So artists will get paid. Good. What about the labels? Do they still not get their cut? Hope so.
More likley the Labels get the money and then dish it out as needed and like always the Artists is on th every bottom of the pile. This doesn't change anything. 3 months of free or 3 months of paid won't be much money in either case unless you're someone use like Taylor Swift and/or have your own Label.
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.
Yeah demanding to get paid makes you "greedy". Fighting for the small guy is "greedy"". Get a grip.
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.
And these quotes coming from people who b***h when $10 is missing from their paycheck.
Why so much hate? A musician with a product to sell chose not to enter into a contract with a distributer, and publicly explained why. Whether she's right or wrong, it's her product, and her leverage.
Apple did the right thing but people here will side with Apple (pre this decision), regardless. And angrily. Critical thought be damned. Fledgeling artists of all genres need support. It is akin to investing in education, or r & d. It is probably the best money spent.
In some countries a creative sales tax of sorts is levied at sales of creative product. The money go into a fund which is distributed to up and coming artists (not just music). The tax is small but the fund can be considerable thanks to successful artists with huge sales.
Do you not even pay attention to the links you put up? Right after the topic it says (Corrected)!!!! Down below is says:
Correction: We’ve learned that Android users will indeed get to try Apple Music for free, both as a free three-month trial and in a free tier very similar to the one iOS users can enjoy. The only difference is that Apple Music radio stations (aside from the flagship Beats 1 station) won’t be included on Android. Here’s a handy chart:
I think you're reading your own post hoc reasoning into this. Lots of large companies make mistakes. I'm yet to be convinced the Beats acquisition isn't a flop.
If Apple thought they would have to pay, or might be forced to, they would have reduced their initial offer to a month. Or weeks.
As it is if they offer to pay $10 per month for all free subscribers across all their 800M devices it could end up being materially very costly, enough to affect the forward guidance on profits in the next conference call.
You really believe they Apple just made this decision from the seat of their pants? That they didn't go over any and all possibilities, scenarios, cost projections, financial responsibilities, lawsuit probability, etc.... BEFOREHAND?
You're claiming a company that continuously is in multiple negotiations across the company with it's suppliers and content providers, some with well over a decade of experience... is simply shooting from the hip here without considering the consequences?
COME ON!
I know a lot of you folks would like to think that you could step into the shoes of these guys and do a better job... you're all just simply dreaming and would get your "a$$" handed to you big time. Every single one of the characters involved can sell you your shirt back to you and make a profit. Don't be so bloody blind and arrogant. We're not talking about your average everyday politician, business people... or Honey Boo Boo Poker here.
Please, the MSM says Apple is doomed for 15 years. Can't give them any cred.
What? Wanting to be paid for her work? Tell you what, if your company gave away free samples, please volunteer to forgo a portion of your wages during that time.
If Taylor Swift was standing Next to me personally singing, then she would be working. If sung sung a song once in a studio and that same song is played a zillion times, she's not working very hard and in fact sitting on her butt most of the time. Not that that's not the american dream, but get real, 3 months of free for months to years of paying service doesn't effect you.
It's not like digging a ditch for 3 months for free.
1) A free trial is a free trial. Apple isn't making money for the service, neither should anyone else.
2) The entire purpose of the free trial is to hook users that otherwise WOULD NOT, I repeat, WOULD NOT just sign up for $9.99 day one and start handing over money to Taylor Swift every month for the rest of their lives.
3) Every artist in the world should be on their knees kissing Apple's ass for continuing to give value to digital music. How quickly these greedy bastards forget that Apple is directly responsible for their success in digital music sales. And instead of standing still, Apple continues to do all the work and negotiation for them to bring new revenue streams to them.
What did Taylor Swift or anyone else do to create the new revenue stream called Apple Music? Nothing.
The few vocal artists without enough business sense to refrain from commenting have what to say? Instead of saying "there shouldn't be a free trial at all," they say, "Hey we're not getting PAID during the free trial."
They could care less if Apple is getting paid during the trial. Apple, the company who put together the entire product, presentation, and revenue stream FOR them.
