Adele might skip '25' release on Spotify in favor of Apple Music, other paid services

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV edited November 2015
Less than two weeks before Adele's highly anticipated album "25" is set to drop, the artist's camp is at odds with Spotify over limiting playback to paying subscribers, meaning the streaming music firm might see another huge release slip through its hands to land on subscription services like Apple Music.




Citing sources familiar with the matter, The Verge reports Adele is thinking about keeping 25 off Spotify unless the company limits streaming to paying subscribers, or about 20 million of 75 million total users.

As the publication noted, Spotify is in the position to tally massive streaming numbers if it is able to get rights to 25 on or near the album's Nov. 20 release date, but this would require a change in company policy. Currently, Spotify offers the same music library to paying subscribers and user listening to ad-supported streams.

For its part, Spotify said the report's claims that Adele or anyone from her team asked for premium only streaming are "categorically untrue."

It is not yet clear if Apple, or any streaming service for that matter, will be granted access to 25 when it is released at the end of the month. The Verge, again citing sources, says the album could land on Apple Music at launch or in the ensuing weeks. iTunes is, however, one of many outlets from which fans can preorder 25.

Interestingly, the report claims Apple approached Adele with an exclusive deal to make 25 an exclusive, presumably in hopes of selling the record on iTunes, streaming it on Apple Music or both. The artist declined the offer, sources said.

Adele most recently joined Apple in the news as reports claimed her talent agency, William Morris Endeavor, pitched Apple on a potential $30 million tour sponsorship.

Spotify has been spurned by big-name artists in the past, most recently receiving the cold shoulder from Taylor Swift in a public dispute over artist royalties. Swift had similar qualms about Apple's decision to not pay royalties during Apple Music's free three-month trial period, but the company ultimately reversed course in time to nab 1989 at launch.

Spotify also missed out a year earlier with Beyonce's self-titled album, which broke sales records as an iTunes exclusive.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 26
    calicali Posts: 3,494member
    Perfect time for Apple to take up that Adele offer and possibly keep the album as an exclusive.
  • Reply 2 of 26

    No one should work for free.

  • Reply 3 of 26
    And the battle starts again. I am an Apple Music customer, but if we are going to get into this streamer exclusiveness, it doesn't help the consumer at all. I am already hating this issues in video world where, Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu, etc. are doing their own contents and I have to subscribe to multiple of the to get to those shows. So at the end, consumer is paying more to get their entertainment.
  • Reply 4 of 26
    matrix07matrix07 Posts: 1,993member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by radster360 View Post



    And the battle starts again. I am an Apple Music customer, but if we are going to get into this streamer exclusiveness, it doesn't help the consumer at all.

     

    Huh? Did you read the article? It has nothing to do with exclusivity at all.

  • Reply 5 of 26
    radster360 wrote: »
    And the battle starts again. I am an Apple Music customer, but if we are going to get into this streamer exclusiveness, it doesn't help the consumer at all. I am already hating this issues in video world where, Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu, etc. are doing their own contents and I have to subscribe to multiple of the to get to those shows. So at the end, consumer is paying more to get their entertainment.

    In which fantasy world do you live in? Can you buy an app on the App Store then use it on an Android device? No. You have to purchase the Android version. The same goes for Windows.
  • Reply 6 of 26

    Adele...ugh, her music isn't that great...why all the fuss.

     

    Although I can't stand this genre of music, I support her choice of not wanting her music for free on Spotify.  No artist should have to throw their hard work out there for free.

  • Reply 7 of 26
    sog35 wrote: »
    More artists should do this.

    Seriously, why would you want your Music to be given for free?  Flatout ridiculous.

    Hopefully enough artist realize this and this kills those free tier music services.

    You tell 'em, Taylor. ;)
  • Reply 8 of 26
    I tried Apple Music for 3 Months.
    I am still on Spotify as a premium member. I like Spotify more. For now.
  • Reply 9 of 26

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by radster360 View Post



    And the battle starts again. I am an Apple Music customer, but if we are going to get into this streamer exclusiveness, it doesn't help the consumer at all. I am already hating this issues in video world where, Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu, etc. are doing their own contents and I have to subscribe to multiple of the to get to those shows. So at the end, consumer is paying more to get their entertainment.

     

     

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post

     

     

    Huh? Did you read the article? It has nothing to do with exclusivity at all.


     

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post





    Interestingly, the report claims Apple approached Adele with an exclusive deal to make 25 an exclusive, presumably in hopes of selling the record on iTunes, streaming it on Apple Music or both. The artist declined the offer, sources said.



    Adele most recently joined Apple in the news as reports claimed her talent agency, William Morris Endeavor, pitched Apple on a potential $30 million tour sponsorship.



    Spotify also missed out a year earlier with Beyonce's self-titled album, which broke sales records as an iTunes exclusive.

     

     

    The question is, did you read the article?

  • Reply 10 of 26
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,379member
    This thread is so typical of AI posters these days and it is sad. If everyone here was sitting in a pub chatting would the response to what others say, even if you disagree, be so obnoxious? I doubt it unless you want a beer poured over your head. Just because folks sit in their homes safe behind anonymity and a firewall doesn't mean they have to be plain rude. This thread is tame compared to many where people get called idiots and worse. Why can't we have intelligent and polite discourse even if we disagree?
  • Reply 11 of 26
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

    More artists should do this.

     

    Seriously, why would you want your Music to be given for free?  Flatout ridiculous.


