Drake's 'More Life' garners half of its worldwide downloads from Apple Music because of Be...

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
A new interview sheds some light on Drake's 300 million worldwide streams for his album More Life in its first week on Apple Music, and discusses the synergies between Beats 1 and Apple's streaming service.




Drake has shifted completely over from SoundCloud to Apple Music, according to The Verge. As part of the integration of Beats 1, Apple Music's 300 million streams of "More Life" is half of the worldwide total, despite having one fifth the members of Spotify.

"It's the biggest radio station in the world. There's no way you're going to find another station that has as many concurrent listeners and audience-wise as Beats 1, period," Apple Music's head of content Larry Jackson Jackson said. "If you rewind back to July of 2015, and those records that rolled out like 'Back to Back,' -- 'Hotline Bling' debuted on OVO Sound Radio first, 'Charged Up' debuted there first -- all these records debuted in a space that was really still new and nascent, and [Drake] made it his own. You can glance over it, but we created this idea that was really great for him, and he took advantage of it."

Drake released a series of Apple Music-exclusive songs in 2015, on OVO Sound Radio. The show airs every two weeks on Saturdays and focuses on new releases.

Apple continues to decline requests for specific listenership data or demographics for Beats 1.

"What we saw on Drake's radio show were TV numbers," says Jimmy Iovine. "We learned so much from just building what Drake needed. He had the idea, we kind of just built and supported around him, and we've learned a lot from that, and the entire industry has learned a lot from that."

Even Zane Lowe, with a body of work two decades long prior to him joining Apple Music and Beats 1, was impressed by what what Drake had accomplished.

"I mean what he's taught me just in terms of the parameters of broadcasting is remarkable. I remember when we were first waiting for [OVO Sound Radio shows] to come in and they'd come in 20 minutes late, and I'd be freaking out because we'd run over our start time," said Lowe. "Now the show comes in an hour late and we're all just like cool."

"He knows what he's doing, and he knows his audience. And he knows it's going to work when it's ready," added Lowe. "The best thing that anyone -- including myself -- can do is get out of the way."

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 11
    Something fishy about those Spotify numbers.

    Considering everyone and their dog is giving away free Spotify memberships (when you sign a cell contract, for example) then I suspect these users don't really use it that much.

    Sort of like how cheap Android phones don't contribute to Google Play sales.
    Soli
  • Reply 2 of 11
    I'm not sure I understand. Were Apple's numbers so high because they counted listeners to Beats 1 when Drake's album was playing? Or are they saying that playing it on Beats 1 was such a successful promotional tool, that it drove people to go stream it themselves on demand in Apple Music?
  • Reply 3 of 11
    Something fishy about those Spotify numbers.

    Considering everyone and their dog is giving away free Spotify memberships (when you sign a cell contract, for example) then I suspect these users don't really use it that much.

    Sort of like how cheap Android phones don't contribute to Google Play sales.
    Why is it that every other company has fishy numbers but Apple never does? You don't think Apple spins and skews numbers to make them look good as well? 
  • Reply 4 of 11
    SoliSoli Posts: 2,817member
    Something fishy about those Spotify numbers.

    Considering everyone and their dog is giving away free Spotify memberships (when you sign a cell contract, for example) then I suspect these users don't really use it that much.

    Sort of like how cheap Android phones don't contribute to Google Play sales.
    Why is it that every other company has fishy numbers but Apple never does? You don't think Apple spins and skews numbers to make them look good as well? 
    Apple rarely has "the most downloads" or "the most installs" or "the most activations" so when hear a stat from Google that Android has a 50 bazillion install base and yet still accounts for a small fraction of the internet traffic websites see, especially in comparison to iOS-based devices, such numbers are head scratchers because it's clearly not telling the full story.

    And, sure, Apple frames their numbers in the best light possible, but either they work to be more transparent or their business model lends to a considerably less complex understanding, so when we see that x% of iOS users have updated to the latest version in a record amount of time, it's usually not a statement that stops us un our tracks.
    edited March 27 calibestkeptsecret
  • Reply 5 of 11
    CelTanCelTan Posts: 14member
    Why is it that every other company has fishy numbers but Apple never does? You don't think Apple spins and skews numbers to make them look good as well? 
    Every organization presents statistics in the best possible light for themselves - this is why top statistics people can claim high salaries - They can make numbers look good for their company - no matter what the underlying data says. In 1954 Darryl Huff wrote "How to Lie with Statistics" and I recommend it as a read to everyone that gets to see charts and stats.
  • Reply 6 of 11
    Something fishy about those Spotify numbers.

