Apple will now pay rights holders during Apple Music trial period, Eddy Cue says

1246714

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 272
    genovellegenovelle Posts: 1,480member
    ascii wrote: »
    Taking it one step further, it they are in the hole $21 for each customer at the end of the 3 month trial, and Apple only get $3 of the $10 monthly subscription for themselves, then each customer will have to be a paying customer for 7 months after their trial before Apple even breaks even on them.
    They are only getting a streaming rate not a revenue share of the $10.
  • Reply 62 of 272
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by genovelle View Post





    They are only getting a streaming rate not a revenue share of the $10.



    Do we know what Apple's formula is for streaming payouts?

  • Reply 63 of 272
    kalvinkalvin Posts: 11member
    Taylor who? She's too young to remember (this appears to include Eddy too): Those days, we went to the music shop, selected CDs (and before LPs) and sampled them for hours. We came back, listened to the same again and perhaps never bought the record because we didn't have the money. It was free of charge. And none of the artists ever complained. Because it was marketing.

    So, if Apple offers a free trial of three months per user, it's limited and very likely people will sign up because today we can afford it. It will provide a almost worry free perpetual royalty income-stream to the artists.

    I would argue today's artists are just lazy, greedy and generally overpaid. Would also explain the garbage we get served these days.
  • Reply 64 of 272
    reefoidreefoid Posts: 158member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post





    Do you have a link saying Android will have free trial? That contradicts with what I read before.



    You know Android will not get Apple Music app until at least 3 months after the launch, right?

    The three month trial isn't only for those people who sign up as part of the initial launch, its for any sign up after that date so its irrelevant as to when the Android app is released.

     

    I did read somewhere over the weekend that Android users would get the free trial once it becomes available on Android, can't remember the site where I read it.  Although Gizmodo are reporting Android users will get the free trial in a corrected article after initially claiming they wouldn't.

  • Reply 65 of 272
    matrix07matrix07 Posts: 1,993member
    reefoid wrote: »
    The three month trial isn't only for those people who sign up as part of the initial launch, its for any sign up after that date so its irrelevant as to when the Android app is released.

    I did read somewhere over the weekend that Android users would get the free trial once it becomes available on Android, can't remember the site where I read it.  Although Gizmodo are reporting Android users will get the free trial in a corrected article after initially claiming they wouldn't.

    Thank you for the link but if that Gizmodo article is true, it supports my point, that Android will not get free trial (the free trial on Android is so limit it doesn't have all you can eat music. It only get Beat1 and follow artists in Connect). Do we read the same thing?

    In short, Android will have free tier, the same as iOS user who don't pay after 3 months but it will not have free "trial".
  • Reply 66 of 272
    reefoidreefoid Posts: 158member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post





    Thank you for the link but if that Gizmodo article is true, it supports my point, that Android will not get free trial (the free trial on Android is so limit it doesn't have all you can eat music. It only get Beat1 and follow artists in Connect). Do we read the same thing?



    In short, Android will have free tier, the same as iOS user who don't pay after 3 months but it will not have free "trial".

     

    No, the correction on Gizmodo says:

     

    Quote:


     Correction: We’ve learned that Android users will indeed get to try Apple Music for free, both as a free three-month trial and in a free tier very similar to the one iOS users can enjoy. The only difference is that Apple Music radio stations (aside from the flagship Beats 1 station) won’t be included on Android.


    So my understanding is that Android will get the free trial.  Could be wrong though, can't see anything on the Apple site to confirm!!

  • Reply 67 of 272
    Now Taylor Swift and all the other whiners will have to make all their music available on Apple Music or look like idiots. Apple wins.

    Even better, by having artists complain and giving the appearance of "caving in" to them, Apple is now able to use their massive cash hoard to promote Apple Music and make the deals that Spotify can't. All without raising any antitrust or competition issues, since, you know, Apple is doing what the artists want.

    Well played, Apple. Well played.

    Well said. I found something a little off about the deal. If it was between Apple and the big music labels, that would've been one thing, but this was aimed at everyone, including the little guys, as was emphasized at the launch. This is like the App Store, but for music, and Apple would never ask App developers to give away their apps for 3 months in order to join the App Store.

    They want to be seen as pro indie, if you watch their initial presentation, that's their take with this whole thing. They're trying to bypass the labels, just like the App Store bypassed software stores. They knew that a negative view would stop the small guys from uploading their original work. And fortunately, they can afford to do it. Some people are saying it makes Apple look weak. Well, it does a little. But, if they hadn't done it, they would have looked stingy. I don't think the initial deal they made was in bad faith, but I don't think they considered the small players. The labels would happily lose 3 months for a higher percentage and larger subscriber base. But for the indies, they're not going to want to give away 3 months for a 1.5 higher percentage. 3 months is huge for them. I think Apple will benefit in the long run. They're getting the best of both worlds. The big labels are happy and the indies are happy. And the money is not an issue. If this cost Apple billions, which I doubt, it would be nothing for them. This a long run investment for Apple. This is the kind of investment apple needs to make right now. Leverage your money to get lifetime returns, not to simply satisfy share holders for another quarter.

