royalties of 9.1 cents still apply to every download, although it’s way lower ($.0019 or even less) for a stream. And you can bet that a major label will never go for a low price transaction with any of their artists unless it can be proven that it’s driving the piracy factor down and sales number up.
That being said, if you’re an indie DIY artist, micropayments can be a great way to make at least a little money on your work.
3) Subscription Is The New Download - This seems like a contradiction to #2, but it’s not since I believe they’re complimentary, not mutually exclusive. Music subscription has been talked about to death, but the bottom line is still true - consumers are beginning to see the value in subscription music, and their interest will only grow. There’s both a lot of hope and a lot of record label resistance to subscription music. On the one hand, everyone likes the idea of a steady monthly income that $10 a customer (the reported target price) might bring. On the other hand, how that money gets split up has labels, publishers and artists all wringing their hands in simultaneous anxious hope and fear.
But consumers are seeing the value of not condemning 20+ gigs of hard drive real estate to a library that provides you no discovery options, and where you only listen to a few hundred songs anyway. An all-you-can-listen-to, anytime, anywhere option that subscription promises is beginning to make more and more sense to more and more people. Someone will get music subscription right, and the world will beat a path to their door.
4) A New Approach To Piracy - To date the RIAA’s approach to piracy was to punish the hell out of anyone caught indulging in illegal music downloading in order to make a nasty example that would deter all others from even thinking about participating in such a heinous crime. Didn’t work, did it?
Let’s try another technique instead. How about taking the same approach that countries often take when they catch a spy?
When a spy is caught they’re given the option; come and work for us as a counterspy, or be prosecuted. What if the industry used the same mindset? Register with a music subscription service (assuming that a widespread subscription service is in place) for a minimum number of years (say, like 5), or be prosecuted. I bet you already know which one everyone would take. This way, you turn illegal file sharers into customers, you take the incentive out of illegal file sharing in the first place, and the artist, publisher, and labels get paid. Everyone wins.
Will these 4 steps completely change the music business? Probably not by themselves. But they’re a good start to reinvigorating the industry and finally bringing us into the new music age - the age of Music 3.0.

-----------------------------------
You should follow me on Twitter for daily news and updates on production and the music business.

Check out my Big Picture blog for discussion on common music, engineering and production tips and tricks.


Tuesday, February 1, 2011

Apple's Subscription Experiment

The iPad was supposed to be a boon for magazines and newspapers - sort of a way to bring them back from the dead, so to speak. It was a way for them to jump into the future. Not only would publishers be able to deliver their publications in electronic form, but also include embedded audio and video as well.

There was only one problem. Apple refused to allow subscriptions and subscription pricing, forcing these publications to charge full retail for every published issue, which drove the price up, and the online sales down. This was good for Apple because they controlled the customer (who bought the newspaper or magazine from Apple), but bad for the consumer and the publisher.

Now it appears that Apple is finally ready to allow publications to employ a more familiar subscription model that should increase both sales and consumer satisfaction.

Apple will soon dip its subscription toe in the water with the publication of  the new iPad newspaper The Daily, which is a joint venture between Rupert Murdoch and Apple. You can be sure that publishers will look at this closely, but many are still dubious because the subscription is with iTunes and not directly with the publisher.


But this news subscription model may be a test case for music subscription as well. Although much of the music industry has dreamed about a sub model for the last few years, there's a lot of fear about just what might happen when its finally a reality (sort of like the Egypt situation). The customer will be Apple's, not the record labels, which scares the crap out of them (it should). And just how does the money get divided anyway? And how much will funnel back to the artist and songwriter in the end?


No one knows the answers to these questions, but this first media subscription could tell us a lot about the music business model for years to come. Stayed tuned as the media world gets ever more interesting.


You can read more about Apple's subscription model here in an article on readwriteweb.com.

-----------------------------------
You should follow me on Twitter for daily news and updates on production and the music business.

Check out my Big Picture blog for discussion on common music, engineering and production tips and tricks.