A more fitting response to whiny clueless nits like Taylor Swift would have been cutting them out from Apple Music themselves. Oh you don't like a 3 month trial? Well how about nothing? Is that better? Go invent your own streaming service and convince hundreds of millions of platform users to subscribe.
1) It's Apple's promotion, not the artists. The artists still deserve to be paid. Promoting off the backs of others is not what Apple should be doing.
2) The majority of people are NOT going to continue after the FREE promotion and still PAY. They will use the 3 months and go right back to other ways of streaming for free.
3) Apple continues to do all the work? So they write and produce all the music? Apple would not have a service to come up with if it were not for the artists making the music in the first place.
New revenue stream? I highly doubt that Taylor Swift or any other artist is going to see any influx of money just because of Apple Music. If anything, people that do sign up for Apple Music will just not buy from other sources anymore. That extra 1.5% is not that big of a deal either. It amounts to practically pennies extra.
Apple put this together for them? No, Apple made this for Apple to make more money for Apple. Plain and simple. It's all about Apple.
Once again, Tyler Swift would see no ill effects from being cut out of Apple Music. She does just fine without them now. Apple Music wasn't going to save her or make her and more money. Her fans, if they can't get her music from Apple Music, guess what they would do? NOT USE Apple Music and go somewhere else that they can use it.
Convince hundreds of millions of people to subscribe? There is no possible way Apple Music is going to get hundreds of millions of people to subscribe to the service. None. Natta. Zilch.
Look, Apple Music is great. I'm happy for the service to be coming out and believe it will do well. I don't believe it will be the only thing and other services will continue to do well. Apple does a great job for what they do and I love using the products. I just bought a new Macbook Pro and am excited to have it as I know it's the best you can get in that class. Apple does make mistakes tho and Apple isn't the be all end all of everything. Other companies make damn fine products as well. So just relax a little. Apple is still doing might fine as is.
it is only sensible that Apple foot the bill. They can afford it
that really isnt how contract negotiations work. it's apple's obligation to its own stockholders to negotiate favorable terms for itself when dealing w/ the labels. if those labels go along w/ those terms, so be it.
at no point would it be general policy to look at any decision and say, "Well, we can afford it, so whatever you want is fine w/ us!"
Damn, you people take this shit too seriously. This isn't life or death; we're talking about for-profit corporation going up against musical artists. If we can't take the time to sit back and find some humor in it all, then we need to remove the sticks from our asses.
Fledgeling artists of all genres need support. It is akin to investing in education, or r & d. It is probably the best money spent.
what!? are you honestly equating amateur musicians with investing in education? what absolute nonsense. no, the music industry is a business, just like any other. the benefits to society are something to turn on in the background of your day, and nothing at all like the importance of well-educated population which can then increase your nation's economic abilities and GDP.
that really isnt how contract negotiations work. it's apple's obligation to its own stockholders to negotiate favorable terms for itself when dealing w/ the labels. if those labels go along w/ those terms, so be it.
at no point would it be general policy to look at any decision and say, "Well, we can afford it, so whatever you want is fine w/ us!"
Don't be ridiculous. This is about an Apple promotional move. There was no justification, financial or otherwise, for them not paying for it. It was their idea to promote their service. It's not about giving the other side what they want because you can afford to, it's about having the financial clout to not piss your partners off for no reason.
If Taylor Swift was standing Next to me personally singing, then she would be working. If sung sung a song once in a studio and that same song is played a zillion times, she's not working very hard and in fact sitting on her butt most of the time. Not that that's not the american dream, but get real, 3 months of free for months to years of paying service doesn't effect you.
It's not like digging a ditch for 3 months for free.
You can't be serious. In her line of work, they get royalties.
So Apple pays money for s free trial in which it makes none while the artists do nothing but reap the rewards.
Sounds fair...
Apple already gave the artists s bigger cut than competing services to help compensate for the longer trial.
Surprised they caved to such foolishness.
Everyone thinks that because Apple has been diligent to save money that they must therefore need to spend it.
