I feel this is what Apple should've done from the start. It's puzzling how with that much money in the bank and they still act.. well, cheap, sometimes. It's just bad PR.
It's called being responsible.
And that's HOW the money ended up in the savings account.
I suppose Apple sea this as a strategic loss to gain a bigger win down the line.
Even if that were true, the artists should be able to have a card to play in this poker game, and that's what she did. There's no right or wrong when negotiating terms. Her open letter was a shrewd move, because it was picked up and spread around by the mainstream media (not just tech sites), and got repeated with the usual "Apple is evil and stealing from artists" narrative attached, some with more intentional zeal and anti-Apple fervor.
I'm just just glad it's over, and I hope her music can go back to being ignored by all the Apple-haters who, for one day, made her their honorary spokesperson in their negative troll campaign against Apple on the Internet.
SMH! How can Apple be so tonedeaf with Jimmy Iovine on staff? "Taylor Smith vs. big mean corporate Apple", how did they not see that coming in Cupertino? I guess Eddy didn't want to be the subject of a TS breakup song on her next album... " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
This is a good thing for new talent and new talentless puppets.
One thing I have noticed with my kids, and their friends, is that they have very short attention spans when it comes to music. The newest hit comes along and is played dozens of times a day. Most lose their flavour after a week, some last a month, but they are played repeatedly and then forgotten.
While this doesn't worry the labels, it is a big problem for one or two hit wonders who's hit may come in the next few months when tens of millions would have been taking advantage of this free service, many who pay somewhere else but don't stream on their regular service for a three month period.
We don't owe artists a living, but if they do become popular for a while, they do deserve to reap the rewards, not have it lost because their 15 minutes of fame came at the wrong time.
Taylor Swift is an attention-whore, using "indie artists" as a ruse for her greediness. Still, it's pretty incredible and impressive how quickly today's Apple listens to feedback and makes changes, in order to avoid potential further negative PR.
Actually, this little skirmish has all the right ingredients to ensure Apple will get favorable press coverage tomorrow for Apple Music. The only downside is that the service won't be immediately available so all the attention cannot be immediately parlayed into sign ups.
Taylor Swift is an attention-whore, using "indie artists" as a ruse for her greediness. Still, it's pretty incredible and impressive how quickly today's Apple listens to feedback and makes changes, in order to avoid potential further negative PR.
Actually not a bad idea. Apple should consider some kind of exclusive with Swift and soon...before she loses her cachet and her audience moves on.
FM Radio was always a free service and artists were still paid royalties. Good to see Apple do the right thing, even if they have to be coerced, shamed, and manipulated into it.
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.
It is hard for me to believe that Tim Cook is that Machiavellian. If this turns out well for Apple, it will be dumb luck. I think they will regret this in the long run, because there will be more instances of PR hostage taking. Already there are people calling for Apple to quit doing business in South Carolina, since Tim Cook has called for SC to stop flying the Confederate flag. The PR hostage takers will compare their issues to that of Taylor Swift and try to shame Apple into a similar caving. Who is going to be the bad guy and say "NO"?
And yet still some people are reducing the tone to ad hominem attacks on Taylor Swift and her music, seeing a successful woman and calling her a whore. Stay classy internet.
This show of weakness will kill their ability get any kind of leverage on deals going forward. They have effectively given away their ecosystem advantage . . . to Taylor Swift. The TV service will never get off the ground without Apple paying through the nose for it, if it gets off the ground at all. Every little outcry by competitors and Apple-haters will be met with capitulation until the money pile is whittled away to nothing
This has been a PR disaster since the day Apple Music spluttered and limped on stage (at a developer's conference no less!) and culminating in this. The headlines won't read that Apple did the right thing; they'll say that Apple caved, and that's what content providers will remember as they walk smiling into negotiations with Cue. If we create a stink, Apple will cave.
I had the same exact thought. At the same thought, I think Apple kind of messed this one up. First, they should have eaten the cost from the get go - they could have expensed it as marketing/client capturing cost. I am sure they must have know what. Now, even after knowing that it didn't go well - they should have stuck it out and provided some explanation on why the are doing this. I know Steve wouldn't have caved like this right away. I think he did a great job dealing with Antennagate! Yes, he did gave out those bumpers afterward, but he did so after showing us all on how Apple did testing and compare the results against other smart phone devices, which also had similar issue.
Why should artists have to pay for apple's promo's ....the reason because apple hired and took the music industry approach to music and not artists.
Taylor Swift was 100 Percent right...Artists first.
The music industry is famous for screwing artists over and apple hired and purchased a music industry insider and so did not take the approach of what good for artists...hence why there on the wrong track.
I'm continuously amazed at how so many here on this board are so blind and inexperienced in negotiations, and for some reason think that Tim Cook and Team are doing this for the first time. Does anyone here really think that they didn't discuss this very scenario in multiple meetings among themselves? That they haven't been through this literally hundreds of times before with all of their suppliers?
Apple has done one of the shrewdest plays I've seen in a long time playing their adversary AND social media to do what they want them to, effectively "killing 2 (or more) birds with one stone" as their goal.
1) as EricTheHalfBee stated, now ALL of the hold-out labels and artists have to be available on Apple Music and can't hold out for anything more, or else they'll be raked over the coals by their own fans as "greedy";
2) any DOJ anti-competitive inquiries... or requests for the same by competitors, Apple has the "Get Out Of Jail" card that Taylor Swift and the labels just handed to them by doing exactly what Apple expected them to. It will now be up to the DOJ to prove that Apple initially negotiated in bad faith to pull this trick.