Sunday, September 19, 2010

Study Predicts Huge Music Industry Growth

Since it seems like I'm always the bearer of bad news, here's something that I hope will be a bit more upbeat. A new study by IE Market Research called the "Global Digital Music Forecast" predicts that music retail revenues will increase to $32.5 billion by the end of 2014.

Now considering that the global total music sales fell by by 7 percent last year to $17 billion, these seems a tad optimistic to me, but I don't write reports for Goldman Sachs either.

How did they come up with these numbers? It seems that there are now 832 million paid users of digital music worldwide, and the study says that number is expected to almost double to 1.555 billion in 2014. As a result, digital music revenues will increse from a current $4.82 billion to $21.3 billion at the end of 2014.

Where are these users coming from? Can it be that Chinese music lovers will suddenly honor international copyright law? Will all the P2P users suddenly get religion and buy a subscription instead?

It seems that subscription will lead the way on both online and mobile music channels according to the studio, although the number of music users downloading their music will also increase from 507 million in 2009 to over 1 billion in 2013.

Some other numbers from the study:
  • There are now 105.4 million paid users of digital music in North America and that number is expected to grow to 227.2 million in 2014.
  • Online music download users in North America will increase dramatically from 50.4 million in 2009 to 135.0 million in 2014.
  • Digital music retail revenues in North America are expected to reach $11.86 billion in 2014.
While I think that all of these predictions are wildly optimistic, I do hope they come to pass. It can only lead to a much healthier music industry and a better lot for everyone involved in it.

You can read more about the the study here.

----------------------------------
Follow me on Twitter for daily news and updates on production and the music business.

Don't forget to check out my Music 3.0 blog for tips and tricks on navigating the music business.

Monday, August 2, 2010

Interesting July Music Stats

Digital music information and strategy company Music Alley puts together an interesting monthly report called NumberCrunch that includes some interesting statistics culled from information sources like NPD, Forrester and Neilsen/Soundscan. Here are a few points that I found interesting (my comments in italics).
  • In the first half of 2010, digital album sales grew by 12.7% to 42.2 million units. If the album was supposed to be a dying format, why does it have a healthy growth of almost 13%?
  • Digital albums now account for 27.4% of all US album sales. That means that the market for albums is still about 160 million, of which about 120 million are still CDs. The CD may be dying, but there's still plenty of sales life left in it according to these numbers.
  • According to media analyst NPD, 7 to 8 million iTunes users in the US would be interested in paying at least $10 a month for cloud-based iTunes services to access their music libraries across multiple platforms. You can bet that Apple will be rolling this out by the end of the year or beginning of next, since they already have the infrastructure in place.
  • 13 to 15 million iTunes users would be interested if the service was free. Doubtful that will happen though, unless the service can be monetized in some other way. 
  • Analyst Russ Crupnick claims that the potential market for a paid subscription-based iTunes would be $1 billion in it's first year alone, which is about 2/3rds of what its present pay-per-download model. This is the 800 pound gorilla in the room. Almost everyone believes that if Apple pulls the subscription trigger, subscription will become accepted by the consumer almost overnight. But when will it happen? Probably not until well after their cloud service comes into being.
  • Home computers accounted for 41.6% of digital music consumption in Q3 of 2009, followed by MP3 players at 32/5%, mobile phones by 12.1% and home streaming devices by 11.1%. That must mean that most people consume most of their music at work.
  • Only 23% of people said they listened to music on both their computer and MP3 player, 9% on computer and mobile phone, and 5% on all four platforms. This could be a bad sign for a cloud-based service, as most people won't have any use for it.
  • 63% of the people listening to music on their phones are 18 to 24 years old. Is this figure really any surprise to anyone?
I think the most interesting thing about these figures is that the conclusions have been holding steady for quite some time now. Let's see what next month brings.

-----------------------------------
Follow me on Twitter for daily news and updates on production and the music business.

Check out my Big Picture blog for discussion on common music, engineering and production tips and tricks.

