or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › iRadio stalled again as Apple, Sony can't agree to royalty terms
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

iRadio stalled again as Apple, Sony can't agree to royalty terms

post #1 of 24
Thread Starter 
Apple's ongoing efforts to bring a radio service to iPhone and iPad owners has apparently hit another snag, as negotiations with Sony have dragged on.

iTunes


Licensing fees are once again holding up the arrival of Apple's rumored radio service, according to the Financial Times. Apple reportedly has already secured a deal with Universal Music, as was rumored in April, and is close to an agreement with Warner Music. Sony Music ? the second-largest of the major record labels ? is reportedly holding out for more lucrative concessions.

Some industry executives are said to believe that, due to Apple's massive financial reserves and the likelihood that it will make a considerable amount of money off the service, the company should pay out more money to the record labels for permission to stream their product.

Reportedly, Apple initially lowballed the record labels with an offer of 6.5 cents per 100 tracks streamed, roughly half what Internet radio service Pandora pays. The labels rejected that offer, leading to the first reports that the service would be delayed. Apple subsequently offered 12.5 cents per 100 tracks streamed, and the number of labels that have accepted that offer is unclear.

The debut of some sort of Apple-run music streaming service has been predicted since the arrival of iTunes some 10 years ago. Rumors picked up earlier this year when icons hidden inside iOS 6.1 showed "radio buy" buttons tucked into the update, indicating that a service was imminent.

The stalled service, according to reports, features not only music streaming and buying, but also the ability to predict which songs users will enjoy based on what they've listened to before.

Apple, reportedly, is offering the record labels a mix of compensation possibilities: a royalty per track streamed, a share of iRadio's advertising revenue, and a guaranteed minimum payment should the the previous two prove unsatisfactory.
post #2 of 24

What about mac owners?

post #3 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins View Post

What about mac owners?

 

Well, we're not allowed to read iBooks, maybe we're not allowed to listen to iRadio either.

post #4 of 24
Please stop calling this "Radio," when it's actually just a streaming music service.

It's not even "Internet Radio," it's just a streaming music service.

"Radio" kind of implies thousands of stations, the ability to choose between stations, and curated content of various kinds on those stations.

This new streaming service is not likely to have any of those things.
post #5 of 24

The record companies are run by the stupidest, greediest people on the planet. If it weren't for Apple and iTunes, at least half of them would be looking for jobs right now.

 

They want Apple to pay more (than Pandora) because "Apple has more money". Ignoring the fact that that's a ridiculous negotiating position, it's crazy to see them digging in their heels on this since this service will almost certainly allow users to buy, through iTunes, the songs they are listening to, increasing revenues for the labels by that much more. The service is essentially free advertising for them, just like radio always has been.

post #6 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

Please stop calling this "Radio," when it's actually just a streaming music service.

It's not even "Internet Radio," it's just a streaming music service.

"Radio" kind of implies thousands of stations, the ability to choose between stations, and curated content of various kinds on those stations.

This new streaming service is not likely to have any of those things.
Don't get so anal. Radio is something we listen to & when I'm listening to one station, not using any others, I'm still listening to the radio. It's a figure of speech.
post #7 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by skleiniv View Post

Don't get so anal. Radio is something we listen to & when I'm listening to one station, not using any others, I'm still listening to the radio. It's a figure of speech.

 

Indeed, like grabbing a "Kleenex" or even drinking a "Coke" (regardless of the actual brand.)

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #8 of 24
Maybe im a person who just doesnt pay attention or isnt on itunes enough but when did the radio button on itunes come along?
post #9 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by shigh View Post

Maybe im a person who just doesnt pay attention or isnt on itunes enough but when did the radio button on itunes come along?

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/02/05/radio-buy-buttons-hidden-in-ios-61-reveal-apples-anticipated-pandora-killer

 

Cheers

post #10 of 24

Yet another PR battle Apple is losing, even on AI. Apple offered "roughly half" of what Pandora is now paying because, just as a deal with Apple was nearing completion last fall, the record labels suddenly doubled their royalty fees. Pandora had been paying roughly half the new rate, too, but was forced to pay the doubled fee or go out of business. Apple is apparently still only willing to offer an amount closer to the old rate (which seems completely fair to me, unlike suddenly doubling the fee).

post #11 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Some industry executives are said to believe that, due to Apple's massive financial reserves and the likelihood that it will make a considerable amount of money off the service, the company should pay out more money to the record labels for permission to stream their product.
 

Really? When I buy something I don't recall being asked how much money I have in the bank as that may determine the price?

 

With one possible exception. Earlier this year I was looking to park my car in a private car park in China as the public one was full. There were two guys at the gate and one looked at the other and said in Chinese (assuming I didn't understand) 'What do you think I should charge him?" The other guy gave me and my car a look and then said to the first guy "Charge him what you like, he can afford it, he is rich long nose" Cheeky chap!

 We came to a reasonable agreement once I demonstrated that I understood what had been said and thought this a poor way of calculating the charge.

post #12 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post

Yet another PR battle Apple is losing
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

according to the Financial Times.