    They reversed course, and I think they'll get positive press for it. I saw something on the morning national news about it just now, and it was positive. This is free publicity people. Commercials only get you so far. And with the direction this was going, it could have easily hurt the momentum. But Apple acted quickly. I think Taylor swift used her social leverage, but complimented more than she complained. She essentially gave Apple a door instead of a rope, which made it work. It was very 'generous' of them to give away musicians music for 3 months. But now, they have a really good chance to get musicians of all pay grades to upload their music. Really looking forward to see what happens next. I think Apple essentially hit the mute button on a viral story. What Taylor did will benefit herself for sure, but I think it does more for people on the low end than people on the high end.
  • Reply 68 of 272

    Apple should pay fees only to indie artist during the free trial...Thats what Tylor wants rights?

  • Reply 69 of 272
    dewmedewme Posts: 5,362member

    I'll bet if you look at the demographic of younger Apple buyers you'll see a lot of overlap with the demographic of Taylor Swift fans, i.e., teenage girls with heavy of influence over daddy's purchasing decisions, which also represents one of the most prolific purchasing groups out there. It would have been a publicity and marketing disaster to not react to the Swifty fans. The lifetime value of all those forlorn, angst riddled teenage girls is way too much to overlook by any company focused on bottom line profits. I'd bet Samsung would pay Taylor Swift billions to be able to sell a Taylor Swift Signature Edition Galaxy 13 phone, along with fashion focused accessories like a halter top case and bright red buttons.

     

    The bottom line is that for artists like Taylor Swift, who's been blessed with the talents that make modern musicians highly marketable and successful, i.e., good looks (luck of the genetic wheel of fortune) and huge music industry backing (which she earned), the original Apple deal would not have made a difference. Likewise, to the struggling musical artists who are supposedly now going to be saved from starvation by Apple paying them for streaming during the trial period, it's not going to make a difference for them either. The rich will just get richer and the rest will get occassional beer & pizza money. http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/12/tech/web/spotify-pay-musicians/index.html

  • Reply 70 of 272
    matrix07matrix07 Posts: 1,993member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by reefoid View Post

     

     

    No, the correction on Gizmodo says:

     

    So my understanding is that Android will get the free trial.  Could be wrong though, can't see anything on the Apple site to confirm!!




    Please re-read it. It said Android will have free "tier", not 3 months free "trial" It will only get viewing and following artists in Connect and listening to Beat 1 Radio. In short the same thing iOS user who don't want to pay after 3 months trial get. There is nothing on Gizmodo article that say Android will have a la cart music for 3 months free "trial".

     

    I screen capped the article to show you but this forum is so Safari unfriendly I can not post the picture so you just have to re-read it carefully.

  • Reply 71 of 272
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,926member
    Good job, Apple. This should have been done at the beginning.
  • Reply 72 of 272
    ppietrappietra Posts: 288member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post





    Android users will not get a free trial.

    As far as I know everyone gets a free 3 month trial before having to pay.

  • Reply 73 of 272
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,926member
    Taylor Swift, the mediocrity rules.  I still don't get her popularity, her music is bland and bullshit. 

    This sounds like: I don't get Apple. Its products are expensive and fad-like.
  • Reply 74 of 272
    matrix07matrix07 Posts: 1,993member
    ppietra wrote: »
    As far as I know everyone gets a free 3 month trial before having to pay.

    That may be so but link?
  • Reply 75 of 272
    ppietrappietra Posts: 288member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post





    I'm not sure the Android version of the app will be available right out the gate... Maybe yes, maybe no...

    it doesn’t matter, it isn’t a 3 month trial after the service opens, it’s a 3 month trial after a user signs up

  • Reply 76 of 272
    ppietrappietra Posts: 288member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post





    That may be so but link?

    The same thing I could have asked you since what you said actually requires specific information regarding Android. If you go to Apple’s press info it doesn't mention that Android users won’t be able to get a free trial, even though it mentions the conditions of the trial and Android availability.

  • Reply 77 of 272
    matrix07matrix07 Posts: 1,993member
    ppietra wrote: »
    The same thing I could have asked you since what you said actually requires specific information regarding Android. If you go to Apple’s press info it doesn't mention that Android users won’t be able to get a free trial, even though it mentions the conditions of the trial and Android availability.

    http://gizmodo.com/sorry-android-users-you-dont-get-free-apple-music-1710252534

    Now yours...
  • Reply 78 of 272
    applesauce007applesauce007 Posts: 1,698member

    OK.  I guess Taylor will now allow 1989 to be streamed on Apple Music?

     

    Heck Apple even named their new programming language Swift.  She should be happy. :)

  • Reply 79 of 272
    dick applebaumdick applebaum Posts: 12,527member
    How can an artist claim to be Indie if they go with an Indie label? They're just feeding a different pig.

    If they were truly Indie and they wanted their music on iTunes/Apple Music then they would deal directly with Apple.


    You done broke the code!

    ... it's called disruption -- and not just for artists on the Indie labels ...

    But, the labels still have the Payola card to play!
  • Reply 80 of 272
    ppietrappietra Posts: 288member

    Did you even read your own link? It actually confirms what I said, after having made the typical gizmondo mistake

Sign In or Register to comment.