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

The Ramifications Of A Lower Priced Rhapsody

As you may know, I'm a big proponent (along with a lot of industry pundits) of subscription music. It just makes so much sense for all the parties involved. It's a steady income stream for the artists, publishers and labels, and it's definitely a lot better for the consumer. Why download and fill up your hard drive when you can have every song at your fingertip anytime and anywhere? You can read a lot more about the advantages and disadvantages of subscription on my previous post.

Subscription hasn't hit critical mass yet, but it's used every day by a lot of people world-wide. Spotify is used by over a million subscribers in Europe, and Rhapsody, MOG and Napster together have over a million subscribers in the States.

Now comes word that Rhapsody (who last week was just spun off into a separate company by its owners - Real Networks and MTV) is lowering the price of a subscription from $14.99 to $9.99 a month. Why is this important? Because $9.99 is thought to be the magic price point where consumers feel comfortable paying a monthly fee. Why pay $10 for only 10 songs via download when you can have millions for $10 via subscription?

But Rhapsody was also forced into action. It has about 675,000 subscribers, but that's actually a decrease from last year, and both MOG and Napster offer $5 plans. But the real reason may be to strike before the 800 pound gorilla in the industry (iTunes, of course) introduces their hypbrid-subscription service, where you can put all your music in the cloud (their servers) and easily access what you don't already own. There's been no firm date for it's introduction, but industry insiders firmly believe it'll be sometime this year.

Subscription also holds promise in both the mobile industry (some can't fit all their music on a smartphone), and the possible licensing to various ISPs, which might end up just being an industry pipe dream.

That being said, it's important to stay tuned to the subscription story, since it has major ramifications for musicians and songwriters as well. How so? Most record label and publishing contracts don't account for record label income from subscription yet. There could be a lot of money that makes it into a label's pocket, and not yours.


Follow me on Twitter for daily news and updates on production and the music business.

Check out my Big Picture blog for discussion on common music, engineering and production tips and tricks.

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Apple's new iTunes Play



One of my predictions about the music industry for 2010 was that subscription music would almost hit critical mass, with Apple's iTunes finally pushing it over the edge when they introduce their own subscription service in 2011. This prediction was based on the premise that Apple's purchase of Lala provided the needed infrastructure to create a subscription service that made it easier than building one from the ground up.

While this seems a reasonable supposition, industry pundits are predicting that Apple has something else in mind for the Lala backbone, and they'll spring it on us at the upcoming "big event" scheduled for January 27th.

The thought is now that Apple will do a sort of hybrid service, moving all of a consumer's purchases to the "cloud" (computer storage accessed via the Internet) instead of having a song downloaded on to your personal computing device (be it a computer or a phone or an iPod). In effect, you get the streaming function of a subscription service but it will still be only of all the songs you purchased. So in effect, you won't be downloading songs any more, you'll be uploading them! You can still have them on your desktop if you want, but you probably won't.

Indeed, the main benefit to the consumer is that you save all that room on your drive, especially if you have a large collection, and you no longer have to worry about high-quality versions of the songs eating up your hard drive. But the real benefit belongs to Apple. They still get to charge you 99 cents (or more) to purchase a song, instead of collecting a flat fee per month for access to unlimited songs. And they don't have to renegotiate any of the licenses with the record labels. The consumer gets a taste of what subscription music would be like, but at no cost benefit.

This doesn't sound like much of a deal at all, especially when the Spotify music subscription service is about to launch in the States soon. I still believe that this move is still a precursor to Apple eventually going subscription, but it's just a ploy to keep the status quo a little longer than had they gone directly to subscription.

Because once the consumer gets a taste of music subscription, there will be no turning back.

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

3 Reasons For And Against Digital Music Subscription


It seems like everyone in the music industry now believes that the subscription model will be the ultimate solution for digital music and the inevitable direction that the industry will take. Subscription means that you pay a basic fee like $10 - $15 per month and then are able to access any song you want whenever you want where ever you want.

