Apple Music rival Spotify tops 140 million free & paid subscribers

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
Keeping ahead of Apple in on-demand streaming, Spotify on Thursday revealed that it has over 140 million active users worldwide, including both Premium customers and people on its free ad-supported tier.




The company didn't break out the number of Premium listeners, from which it generates more income. In March, however, it said that it had hit the 50 million mark, a figure which has likely grown since.

As of last week's Worldwide Developers Conference, Apple Music had some 27 million subscribers. The service is paid-only apart from a three-month trial.

Its growth has nevertheless been fairly rapid, having first launched in June 2015. Spotify dates back to Oct. 2008, which has helped make it the "default" platform for on-demand music.

The company received a boost last week when pop star Taylor Swift restored her catalog to the service, ending a boycott in place since 2014. That also signaled an end to Apple Music's exclusive hold on much of Swift's library, including her most recent album "1989."

Apple has increasingly turned to video as way of distinguishing itself from rival streaming options, with shows such as "Carpool Karaoke" and "Planet of the Apps," and documentaries about subjects like Bad Boy Records.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 47
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,799member
    Spotify financials:

    Revenue up 50% to $3.3 billion; operating loss $390 million; net loss $601 million.
    john.bslprescottlkruppdirecthackerlolliverlostkiwi[Deleted User]stanthemanwatto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 47
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,183member
    The more "successful" they are, the faster they are headed for destruction.
    lkrupplolliverlostkiwiradarthekatwatto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 47
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member

    Yeah, nothing's better than losing money more quickly.

    This is today's anti-Apple talking point from the bots ;-).
    lkrupplolliverlostkiwijony0watto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 47
    robjnrobjn Posts: 210member
    Apple should offer a cheaper Apple Music tier. Perhaps it could be limited to a fixed number of hours usage per month.

    If you rarely listen to music $9.99 is a bit steep.
    GeorgeBMacjony0
  • Reply 5 of 47
    With Spotify being over 5 times a large as Apple Music, will government agencies stop giving Spotify a handkerchief whenever it cries that Apple is abusing its power over the App Store? Obviously Spotify is doing something right to have so many people signing onto its service.
    lostkiwiwatto_cobramacxpress
  • Reply 6 of 47
    NY1822NY1822 Posts: 599member
    I am an Apple Music subscriber and talking to my friends who use Spotify and not Apple Music, they say they would pay for Apple Music if when you "thumbs up"/ "like" a song, it adds that song to a "thumbs up playlist". Something so simple like that influences people...they spend so much time talking about curated playlists and algorithms and exclusives....the casual listener doesn't really care about that. They hear a song they like and want it in a playlist. Obviously you can just create a playlist and hit add to playlist, but some people are lazy, if that makes sense.
    edited June 2017 bb-15lostkiwiradarthekatGeorgeBMacretrogustojony0watto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 47
    I also still question the revenue they get from those "premium" subscriptions. I constantly see promotions where you get 6 months or 1 year of free Spotify Premium if you buy "insert product here".
    lolliverlostkiwiradarthekat[Deleted User]watto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 47
    djsherlydjsherly Posts: 1,020member
    I also still question the revenue they get from those "premium" subscriptions. I constantly see promotions where you get 6 months or 1 year of free Spotify Premium if you buy "insert product here".
    I'm getting Apple Music for two years as part of my cell plan. It's no more expensive than my last contract so someone's eating the cost somewhere. 

    Ive also still got Spotify for the reason noted above. It's just easier to use. 

     But I don't know how much vc money can continue to be tipped into this thing until the losses are enough. Profit from streaming seems pretty hard to do. 
    john.bwatto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 47
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 1,980member
    Apple Music is a failure.  I said this a few weeks ago on this forum. Apple is very bad at content services,  Apple wants similar profit margins as its hardware business.  This is stupid. Stupid, stupid, stupid, period. 
    brucemc
  • Reply 10 of 47
    boltsfan17boltsfan17 Posts: 2,161member
    I also still question the revenue they get from those "premium" subscriptions. I constantly see promotions where you get 6 months or 1 year of free Spotify Premium if you buy "insert product here".
    I get a premium discount through one of the credit cards I have. It's actually a pretty decent deal. You do wonder how many people are using a promotional offer for premium. I would switch to Apple Music, but both times I've tried it, the match part of it ruined my iTunes library. I don't want the thousands of studio masters I have replaced with a 256 kbps version. 
  • Reply 11 of 47
    Yeah, don't break out the Premium subscriber numbers. Keep 'em guessing and make Apple's AppleMusic paid subscriber base to look pathetic. Believe me, I don't want to see Spotify fail, so if they ever do start turning a profit, I'm cheering for them. I don't believe it should be if my company is doing well, then rival companies also have to be put out of business. It's important for all people to have employment. I get no joy out of hearing about failed competitors.

    However... The more freeloaders Spotify has to carry, the harder it will be for Spotify to become profitable. Is their business model really that bad that they can't ever make money from the ad-supported users? They're probably using up an awful lot of bandwidth with many tens of thousands of free subscribers. I'm not sure why Spotify wants to carry so many free subscribers. It sure doesn't seem like the total number of subscribers would be anything worth boasting about.