    Considering everyone and their dog is giving away free Spotify memberships (when you sign a cell contract, for example) then I suspect these users don't really use it that much.

    Sort of like how cheap Android phones don't contribute to Google Play sales.
    Why is it that every other company has fishy numbers but Apple never does? You don't think Apple spins and skews numbers to make them look good as well? 

    You should learn to read - then maybe people won't keep calling you a troll.

    I believe Spotify has 50 million paid subscriptions and that Apple only has 20 million. What makes it fishy is that with 2.5x more listeners Spotify had a full 1/3 fewer streams for Drake. Which tells me that the average Spotify subscriber listens less than an Apple Music subscriber. This is exactly the same as Android vs iOS where Android has a higher market share, but iOS leads in all the usage metrics.

    I find it hard to believe people are signing up for, and paying for a Spotify membership and then never bother to listen to anything. And given the fact that you can get a Spotify membership for free when you buy a computer, TV, new car, tablet, cell phone, carrier contract, cable TV subscription or even a kitchen sink, then it appears people given these free memberships don't really use them that much. So while they count towards Spotify's total subscriber base they aren't "true" subscribers.

    Which, in a way, is good for Spotify. If people have memberships but don't use them, then Spotify doesn't have to pay all the bandwidth to stream to those users or pay royalties for all the content they listen to. The real test will be seeing how many of these free subs are going to retain their membership and switch to paying for it.
    calibestkeptsecret
  • Reply 7 of 11
    calicali Posts: 2,964member
    Something fishy about those Spotify numbers.

    Considering everyone and their dog is giving away free Spotify memberships (when you sign a cell contract, for example) then I suspect these users don't really use it that much.

    Sort of like how cheap Android phones don't contribute to Google Play sales.
    Why is it that every other company has fishy numbers but Apple never does? You don't think Apple spins and skews numbers to make them look good as well? 
    Apple doesn't.

    It's obviously fishy because Spotify has over twice the subscribers but less listeners than Apple. 
  • Reply 8 of 11
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 3,206member
    cali said:
    Something fishy about those Spotify numbers.

    Considering everyone and their dog is giving away free Spotify memberships (when you sign a cell contract, for example) then I suspect these users don't really use it that much.

    Sort of like how cheap Android phones don't contribute to Google Play sales.
    Why is it that every other company has fishy numbers but Apple never does? You don't think Apple spins and skews numbers to make them look good as well? 
    Apple doesn't.

    It's obviously fishy because Spotify has over twice the subscribers but less listeners than Apple. 
    Its obvious, Spotify numbers are inflated by the huge amount of discounted promotional accounts, I'd say that Spotify is even expecting most of those accounts NOT to be used (if they were actually used since Spotify usually get so little for them from the reseller (like cell phone provider), Spotify would likely lost money on each of them).

    The resellers use the rebate spotify accounts as a hook to sell their own products and likely pay a fraction of the $10 per month cost (probably 3-4 dollars) and count it as a marketing expense. For spotify, it is ALSO a marketing expense (or at most revenue neutral) as they have to be royalties for these accounts.
  • Reply 9 of 11
    kevin keekevin kee Posts: 448member
    Is there any doubt since Spotify still struggle to make money? Apple 'could' technically say that they have 100 million Apple Music users just because every new iPhone comes with free 3 months Apple Music trial, but they didn't.
  • Reply 10 of 11
    SoliSoli Posts: 2,817member
    kevin kee said:
    Is there any doubt since Spotify still struggle to make money? Apple 'could' technically say that they have 100 million Apple Music users just because every new iPhone comes with free 3 months Apple Music trial, but they didn't.
    I've never noticed that. The only 3 month credit I've seen was for the new Apple BeatsX headphones, and even then the code just gives you iTunes Store credit that could be used for anything.
  • Reply 11 of 11
    Soli said:
    kevin kee said:
    Is there any doubt since Spotify still struggle to make money? Apple 'could' technically say that they have 100 million Apple Music users just because every new iPhone comes with free 3 months Apple Music trial, but they didn't.
    I've never noticed that. The only 3 month credit I've seen was for the new Apple BeatsX headphones, and even then the code just gives you iTunes Store credit that could be used for anything.
    Which you would then use to pay for an Apple Music subscription. Your subscription fee comes out of your iTunes account. FYI if you can find the Apple Music gift cards on eBay for $99, thats a fair amount less than the ~ $120/year cost when paid monthly.
Sign In or Register to comment.