This view has been held by those inside the industry for a long time, but I really didn't get it until recently. In helping my partner clean up the hard drive on her laptop, we were eliminating everything that was outdated, already backed up, or simply no longer needed. After much work there was still wasn't much drive space reclaimed, so I took a look at her iTunes folder. Sure enough, she had well over 20 gigs of songs! At that moment, I understood that subscription was the future of the business.

Here are the reasons that I believe it will work:

1) It's a lot more cost-effective for the consumer. As industry pundit Ted Cohen states, “For $10 a month, you can get 10 songs on iTunes or 10 million songs on Napster.”

2) Managing a lot of songs takes time and a lot of storage space for the consumer (see my story above).

3) There's potentially a lot of money to go around - much, much more than the business is generating today. The potential buying public in the US alone is 100 million. If only 50% of those subscribed at $10 a month, that's $500 million a month spread around to everyone in the business. The consumer will never be happier and the industry will grow overnight.

Here are the reasons against it:

1) It's hard for people to get over the idea of "renting" music after buying it for almost forever.

2) Most artists are afraid of subscription. Oh, they like the idea of steady income every month, but as of yet there's no way to ensure they'll actually see any of it. Most fear that the labels will take the lions share of the money and the artists will not see their fair share.

3) It's a publishing nightmare. As of now, the artist and publisher split a grand total of .18 cents (less than 1/4 of a cent!) each time a song is streamed. Most publishers claim that they now get statements that may be 5 phonebooks high of reported streams that add up to maybe $12, of which they only get to keep $3. In other words, it costs way, way more to process the paperwork than they're capable of making in it's current form. It's great that you can get the type of granular information about number of plays that publishers always hoped for, but they'll never sign off on subscription until they stop losing money on the deal.

I'm convinced that subscription digital music will eventually take over the business. Already Rhapsody has nearly 800,000 users and Napster has 700,000. The upstart Spotify has over a million subscribers in Europe alone (it's not available in the States yet due to licensing issues, but it's coming in 2010) and is getting rave reviews. But as our friend Ted Cohen says, "If iTunes announced subscription tomorrow, we’d be over the hump."

We keep hearing rumors that might happen, and with Apple's recent purchase of LaLa, they seem to have the infrastructure in place. Stay tuned as the digital space continues to be the most interesting part of the music business.

Portions of this post came from a previously published post on bobbyowsinski.blogspot.com from about 6 months ago, but it's even more relevant now.

Monday, December 7, 2009

The Real Reason Why Apple Bought LaLa


By know everyone has heard that Apple has bought the semi-subscription service LaLa and there's a lot of industry speculation as to why. I'd like to give you my personal speculation, but first some background.

Everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, who knows anything about the digital music business has predicted for some time that digital downloads would give way to subscription at some point. The reason? Why pay $10 to download and own 10 songs when for the same amount (approximately) you can stream millions of songs any time and anywhere you want. While subscription service Rhapsody has set everyone up for subscriptions and Spotify threatens to gradually put it over the top (whenever it finally reaches the US), it's pretty much a given that the digital music world would change to subscription overnight if Apple suddenly offered it.

Although it seems that subscription isn't exactly in Apple's best interest since it takes in a lot of dough by selling downloads, iTune's profit margins are razor thin and the downloads from the store primarily act to promote sales of Apple's hardware. Would that profit margin be any better with subscription? Would it serve the same purpose promote iPods?

That's what makes LaLa such an interesting purchase. LaLa isn't exactly a subscription service and it's not exactly a download service - it's a hybrid. First of all, it's streaming from the "cloud" (that's a network that stores all the content online - see the picture at left), not a download, but it's the pricing that's interesting. The customer can listen to any song for free once, but has to purchase the right to listen to it again for 10 cents. You have the right to listen to that song forever and ever thereafter.

So for Apple, it's the best of both worlds. It's in the streaming business, it's still gets individual purchases (although at a reduced rate), and it'll have the infrastructure and brainpower to implement a true subscription service at a later date if needed. Sounds like a win to me.

LinkWithin

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...