Apple acquisition reverses fortune of Shazam

Posted:
in General Discussion
Shazam has eradicated its losses and increased its user base by over 78 million users in 2018 after acquisition by Apple.




According to the annual report and financial statements submitted to the U.K.'s Companies House, Shazam now has 478 million active users, versus 400 in the previous year. Shazam's 2018 profit was $34.5 million, less than 2017's $44.8 million, but boasted a profit of $158.4 million and reversed $19.4 million in losses the year prior.

Apple Music has incorporated features of Shazam into its Shazam Discovery Top 50 chart, which is populated by trending tracks and artist searches using Shazam. The searches include countries Australia, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Mexico, Russia, Spain, the UK, and the U.S. The playlist uses more than 20 million Shazam queries a day to populate it, updates every Tuesday, and is available wherever Apple Music is.

Word first surfaced in December that Apple was close to buying Shazam. It was said that the price was about $401 million -- a significant discount from the $1 billion the company was valued at in its last funding round in 2015.

Shazam started life in the UK in 1999 as a product called 2580, named after the number users had to dial to reach the service via text. Since its debut on the iOS App Store, and subsequently Mac App Store, Shazam has evolved into a comprehensive audio fingerprinting service that allows users to identify songs, movies, TV shows and other media by capturing short audio segments.
applesnoranges

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 16
    FatmanFatman Posts: 317member
    Cost of acquisition: $401m, first year profit $158m. If the trend continues, by year three the acquisition cost will be paid off and Apple will have yet another recurring profit machine. Lesson learned: Buy Apple stock.
    radarthekatmacseekerfred steinlolliverracerhomie3razorpitjbdragonjahbladeStrangeDayscornchip
  • Reply 2 of 16
    Shazam's 2018 profit was $34.5 million, less than 2017's $44.8 million, but boasted a profit of $158.4 million and reversed $19.4 million in losses the year prior.“

    Am I missing something?
    cy_starkmancaladanianarlorrazorpitjahbladebaconstangwatto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 16
    d_2d_2 Posts: 59member
    “Shazam's 2018 profit was $34.5 million, less than 2017's $44.8 million, but boasted a profit of $158.4 million and reversed $19.4 million in losses the year prior.“

    Am I missing something?
    Glad it’s not just me confused with this statement.
    arlorMacQcGeorgeBMacrazorpitjbdragonjahbladewatto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 16
    Well, the article should say - 2017 revenue was $44.8 million, but with a $19.4 million loss. For 2018, revenue slipped to $34.5 million, (because Apple discountinued ads in the free version), but the company had a profit of $158.4.million.  Which is because they're counting the money they got from Apple for the sale of their intellectual property..but other than that, they were not profitable for 2018 either..
    Soliemoellergregoriusmcaladanianfirelockcornchipapplesnorangesmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 5 of 16
    Forget the accounting quirks. Apple paid $401M and has 478M user. Good deal.
    lolliverlkruppapplesnorangeswatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 16
    arlorarlor Posts: 514member
    d_2 said:
    “Shazam's 2018 profit was $34.5 million, less than 2017's $44.8 million, but boasted a profit of $158.4 million and reversed $19.4 million in losses the year prior.“

    Am I missing something?
    Glad it’s not just me confused with this statement.
    Me three. I looked at the actual report, and I'm not an accountant but I couldn't find the exact numbers cited under any label. 

    On page 10 of the report, it shows $40.8m of revenue ("turnover") in 2017, $31.4m in 2018, with operating losses, not gains, of $17.8m in 2017 and $13.8m in 2018. That's as close as I think we get to the underlying operational revenue and profit (that is to say loss). The profit in 2018 of $144.2m (before tax of $20.3m), not $158.4m, is entirely due to a payment by Apple of $157.7m for intellectual property (see page 23) offsetting the $13.8m in operating loss. 
    firelockgatorguygregoriusmwatto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 16
    Surely the TV show, Beat Shazam has also helped in this turnaround?
    BxBorncornchipwatto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 16
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 8,743member
    I use Shazam on my Apple Watch sometimes. It can be useful.
    applesnorangeswatto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 16
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,289member
    Fatman said:
    Cost of acquisition: $401m, first year profit $158m. If the trend continues, by year three the acquisition cost will be paid off and Apple will have yet another recurring profit machine. Lesson learned: Buy Apple stock.
    If only profit were the sole driver of stock prices. :/
    razorpitcornchipmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 10 of 16
    gatorguy said:
    Fatman said:
    Cost of acquisition: $401m, first year profit $158m. If the trend continues, by year three the acquisition cost will be paid off and Apple will have yet another recurring profit machine. Lesson learned: Buy Apple stock.
    If only profit were the sole driver of stock prices. :/
    The main thing here is that the company DID NOT have an operating profit as Arlor helpfully researched and posted. That whole $158m "profit" is a result of Apple taking money out of one pocket and putting it into another.  Go ahead and buy Apple stock for many reasons, but not for this one.
    cornchipmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 11 of 16
    fred1fred1 Posts: 359member
    I wonder how SoundHound survives . . .
    cornchipwatto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 16
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 5,273member
    Forget the accounting quirks. Apple paid $401M and has 478M user. Good deal.
    Yeh, the difference between today and the golden age of American industry is that today corporations tend to focus on profit, bonuses and stock holder value over product and growing the business.  
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 16
    Surely the TV show, Beat Shazam has also helped in this turnaround?
    Blasphemy!!! :smiley:
    edited October 10
  • Reply 14 of 16
    sanssans Posts: 48member
    Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't Shazam, when it started, give the user the ability to search for songs based on certain criteria? Like female vocals, pop guitar, etc... Or am I thinking of a different service?
    edited October 10
  • Reply 15 of 16
    davgregdavgreg Posts: 482member
    My only complaint about Shazam is that it points to Apple Music (rental) rather than the iTunes Store (purchase). There should be a preference setting for that.
    applesnorangeswatto_cobra
  • Reply 16 of 16
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 1,687unconfirmed, member
    Shazam was always one of the cooler buys from Apple alongside PrimeSense and Beats.

    Thought this user growth seems organic whether Apple had acquired them or not. Seems Shazam is caring less and less about user interaction as before I would see ads asking to Shazam to enter a sweepstakes or for more info which was innovative and engaging. Shazam was also supposed to have a huge TV push for discovery which would have also grown the user base and helped Apple.

    davgreg said:
    My only complaint about Shazam is that it points to Apple Music (rental) rather than the iTunes Store (purchase). There should be a preference setting for that.

    Agree, but it should be default with both not a preference. This would also help Apple with TV. Say someone catches a show on TV mid-season and is curious about what they missed. They could Shazam it, then purchase the season on iTunes or subscribe to a third-party streaming service and Apple gets a referral cut.

Sign In or Register to comment.