So, despite the info not coming from Apple or Sony, you are believing it, despite all the other journalistic crap that we have seen over the last 6 months regarding Apple.
post #13 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

The record companies are run by the stupidest, greediest people on the planet. If it weren't for Apple and iTunes, at least half of them would be looking for jobs right now.

 

They want Apple to pay more (than Pandora) because "Apple has more money". Ignoring the fact that that's a ridiculous negotiating position, it's crazy to see them digging in their heels on this since this service will almost certainly allow users to buy, through iTunes, the songs they are listening to, increasing revenues for the labels by that much more. The service is essentially free advertising for them, just like radio always has been.

 

I wonder if they will do anything about the extension to the Chrome browser that allows the conversion of any song from Spotify to a DRM free MP3.

 

Paying one months subscription might be worth it to fill a library with 30 days of 24/7 free music downloads from Spotify's 20 million songs.

 

Apparently Google removed it from the chrome store but it is still available from the more "open" github.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #14 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

"Radio" kind of implies thousands of stations, the ability to choose between stations, and curated content of various kinds on those stations.
 

 

So something like this:-

 

 

 

iTunes has had this for ages.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #15 of 24
Why don't they just go buy tunein radio or whatever and quit trying to do everything organically......
post #16 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

Please stop calling this "Radio," when it's actually just a streaming music service.

It's not even "Internet Radio," it's just a streaming music service.

"Radio" kind of implies thousands of stations, the ability to choose between stations, and curated content of various kinds on those stations.

This new streaming service is not likely to have any of those things.

 

 

how about 'on demand radio'? It will be like you are the only caller and the station plays only the songs you want to hear!

post #17 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by scotttrader View Post

Why don't they just go buy tunein radio or whatever and quit trying to do everything organically......

 

Why?

 

...because as soon as Apple do that they will be back at square one negotiating licences.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #18 of 24
Sony hasn't been competent in years. They're rapidly becoming an afterthought.
post #19 of 24

If they don't agree Apple will miss out on a lot of songs and Sony will miss out on a lot of $.

post #20 of 24

Apple should just buy Sony - $18 billion is only a couple quarters earnings.  They could merge the PS4 in with the new AppleTV, keep the TV business as the basis for the rumored product, keep or sell the semiconductor business, keep the music and movie studios, sell the half of
Sony-Ericsson back to Ericsson, and ditch or sell all the misc stuff.

45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #21 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Why?

...because as soon as Apple do that they will be back at square one negotiating licences.
They got the big stick use it....
post #22 of 24

Stalled…

 

Or maybe it just isn't happening. 1rolleyes.gif

post #23 of 24
Surprised Apple hasn't bought a major music/media firm for further leverage. There could be anti-trust concerns but Apple could extend their vertical this way.
post #24 of 24

I actually don't understand why Apple has to negotiate with the record companies at all.    I was under the impression that Congress has mandated rates for digitally delivered streaming music via the Library of Congress and Sound Exchange manages all this.    I personally think Sound Exchange's rates are absurdly high and they almost put Pandora out of business, but it's there.    I thought you HAD to go through Sound Exchange. 

 

I do know that Sirius/XM does not use the standard rates, so they must have negotiated something with Sound Exchange, but I don't think they should have been permitted to do that.  Everyone should have to play by the same rules.  Even with that, Sirius/XM breaks up their monthly bill and separates out a music licensing charge. 

 

 

 

Quote:
The record companies are run by the stupidest, greediest people on the planet. If it weren't for Apple and iTunes, at least half of them would be looking for jobs right now.

 

They may be stupid, but the labels are not exactly swimming in money.   Total recorded music sales in the U.S., including digital sales from iTunes and others, are less than half what they were in 1999, when the industry peaked.    And that doesn't even include inflation.    In equivalent dollars, it's probably only 40% of 1999 sales.   So maybe you should look at some actual numbers before you make such statements. 

 

The are many issues, including the competition for leisure time and the fact that there's an awful lot of music up on places like YouTube, for which the labels get next to nothing, but one of the main problems is that consumers have returned to buying singles, not albums.    That worked back in the 1950s and pre-Beatle 60s when acts went into the studio and recorded three songs in a session that were released two weeks later, but it doesn't work in an age when acts obsess about their recordings, use multiple studios, multiple producers; record, mix and master in different studios and take a year to release.    It's simply not sustainable.    Back the late 60s-80s, singles were mainly sold (in the U.S.) to 14-year-old girls.       

 

We're down to only three major record companies:  Sony, Universal (owned by Vivendi) and Warner (owned by Access Industries).   That's not a very healthy industry.    Their problems are largely of their own making (being slow to respond to digital, lousy music, refusal to develop acts over the long term, etc.), but there's also many factors that weren't their fault, such as the fragmentation of the marketplace.     We're never again going to have a Sinatra, Elvis, Beatles, Stones, Springsteen, Madonna, Michael Jackson, Garth Brooks, etc.    Each act appeals to a relatively small number of people.    I don't think any albums have been certified Diamond (more than 10 million units) in years, except for Selena's album, "Dreaming of You", which was certified at an amazing 35 million copies (in the U.S.) - the best selling album of all time (and frankly, I'd never heard of her).  "The Eagles Greatest Hits" and "Thriller" come in at 29 million copies.  

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › iRadio stalled again as Apple, Sony can't agree to royalty terms