     

    Yes! I hope I will never hear her whiny music on the radio either, because she's not making any money off of that and we all know how ridiculous that is, right? 

     

    Because on Spotify free she does make money, but not as much as she wants because she's this great, amazing artist and she's entitled to more. Same goes for Anorexic Swift and Beyonce Knows-less, all three are these amazing artists, these Beethovens, John Lennons, Run DMCs, Whodinis, Metallicas, R.E.M.s of our time, and the world cannot live without hearing their motivational, uplifting, soul discovering, revolutionary music that never stops inspiring millions today to question authority and the system, do more for society and be the best human being that they can be... Oh, wait... they don't and they aren't. It's all about breakups, bling-bling and superficiality. Please Adele, please keep your crap outta Spotify because they don't pay you enough, and goddamit you deserve it more than everyone else on Spotify!

  • Reply 12 of 26
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

    More artists should do this.

     

    Seriously, why would you want your Music to be given for free?  Flatout ridiculous.

     

    Hopefully enough artist realize this and this kills those free tier music services.




    Artists with name recognition like Adele or Taylor Swift (and many others) can pull this off because they already have the leverage. New artists have no recognition and no leverage. The best they can do is make their music easily accessible and hope their music is good enough to cut through the noise. Even GRAMMY voters use Spotify to listen to the consideration lists before casting votes. If you're not on Spotify, and you're not Adele or Taylor Swift, you're going to struggle to get traction in the industry. Nobody wants their music to be given for free, but the industry is so competitive, it's extremely difficult to get anywhere as a new artist without giving away the music for free.

  • Reply 13 of 26
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by aminorsixth View Post

     

    Even GRAMMY voters use Spotify to listen to the consideration lists before casting votes.


    This Grammy voter doesn't listen through Spotify...

  • Reply 14 of 26
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by studiomusic View Post

     

    This Grammy voter doesn't listen through Spotify...


    Well, I didn't say all GRAMMY voters. 

  • Reply 15 of 26
    matrix07matrix07 Posts: 1,993member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by techno View Post

     

     

     

     

    The question is, did you read the article?




    Huh? Selective quote out of context much?

     

    Quote:

     Less than two weeks before Adele's highly anticipated album "25" is set to drop, the artist's camp is at odds with Spotify over limiting playback to paying subscribers, meaning the streaming music firm might see another huge release slip through its hands to land on subscription services like Apple Music.


     

    And that Beyoncé thing has nothing to do with this but thanks for playing.

  • Reply 16 of 26

    So if the story is true, it would mean that there is a difference in the amount the artist earns when music is streamed in the free category and when streamed in the pay category. 

    That is interesting. 

  • Reply 17 of 26
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,162member
    This thread is so typical of AI posters these days and it is sad. If everyone here was sitting in a pub chatting would the response to what others say, even if you disagree, be so obnoxious? I doubt it unless you want a beer poured over your head. Just because folks sit in their homes safe behind anonymity and a firewall doesn't mean they have to be plain rude. This thread is tame compared to many where people get called idiots and worse. Why can't we have intelligent and polite discourse even if we disagree?
    This will be the first post of yours I've acknowledged in weeks, despite your lobbing several taunts in my direction. I like your new attitude, and I hope it's sincere. Perhaps we can get back to discussions between the two of us afterall.

    You're one of the more knowledgable members here and I do appreciate much of what you contribute. I've learned a thing or two from you. How'bout we do a reboot and each try to be more respectful as the point you made was an excellent one. Too many folks seem to think it perfectly acceptable to consistently be rude and insulting in public forums tho they would never do so sitting across the table. At least I don't think many of us would.
  • Reply 18 of 26
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,379member
    gatorguy wrote: »

    This will be the first post of yours I've acknowledged in weeks, despite your lobbing several taunts in my direction. I like your new attitude, and I hope it's sincere. Perhaps we can get back to discussions between the two of us afterall.

    You're one of the more knowledgable members here and I do appreciate much of what you contribute. I've learned a thing or two from you. How'bout we do a reboot and each try to be more respectful as the point you made was an excellent one. Too many folks seem to think it perfectly acceptable to consistently be rude and insulting in public forums tho they would never do so sitting across the table. At least I don't think many of us would.

    I appreciate your comments. I have always tried to be polite even when pointing out I have hard time fathoming why anyone, not just you, who is clearly here to knock Apple, bother? That's all. I do agree you are always civil and would be a wonderful contributor to an Apple centric fan site were you one of us ;)
  • Reply 19 of 26
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,162member
    I appreciate your comments. I have always tried to be polite even when pointing out I have hard time fathoming why anyone, not just you, who is clearly here to knock Apple, bother? That's all. I do agree you are always civil and would be a wonderful contributor to an Apple centric fan site were you one of us ;)
    That's where the chasm is then. I'm not here to "knock Apple". Are there several posts where you were left with that impression? Dredge them up and I'll be happy to discuss them. As I've asked you before for an example of where you've thought I'd done so and none could yet be found I would assume you might reconsider why I might be interested in taking part here. "Clearly not to knock Apple".

    In any event I am glad to see yet another AI member pick up the civil discourse banner. Thanks.
  • Reply 20 of 26
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,379member
    Ok then, if there is that misunderstanding it is a large one on my part it might be fun to explore how this occurred after so many years but perhaps not on AI.
Sign In or Register to comment.