I tend to agree with you, although I do see the independent labels point of view being the little guys, and would have a greater impact on them financially. I think a two tiered approach, compensating them during the free trial, could have worked. As to TS, she's right in that music shouldn't be free. But that's why free streaming should never have been agreed to by the industry, but Apple didn't create that, but has to compete against it. Free streaming of "all you can eat" from the full music catalogue is just plain stupid as it totally devalues music, and results in people not willing to invest in purchasing music. Ultimately the performers and song writers are the ones that get screwed. What is the value of something that is free? Zero!
Apple could easily give the music industry 80% of the royalties and at ill make out just fine. The real rip is to the consumer who is only "renting" the music. There is no exchange of goods! Personally I despise subscription services because they chip away at one's monthly income. And when one counts up all the time not used its usually greater than used.
Apple could easily give the music industry 80% of the royalties and at ill make out just fine. The real rip is to the consumer who is only "renting" the music. There is no exchange of goods!
Personally I despise subscription services because they chip away at one's monthly income. And when one counts up all the time not used its usually greater than used.
For some that may be true. For me, I stream music from Google Play Music several hours per day as does my girlfriend on the same account. So, I definitely get my money's worth.
First off, I don't think this was specifically planned by Apple. Large companies that introduce new products or make changes to services will always discuss numerous "what if" scenarios along with their responses. If negotiations over the free trial were as strained as early reports said, then Apple would have discussed contingencies for things like bad PR resulting from artist complaints or music from top artists being held back. It happened to be Taylor Swift but could just as easily been another famous artist or a large number of smaller ones.
So now instead of people using logic and realizing Apple was prepared for this possible outcome they now think Taylor Swift deserves the credit or that she's so powerful she can force Apple to bend to her will. Which gives the haters another pulpit to preach from.
Nah.... Jimmy & Cue were just lounging around on the corporate bass fishin' boat, when Jimmy I. said to Cue Ball, "watcha say we do a streaming service". Cue was distracted by a Big'N on the line at the time... so Jimmy simply scribbled the idea on the back of a Greasy Poon Bites-n-Bait napkin and hooked it on Tim's chair when they got back. Tim done did declare upon seeing the note, "well I'll be just a cotton-pickin' country boy... but that looks like a might fine idea to me... Let's do it!"
That was it. They invited a few cousins and friends of Apple to demo, talk and shoot the "breeeeze" on stage, and waited for their customers and the musicians to be ooohed, aaahed and flabbergasted at such a Grand Ol' Opry of an idea.
Less than a couple of weeks later though, they were all brought to collective tears that the Lil Darlin' Taylor Swift wouldn't be coming to their "pawdy" They were trying to do something nice for thier cuuuu-stomers and for Taylor, and get this Hoedown hoppin', (not to be mistaken with a hoppin' ho-down) ... so Cue got on the Twitter and wrote, "Dawlin... have we got newwwws for you! Not only we gonna pay whadeva yer pretty little head can conjure up... but we throwin' in free ice cream!"... while thunkin' to himself "top THAT Spoteeerfy!"
And without further ado... that's all-she-wrote!
Done deal by the Happy Honky Hoedown Hillbillies of Cupertino.
They're not getting good free press though. And I think it's a pipe dream to think Apple is going to convert millions of people into paying streaming customers. If that is where people were moving then Spotify would have a lot more paying subscribers and YouTube would be on its last legs. Neither of which are true. I'm sure Apple Music will do well (and the power of defaults helps here) but I think it's WAY to early to say if it's going usher in a whole new wave of paying customers that will translate over to Apple TV.
Just like the continuous bad press Apple gets week after week? Seems to be having quite the detrimental effect on Apple, with declining sales and revenues. Maybe one of these days if enough press keep repeating Apple is doomed it will finally come true.
Spotify lacks so many things to make it truly successful. They're not nearly as well known as Apple. They don't have the marketing budget to promote it. They won't be installed on hundreds of millions of iOS devices by default. They don't have 800 million customers on a related music service (iTunes) they can add to the new one (Apple Music). They don't have the same music library. They aren't mentioned nearly enough in the press (except as an addendum in an Apple Music article). And remember when Spotify and Taylor Swift had their falling out? Was it ever resolved? No. What happens when Taylor Swift and Apple have a disagreement? They kiss and make up. And get an unreal amount of press coverage to boot.
