Spotify grows to 108M paid subscribers, 232M in total

Posted:
in General Discussion
Further raising the bar for Apple Music, Spotify on Wednesday announced that its paid Premium subscribers climbed 30% year-over-year in the June quarter to 108 million, while total listenership -- including its free ad-based tier -- rose 29% to 232 million.

Spotify power electronics


Premium subscribers were 500,000 below analyst consensus, but overall numbers beat a consensus of 227.7 million, Reuters said. Revenue, accordingly, grew from 1.27 billion euros in Q2 2018 to 1.67 billion euros, or about $1.86 billion. The analyst average forecast had been just under $1.83 billion.

The company once again posted a net loss, but down from 394 million euros in 2018 to 76 million euros, $84.71 million. It has focused heavily on growth in 2019, for instance launching in India, South Africa, and the Middle East within just the past few months. It has also invested heavily in podcasts, for instance acquiring Anchor, Parcast, and Gimlet Media, and paying for exclusive shows.

Apple Music cracked 60 million paid subscribers in June. The service lacks a free tier beyond trials. Almost 90% of Spotify's Q2 revenue comes from Premium customers.

Apple's June-quarter services revenue grew 13% year-over-year to $11.5 billion. That includes not just Apple Music but the likes of iCloud, Apple News, Apple TV Channels, and App Store advertising.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 7
    davgregdavgreg Posts: 421member
    Buying Beats was a waste of money.

    There is not one thing of value that came along that could not have been done better inside Apple.

    They should have partnered with Spotify.
  • Reply 2 of 7
    uraharaurahara Posts: 263member
    davgreg said:
    Buying Beats was a waste of money.

    There is not one thing of value that came along that could not have been done better inside Apple.

    They should have partnered with Spotify.
    Waste of Money? Source?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 7
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,178member
    davgreg said:
    Buying Beats was a waste of money.

    There is not one thing of value that came along that could not have been done better inside Apple.

    They should have partnered with Spotify.
    While I much prefer Spotify over Apple Music, but it's clear to non-racists most people that the Beats purchase was a smart purchase.
    edited July 31 Carnage
  • Reply 4 of 7
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 1,376unconfirmed, member
    davgreg said:
    Buying Beats was a waste of money.

    There is not one thing of value that came along that could not have been done better inside Apple.

    They should have partnered with Spotify.
    Because partnerships have worked so well with Apple and Spotify is such an honest company!!!
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 7
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 1,376unconfirmed, member
    Soli said:
    davgreg said:
    Buying Beats was a waste of money.

    There is not one thing of value that came along that could not have been done better inside Apple.

    They should have partnered with Spotify.
    While I much prefer Spotify over Apple Music, but it's clear to non-racists most people that the Beats purchase was a smart purchase.

    Well Apple Music is on Spotty's A$$. 60 Million in June is more than half of Spotify's subscribers. I remember when Apple Music was less than half and then half of Spotify's subscriber.

    In the long game I see Apple Music catching up though Iovine leaving was definitely bad for growth.

    Even if Beats was only hardware, it still was a win for Apple and the envy of other tech companies. Beats is as cool as it gets, hardware is getting better and I believe sales are rising adding to that Wearables, Home and Accesories record revenue. I do wish they'd bring the Beats pill; back which was the people's  favorite Bluetooth speaker.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 7

    I understand that some people have tried out both services and genuinely prefer Spotify to Apple Music. However, I think for the majority (I'm not talking about Apple haters), it has more to do with inertia.

    If someone had started off with Spotify, they'd not really move to another service.

    For me, Apple Music came first so I'm really not going to take a look at Spotify, even though it is available now.

    People say that Spotify's playlists and suggestions are much better than Apple Music's. That may be Spotify's advantage, but for me, iTunes Match + Apple Music is simply indispensable.

    watto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 7
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,178member

    I understand that some people have tried out both services and genuinely prefer Spotify to Apple Music. However, I think for the majority (I'm not talking about Apple haters), it has more to do with inertia.

    If someone had started off with Spotify, they'd not really move to another service.

    For me, Apple Music came first so I'm really not going to take a look at Spotify, even though it is available now.

    People say that Spotify's playlists and suggestions are much better than Apple Music's. That may be Spotify's advantage, but for me, iTunes Match + Apple Music is simply indispensable.

    I'd like to move to Apple Music because 1) it will play via my Apple Watch (Spotify has a Watch app but it's only a remote control for your iPhone app so that also needs to be present) and 2) they pay their artists a little better and I'd like to support that when it's not a detriment to my listening (which was fewer listens when I tried to AM which also hurts artists).
    edited August 1
Sign In or Register to comment.