    I do wonder why Spotify didn't tell the number of paid subscribers. There shouldn't be a need to hide that unless paid subscriber numbers didn't grow. I'm ready to see the news media posting headlines saying, "Spotify is crushing Apple owing to a huge number of new active users." All I get is a picture of Atlas trying to hold up the world on his shoulders and Spotify has become Atlas.
    edited June 2017
  • Reply 12 of 47
    slprescottslprescott Posts: 752member
    tzeshan said:
    Apple Music is a failure.  I said this a few weeks ago on this forum. Apple is very bad at content services,  Apple wants similar profit margins as its hardware business.  This is stupid. Stupid, stupid, stupid, period. 
    Re: "failure"...

    Here is a simple calculation:
      Annual Revenue = 20,000,000 paid subscribers  x  $10/month  x  12 months  = $2.4 billion

    It's only 2 years old.

    Any business with $2.4B of revenue after only 2 years is absolutely NOT a failure.  It's big, growing, and profitable.
    lolliversteyounRayz2016lostkiwismiffy31GeorgeBMacericthehalfbeeStrangeDays
  • Reply 13 of 47
    robjn said:
    Apple should offer a cheaper Apple Music tier. Perhaps it could be limited to a fixed number of hours usage per month.

    If you rarely listen to music $9.99 is a bit steep.
    The cost is a bit steep for infrequent users.  I'd have no use for it at all during the summer months.  However, Apple isn't going to mess up its simple business model for consumers short on funds.  Apple isn't Amazon.  You can either afford AppleMusic or you can't.  I'm sure that's how Apple sees it.  
    lolliverradarthekat
  • Reply 14 of 47
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 1,980member
    tzeshan said:
    Apple Music is a failure.  I said this a few weeks ago on this forum. Apple is very bad at content services,  Apple wants similar profit margins as its hardware business.  This is stupid. Stupid, stupid, stupid, period. 
    Re: "failure"...

    Here is a simple calculation:
      Annual Revenue = 20,000,000 paid subscribers  x  $10/month  x  12 months  = $2.4 billion

    It's only 2 years old.

    Any business with $2.4B of revenue after only 2 years is absolutely NOT a failure.  It's big, growing, and profitable.
    It is not worth paying $120 per year. Amazon prime is $130 per year.  You get more services besides music. Apple is fooling a lot of end users.
  • Reply 15 of 47
    19831983 Posts: 1,183member
    I was surprised to hear that as of WWDC 2017 Music has only 27 million subscribers. I believe at the last big Apple event they claimed 30 million. If that's the case its actually declined over the last few months rather than gain more subscribers as was expected to happen. Personally I still prefer to purchase and own my music. So maybe there are more like me out there than I thought, and we're sticking to it rather than going the streaming route.
    edited June 2017
  • Reply 16 of 47
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,627member
    1983 said:
    I was surprised to hear that as of WWDC 2017 Music has only 27 million subscribers. I believe at the last big Apple event they claimed 30 million. If that's the case its actually declined over the last few months rather than gain more subscribers as was expected to happen. Personally I still prefer to purchase and own my music. So maybe there are more like me out there than I thought, and we're sticking to it rather than going the streaming route.
    Apple has never claimed to have 30 million subscribers. I think you were reading a report that claimed Apple had thirty or forty million unique users – which doesn't really mean anything. 
    lolliver
  • Reply 17 of 47

    Spotify is simply a better product.

    Apple won't introduce a simple, streaming-only app (like Spotify) and instead continues to confuse users with an iTunes app that's a cluster-f of purchase and streaming.

    It's almost like Apple decided to let Microsoft and Verizon design iTunes.

    I'm a big Apple fan myself, but the company needs someone at the helm with vision and no patience for terrible software.

    They used to have a guy like that...  
    [Deleted User]GeorgeBMacmr o
  • Reply 18 of 47
    NY1822NY1822 Posts: 599member
    The app Shazam would be a nice integration into Apple Music, or if they can create their own in house version of it. They already have "add to Apple Music Playlist" as an option once a song is recognized. The article in the link talks about how Shazam is now being used in Augmented Reality.

    http://nordic.businessinsider.com/shazam-ceo-rich-riley-interview-shazam-codes-and-snapchat-integration-2017-3/
    edited June 2017
  • Reply 19 of 47
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 7,149member
    robjn said:
    Apple should offer a cheaper Apple Music tier. Perhaps it could be limited to a fixed number of hours usage per month.

    If you rarely listen to music $9.99 is a bit steep.
    Absolutely blathering nonsense. Cheaptards are always making this argument.
    lolliverericthehalfbee
  • Reply 20 of 47
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 7,149member

    joebags said:

    Spotify is simply a better product.

    Apple won't introduce a simple, streaming-only app (like Spotify) and instead continues to confuse users with an iTunes app that's a cluster-f of purchase and streaming.

    It's almost like Apple decided to let Microsoft and Verizon design iTunes.

    I'm a big Apple fan myself, but the company needs someone at the helm with vision and no patience for terrible software.

    They used to have a guy like that...  
    Spotify - 140 million “subscribers" but losing money hand over fist. Yep, Apple should emulate the “better” product Spotify. Sheesh!
    lolliverlostkiwiradarthekatericthehalfbeewatto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.