1) It's Apple's promotion, not the artists. The artists still deserve to be paid. Promoting off the backs of others is not what Apple should be doing.
2) The majority of people are NOT going to continue after the FREE promotion and still PAY. They will use the 3 months and go right back to other ways of streaming for free.
3) Apple continues to do all the work? So they write and produce all the music? Apple would not have a service to come up with if it were not for the artists making the music in the first place.
New revenue stream? I highly doubt that Taylor Swift or any other artist is going to see any influx of money just because of Apple Music. If anything, people that do sign up for Apple Music will just not buy from other sources anymore. That extra 1.5% is not that big of a deal either. It amounts to practically pennies extra.
Apple put this together for them? No, Apple made this for Apple to make more money for Apple. Plain and simple. It's all about Apple.
Once again, Tyler Swift would see no ill effects from being cut out of Apple Music. She does just fine without them now. Apple Music wasn't going to save her or make her and more money. Her fans, if they can't get her music from Apple Music, guess what they would do? NOT USE Apple Music and go somewhere else that they can use it.
Convince hundreds of millions of people to subscribe? ARE YOU THAT DENCE. There is no possible way Apple Music is going to get hundreds of millions of people to subscribe to the service. None. Natta. Zilch.
Look, Apple Music is great. I'm happy for the service to be coming out and believe it will do well. I don't believe it will be the only thing and other services will continue to do well. Apple does a great job for what they do and I love using the products. I just bought a new Macbook Pro and am excited to have it as I know it's the best you can get in that class. Apple does make mistakes tho and Apple isn't the be all end all of everything. Other companies make damn fine products as well. So just relax a little. Apple is still doing might fine as is.
Blah blah blah blah blah. Don't you ever get tired of smelling your own sh&t? Bash Apple and then throw in you own some Apple products for good measure. You think people don't see through this?
BTW, If you're going to insult someone, try to avoid common spelling mistakes. It's dense, not dence.
Comments
So artists will get paid. Good. What about the labels? Do they still not get their cut? Hope so.
More likley the Labels get the money and then dish it out as needed and like always the Artists is on th every bottom of the pile. This doesn't change anything. 3 months of free or 3 months of paid won't be much money in either case unless you're someone use like Taylor Swift and/or have your own Label.
Yeah demanding to get paid makes you "greedy". Fighting for the small guy is "greedy"". Get a grip.
And these quotes coming from people who b***h when $10 is missing from their paycheck.
STOP just stop. You're dating yourself.
In some countries a creative sales tax of sorts is levied at sales of creative product. The money go into a fund which is distributed to up and coming artists (not just music). The tax is small but the fund can be considerable thanks to successful artists with huge sales.
http://gizmodo.com/sorry-android-users-you-dont-get-free-apple-music-1710252534
Now yours...
Do you not even pay attention to the links you put up? Right after the topic it says (Corrected)!!!! Down below is says:
Correction: We’ve learned that Android users will indeed get to try Apple Music for free, both as a free three-month trial and in a free tier very similar to the one iOS users can enjoy. The only difference is that Apple Music radio stations (aside from the flagship Beats 1 station) won’t be included on Android. Here’s a handy chart:
So your own link just proved you WRONG!!!!
Taylor Swift, the mediocrity rules. I still don't get her popularity, her music is bland and bullshit.
She's pretty. That sells.
You really believe they Apple just made this decision from the seat of their pants? That they didn't go over any and all possibilities, scenarios, cost projections, financial responsibilities, lawsuit probability, etc.... BEFOREHAND?
You're claiming a company that continuously is in multiple negotiations across the company with it's suppliers and content providers, some with well over a decade of experience... is simply shooting from the hip here without considering the consequences?
COME ON!
I know a lot of you folks would like to think that you could step into the shoes of these guys and do a better job... you're all just simply dreaming and would get your "a$$" handed to you big time. Every single one of the characters involved can sell you your shirt back to you and make a profit. Don't be so bloody blind and arrogant. We're not talking about your average everyday politician, business people... or Honey Boo Boo Poker here.
Please, the MSM says Apple is doomed for 15 years. Can't give them any cred.
What? Wanting to be paid for her work? Tell you what, if your company gave away free samples, please volunteer to forgo a portion of your wages during that time.
If Taylor Swift was standing Next to me personally singing, then she would be working. If sung sung a song once in a studio and that same song is played a zillion times, she's not working very hard and in fact sitting on her butt most of the time. Not that that's not the american dream, but get real, 3 months of free for months to years of paying service doesn't effect you.
It's not like digging a ditch for 3 months for free.
1) It's Apple's promotion, not the artists. The artists still deserve to be paid. Promoting off the backs of others is not what Apple should be doing.
2) The majority of people are NOT going to continue after the FREE promotion and still PAY. They will use the 3 months and go right back to other ways of streaming for free.
3) Apple continues to do all the work? So they write and produce all the music? Apple would not have a service to come up with if it were not for the artists making the music in the first place.
New revenue stream? I highly doubt that Taylor Swift or any other artist is going to see any influx of money just because of Apple Music. If anything, people that do sign up for Apple Music will just not buy from other sources anymore. That extra 1.5% is not that big of a deal either. It amounts to practically pennies extra.
Apple put this together for them? No, Apple made this for Apple to make more money for Apple. Plain and simple. It's all about Apple.
Once again, Tyler Swift would see no ill effects from being cut out of Apple Music. She does just fine without them now. Apple Music wasn't going to save her or make her and more money. Her fans, if they can't get her music from Apple Music, guess what they would do? NOT USE Apple Music and go somewhere else that they can use it.
Convince hundreds of millions of people to subscribe? There is no possible way Apple Music is going to get hundreds of millions of people to subscribe to the service. None. Natta. Zilch.
Look, Apple Music is great. I'm happy for the service to be coming out and believe it will do well. I don't believe it will be the only thing and other services will continue to do well. Apple does a great job for what they do and I love using the products. I just bought a new Macbook Pro and am excited to have it as I know it's the best you can get in that class. Apple does make mistakes tho and Apple isn't the be all end all of everything. Other companies make damn fine products as well. So just relax a little. Apple is still doing might fine as is.
that really isnt how contract negotiations work. it's apple's obligation to its own stockholders to negotiate favorable terms for itself when dealing w/ the labels. if those labels go along w/ those terms, so be it.
at no point would it be general policy to look at any decision and say, "Well, we can afford it, so whatever you want is fine w/ us!"
Didn't Cue say that they are "still" paying artists during free period? Why did he have to say it like that? Not a good way to phrase things.
what!? are you honestly equating amateur musicians with investing in education? what absolute nonsense. no, the music industry is a business, just like any other. the benefits to society are something to turn on in the background of your day, and nothing at all like the importance of well-educated population which can then increase your nation's economic abilities and GDP.
Don't be ridiculous. This is about an Apple promotional move. There was no justification, financial or otherwise, for them not paying for it. It was their idea to promote their service. It's not about giving the other side what they want because you can afford to, it's about having the financial clout to not piss your partners off for no reason.
You can't be serious. In her line of work, they get royalties.
I tend to agree with you, although I do see the independent labels point of view being the little guys, and would have a greater impact on them financially. I think a two tiered approach, compensating them during the free trial, could have worked. As to TS, she's right in that music shouldn't be free. But that's why free streaming should never have been agreed to by the industry, but Apple didn't create that, but has to compete against it. Free streaming of "all you can eat" from the full music catalogue is just plain stupid as it totally devalues music, and results in people not willing to invest in purchasing music. Ultimately the performers and song writers are the ones that get screwed. What is the value of something that is free? Zero!
Personally I despise subscription services because they chip away at one's monthly income. And when one counts up all the time not used its usually greater than used.
For some that may be true. For me, I stream music from Google Play Music several hours per day as does my girlfriend on the same account. So, I definitely get my money's worth.
Nah.... Jimmy & Cue were just lounging around on the corporate bass fishin' boat, when Jimmy I. said to Cue Ball, "watcha say we do a streaming service". Cue was distracted by a Big'N on the line at the time... so Jimmy simply scribbled the idea on the back of a Greasy Poon Bites-n-Bait napkin and hooked it on Tim's chair when they got back. Tim done did declare upon seeing the note, "well I'll be just a cotton-pickin' country boy... but that looks like a might fine idea to me... Let's do it!"
