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

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV edited January 2014
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.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 23
    pedromartinspedromartins Posts: 1,333member


    What about mac owners?

  • Reply 2 of 23
    v5vv5v Posts: 1,357member

    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.

  • Reply 3 of 23
    gazoobeegazoobee Posts: 3,754member
    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.
  • Reply 4 of 23
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,712member


    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.

  • Reply 5 of 23
    skleinivskleiniv Posts: 37member
    gazoobee wrote: »
    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.
  • Reply 6 of 23
    mj1970mj1970 Posts: 9,002member

    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.)

  • Reply 7 of 23
    shighshigh Posts: 27member
    Maybe im a person who just doesnt pay attention or isnt on itunes enough but when did the radio button on itunes come along?
  • Reply 8 of 23
    minicaptminicapt Posts: 219member

    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


  • Reply 9 of 23
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 3,060member


    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).

  • Reply 10 of 23
    festerfeetfesterfeet Posts: 108member

    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.

  • Reply 11 of 23
    evilutionevilution Posts: 1,398member
    cpsro wrote: »
    Yet another PR battle Apple is losing
    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.
  • Reply 12 of 23
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member

    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.

  • Reply 13 of 23
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member

    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.

  • Reply 14 of 23
    Why don't they just go buy tunein radio or whatever and quit trying to do everything organically......
  • Reply 15 of 23

    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!

  • Reply 16 of 23
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member

    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.

  • Reply 17 of 23
    eideardeideard Posts: 427member
    Sony hasn't been competent in years. They're rapidly becoming an afterthought.
  • Reply 18 of 23
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member


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

  • Reply 19 of 23
    e1618978e1618978 Posts: 6,075member


    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.

  • Reply 20 of 23
    hill60 wrote: »
    Why?

    ...because as soon as Apple do that they will be back at square one negotiating licences.
    They got the big stick use it....
Sign In or Register to comment.