Why any of you think Apple, it's management and lawyers are on the same level as you negotiating the purchase of a used car, is beyond my comprehension :rolleyes:
Comments
It's called being responsible.
And that's HOW the money ended up in the savings account.
I suppose Apple sea this as a strategic loss to gain a bigger win down the line.
If they were truly Indie and they wanted their music on iTunes/Apple Music then they would deal directly with Apple.
Even if that were true, the artists should be able to have a card to play in this poker game, and that's what she did. There's no right or wrong when negotiating terms. Her open letter was a shrewd move, because it was picked up and spread around by the mainstream media (not just tech sites), and got repeated with the usual "Apple is evil and stealing from artists" narrative attached, some with more intentional zeal and anti-Apple fervor.
I'm just just glad it's over, and I hope her music can go back to being ignored by all the Apple-haters who, for one day, made her their honorary spokesperson in their negative troll campaign against Apple on the Internet.
THIS!!!!!!!!
Pronto.
SMH! How can Apple be so tonedeaf with Jimmy Iovine on staff? "Taylor Smith vs. big mean corporate Apple", how did they not see that coming in Cupertino? I guess Eddy didn't want to be the subject of a TS breakup song on her next album...
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
LMAO So true. HAHAHAHHA! Wow! Great post btw...
Apple needs to get rid of con artist lovine and hire Taylor swift.
Pronto.
I wish Taylor Swift's music was half as good as her negotiation skills. She's a better hire than Iovine.
This is a good thing for new talent and new talentless puppets.
One thing I have noticed with my kids, and their friends, is that they have very short attention spans when it comes to music. The newest hit comes along and is played dozens of times a day. Most lose their flavour after a week, some last a month, but they are played repeatedly and then forgotten.
While this doesn't worry the labels, it is a big problem for one or two hit wonders who's hit may come in the next few months when tens of millions would have been taking advantage of this free service, many who pay somewhere else but don't stream on their regular service for a three month period.
We don't owe artists a living, but if they do become popular for a while, they do deserve to reap the rewards, not have it lost because their 15 minutes of fame came at the wrong time.
Actually, this little skirmish has all the right ingredients to ensure Apple will get favorable press coverage tomorrow for Apple Music. The only downside is that the service won't be immediately available so all the attention cannot be immediately parlayed into sign ups.
Actually not a bad idea. Apple should consider some kind of exclusive with Swift and soon...before she loses her cachet and her audience moves on.
Good to see Apple do the right thing, even if they have to be coerced, shamed, and manipulated into it.
It is hard for me to believe that Tim Cook is that Machiavellian. If this turns out well for Apple, it will be dumb luck. I think they will regret this in the long run, because there will be more instances of PR hostage taking. Already there are people calling for Apple to quit doing business in South Carolina, since Tim Cook has called for SC to stop flying the Confederate flag. The PR hostage takers will compare their issues to that of Taylor Swift and try to shame Apple into a similar caving. Who is going to be the bad guy and say "NO"?
All's well that ends well.
Why does Apple need to pay for the promotions of Artists,...especially that of the bitch.?!
Good decision.
And yet still some people are reducing the tone to ad hominem attacks on Taylor Swift and her music, seeing a successful woman and calling her a whore. Stay classy internet.
That's not Lana Del Rey's twitter account. It's probably some dungeon dwelling fanboy having a pop.
https://twitter.com/LanaDelRey
Apple bitch-slapped by Taylor Swift.
Well I never.
This show of weakness will kill their ability get any kind of leverage on deals going forward. They have effectively given away their ecosystem advantage . . . to Taylor Swift. The TV service will never get off the ground without Apple paying through the nose for it, if it gets off the ground at all. Every little outcry by competitors and Apple-haters will be met with capitulation until the money pile is whittled away to nothing
This has been a PR disaster since the day Apple Music spluttered and limped on stage (at a developer's conference no less!) and culminating in this. The headlines won't read that Apple did the right thing; they'll say that Apple caved, and that's what content providers will remember as they walk smiling into negotiations with Cue. If we create a stink, Apple will cave.
I had the same exact thought. At the same thought, I think Apple kind of messed this one up. First, they should have eaten the cost from the get go - they could have expensed it as marketing/client capturing cost. I am sure they must have know what. Now, even after knowing that it didn't go well - they should have stuck it out and provided some explanation on why the are doing this. I know Steve wouldn't have caved like this right away. I think he did a great job dealing with Antennagate! Yes, he did gave out those bumpers afterward, but he did so after showing us all on how Apple did testing and compare the results against other smart phone devices, which also had similar issue.
Why should artists have to pay for apple's promo's ....the reason because apple hired and took the music industry approach to music and not artists.
Taylor Swift was 100 Percent right...Artists first.
The music industry is famous for screwing artists over and apple hired and purchased a music industry insider and so did not take the approach of what good for artists...hence why there on the wrong track.
Apple has done one of the shrewdest plays I've seen in a long time playing their adversary AND social media to do what they want them to, effectively "killing 2 (or more) birds with one stone" as their goal.
1) as EricTheHalfBee stated, now ALL of the hold-out labels and artists have to be available on Apple Music and can't hold out for anything more, or else they'll be raked over the coals by their own fans as "greedy";
2) any DOJ anti-competitive inquiries... or requests for the same by competitors, Apple has the "Get Out Of Jail" card that Taylor Swift and the labels just handed to them by doing exactly what Apple expected them to. It will now be up to the DOJ to prove that Apple initially negotiated in bad faith to pull this trick.
Why any of you think Apple, it's management and lawyers are on the same level as you negotiating the purchase of a used car, is beyond my comprehension :rolleyes: