Apple to reportedly pay 0.2 cents per song for Apple Music 90-day free trial period
As Apple Music nears its June 30 debut more information is coming out regarding Apple's fee structure as applied to the service's 90-day free trial, with reports on Wednesday now pegging the number at 0.2 cents per play.
Citing music executives familiar with the matter, The New York Times reports Apple's deal with labels has the company shelling out 0.2 cents for songs streamed during a free 90-day Apple Music trial period. The amount is comparable to free tier rates paid by competing streaming services, sources said.
In addition to the per-play fee, Apple is also paying a smaller sum to publishers for songwriting rights. Publishing companies confirmed that negotiations are still in flux less than one week from Apple Music's launch.
On Tuesday, Apple inked eleventh-hour deals with Merlin and Beggars Group, which represent a large swath of indie labels and distributors.
The company came under fire this week when Taylor Swift made much ado over the loss of income artists would face as a result of Apple's previous terms. After modifying Music's royalty structure, Apple SVP of Internet Software and Services Eddy Cue spoke to Swift, reporting back that she was "thrilled" with the changes.
Apple Music came under fire over the weekend when pop icon Taylor Swift posted to her blog a letter to Apple bemoaning the company's reluctance to pay out royalties during the 90-day free trial. In response, Apple SVP of Internet Software and Services Eddy Cue announced Apple would foot the bill for free trial streams.
Citing music executives familiar with the matter, The New York Times reports Apple's deal with labels has the company shelling out 0.2 cents for songs streamed during a free 90-day Apple Music trial period. The amount is comparable to free tier rates paid by competing streaming services, sources said.
In addition to the per-play fee, Apple is also paying a smaller sum to publishers for songwriting rights. Publishing companies confirmed that negotiations are still in flux less than one week from Apple Music's launch.
On Tuesday, Apple inked eleventh-hour deals with Merlin and Beggars Group, which represent a large swath of indie labels and distributors.
The company came under fire this week when Taylor Swift made much ado over the loss of income artists would face as a result of Apple's previous terms. After modifying Music's royalty structure, Apple SVP of Internet Software and Services Eddy Cue spoke to Swift, reporting back that she was "thrilled" with the changes.
Apple Music came under fire over the weekend when pop icon Taylor Swift posted to her blog a letter to Apple bemoaning the company's reluctance to pay out royalties during the 90-day free trial. In response, Apple SVP of Internet Software and Services Eddy Cue announced Apple would foot the bill for free trial streams.
Comments
Rumors are Apple spent over $100 million giving away U2's latest album. If they can afford to do that they can pay for this free trial.
Still going to cost Apple millions and millions of dollars. When the base iPhones are 16GB again you can thank Taylor Swift.
millions and millions of dollars is lunch money to Apple.
Still bi***ing?!!
Do you work for free?
Taylor Swift's open smack down (and the tech websites who don't listen to her music's coverage of it) has generated public interest in how much Apple pays record labels. Ordinarily, nobody wants to know how the sausage is made. Those negotiations happen behind the scenes, as they do between Apple and cellular carriers, or Apple and its supply chain partners.
so why aren't the labels being implicated in all of this. it's not like the negotiations were one-sided. furthermore, if labels pay their artists, why weren't they named at all in this pr debacle? apple isn't paying the artists .2 cents directly. the labels are.After this kerfuffle, Taylor Swift would look pretty lame if she withheld the most talked/written about album this year from Apple Music. I have no doubt the articles trashing her for not releasing the album have already been written and are being revised to get the most sensationalist amount of stab wounds that can be inflicted on her in the least amount of words the keep the attention spans of the people who will read the articles.
Still, those articles will pale in comparison to the millions of people (who include her fans, people who hate just because they nothing else better going on in their lives or because she had the audacity to call out Apple, the extraordinarily reputable CNBC, NYT and WSJ and you know... Philip Elmer-Dewitt over at Fortune) who will not hesitate to go thermonuclear on her on Twitter and Facebook.
The ball is most definitely in her court! Yikes!!
Where is the popcorn?
Oh noes! That's going to eat up a huge chunk of that nearly $200 billion of reserve cash. Apple is doomed. /s
Imagine if Spotify tried to do that. They'd be bankrupted.
Hey, as a side note, I saw an ad at the bottom of this article... TODAY'S BEST ANDROID PHONE IS ON SALE Samsung Galaxy S6 & S6 Edge. Didn't these phones get released in April 2015? Yikes!
Oh noes! That's going to eat up a huge chunk of that nearly $200 billion of reserve cash. Apple is doomed. /s
Imagine if Spotify tried to do that. They'd be bankrupted.
Spotify is probably complaining to the DOJ, FTC, European Commission and the NY/CT State AGs to stop Apple from paying the artists money because it is something Spotify cannot compete with without having a very real financial hit.
Rumors are Apple spent over $100 million giving away U2's latest album. If they can afford to do that they can pay for this free trial.
Sorry, but I call BS on that rumor. There is no way that giving away an album, especially a U2 album, is worth $100 million to any company.
If, as I've read on this post, spotify doesn't pay the artists for the free tier memberships, do the artists get paid at all? And why aren't the artists raising a big stink about this? Why isn't this the big issue instead of apple's negotiations? Sounds to me the labels aren't stepping up and doing the right thing here.
The labels are innocent middlemen.
I don't know...that's a good question. Maybe the New York Times should write an expose on that but oh wait it doesn't embarrass Apple, so never mind. News is not about information it's about clicks.
Yes, that's definitely unfair practice on Apple's part.
Bono's a good negotiator
Bono's a good negotiator
I guess he had to be in order to pay off his orthopedic surgeon.
Wow, would not want to be Spotify at the moment, Apple could be aiming to put them out of business simply by paying more the labels more than they could ever afford.
I hope Ms. Swift is happy ... $20K is more than many people make per year, and she will make that without lifting a finger.
Then again, some of her concert tickets are $700 a piece, so she really doesn't care about anyone except herself.
She would be nothing without Apple products.