That was it. They invited a few cousins and friends of Apple to demo, talk and shoot the "breeeeze" on stage, and waited for their customers and the musicians to be ooohed, aaahed and flabbergasted at such a Grand Ol' Opry of an idea.
Less than a couple of weeks later though, they were all brought to collective tears that the Lil Darlin' Taylor Swift wouldn't be coming to their "pawdy" They were trying to do something nice for thier cuuuu-stomers and for Taylor, and get this Hoedown hoppin', (not to be mistaken with a hoppin' ho-down) ... so Cue got on the Twitter and wrote, "Dawlin... have we got newwwws for you! Not only we gonna pay whadeva yer pretty little head can conjure up... but we throwin' in free ice cream!"... while thunkin' to himself "top THAT Spoteeerfy!"
And without further ado... that's all-she-wrote!
Done deal by the Happy Honky Hoedown Hillbillies of Cupertino.
They're not getting good free press though. And I think it's a pipe dream to think Apple is going to convert millions of people into paying streaming customers. If that is where people were moving then Spotify would have a lot more paying subscribers and YouTube would be on its last legs. Neither of which are true. I'm sure Apple Music will do well (and the power of defaults helps here) but I think it's WAY to early to say if it's going usher in a whole new wave of paying customers that will translate over to Apple TV.
Just like the continuous bad press Apple gets week after week? Seems to be having quite the detrimental effect on Apple, with declining sales and revenues. Maybe one of these days if enough press keep repeating Apple is doomed it will finally come true.
Spotify lacks so many things to make it truly successful. They're not nearly as well known as Apple. They don't have the marketing budget to promote it. They won't be installed on hundreds of millions of iOS devices by default. They don't have 800 million customers on a related music service (iTunes) they can add to the new one (Apple Music). They don't have the same music library. They aren't mentioned nearly enough in the press (except as an addendum in an Apple Music article). And remember when Spotify and Taylor Swift had their falling out? Was it ever resolved? No. What happens when Taylor Swift and Apple have a disagreement? They kiss and make up. And get an unreal amount of press coverage to boot.
1) It's Apple's promotion, not the artists. The artists still deserve to be paid. Promoting off the backs of others is not what Apple should be doing.
2) The majority of people are NOT going to continue after the FREE promotion and still PAY. They will use the 3 months and go right back to other ways of streaming for free.
3) Apple continues to do all the work? So they write and produce all the music? Apple would not have a service to come up with if it were not for the artists making the music in the first place.
New revenue stream? I highly doubt that Taylor Swift or any other artist is going to see any influx of money just because of Apple Music. If anything, people that do sign up for Apple Music will just not buy from other sources anymore. That extra 1.5% is not that big of a deal either. It amounts to practically pennies extra.
Apple put this together for them? No, Apple made this for Apple to make more money for Apple. Plain and simple. It's all about Apple.
Once again, Tyler Swift would see no ill effects from being cut out of Apple Music. She does just fine without them now. Apple Music wasn't going to save her or make her and more money. Her fans, if they can't get her music from Apple Music, guess what they would do? NOT USE Apple Music and go somewhere else that they can use it.
Convince hundreds of millions of people to subscribe? ARE YOU THAT DENCE. There is no possible way Apple Music is going to get hundreds of millions of people to subscribe to the service. None. Natta. Zilch.
Look, Apple Music is great. I'm happy for the service to be coming out and believe it will do well. I don't believe it will be the only thing and other services will continue to do well. Apple does a great job for what they do and I love using the products. I just bought a new Macbook Pro and am excited to have it as I know it's the best you can get in that class. Apple does make mistakes tho and Apple isn't the be all end all of everything. Other companies make damn fine products as well. So just relax a little. Apple is still doing might fine as is.
Blah blah blah blah blah. Don't you ever get tired of smelling your own sh&t? Bash Apple and then throw in you own some Apple products for good measure. You think people don't see through this?
BTW, If you're going to insult someone, try to avoid common spelling mistakes. It's dense, not dence.