Sony Music CEO Confirms Launch of Apple's Music Streaming Service 86
An anonymous reader writes: Sony Music CEO Doug Morris said in an interview that Apple will announce a new music streaming service tomorrow at its World Wide Developers Conference (WWDC). The new Apple Music service will include subscription streaming music features as well as a revamped iTunes Radio service. "What does Apple bring to this?" Morris said. "Well, they've got $178 billion in the bank. And they have 800 million credit cards in iTunes. Spotify has never really advertised because it's never been profitable. My guess is that Apple will promote this like crazy and I think that will have a halo effect on the streaming business. A rising tide will lift all boats," he added. "It's the beginning of an amazing moment for our industry."
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, changing iTunes to a subscription service is just awesome. Say goodbye to all of the music you bought from iTunes, because Apple is going to delete it all remotely and force you to pay per play now.
Re: (Score:2)
Rising tide? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Rising tide? (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly.
>"It's the beginning of an amazing moment for our industry"
More like additional fuel to end the "owning" of anything. Streaming is great when you are connected, don't mind someone watching what you are doing, and don't care that you can be fed things you don't want.
Look at the reaction to even the CONCEPT of Netflix having commercials...
Pandora (Score:4, Interesting)
I think apple is a little late to this. They tried apple radio a couple years ago and it didn't work. insider interviews confirmed that the point was not to get people to listen to the radio, but rather to convert people to buy the songs from itunes. this was patently transparent. At the time I started using pandora and paying $4 through the app store subscription. I have a dozen really cool stations that I have curated through dozens of thumbs up / thumbs down / song seeds. I would need to see something really compelling tomorrow if i'm to be convinced to try something else, let alone in addition.
Re:Pandora (Score:5, Insightful)
Those people who already use something like Spotify or Pandora won't immediately switch, but I guess that Apple expects that there will be a very large number of people who have never used an Internet radio service that will sign up for Apple's service.
Reducing friction in the sign-up process will certainly make a difference and I expect that Apple will make it easy to sign up.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It depends on if you prefer to listen for the hottest artists are you prefer to listen for the back catalog. I do a lot of back catalogue genre and live music listening, so the ebbs and flows of hot artists to hot services don't really impact me.
btdubs, TS didn't pull from Spotify to go to tidal, she pulled from Spotify in order to boost her CD sales and other paid channels. She had wanted to do a deal with Spotify where her music would be available on the paid service but not on the ad-supported service,
Re: (Score:2)
i.e.: automatic. Just fill out this form, mail it in with proof of identity, and we'll stop charging you a subscription in 60-90 days!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Surprisingly, you and the US aren't the only people in the world.
Re: (Score:2)
This is not going after Pandora users, it's going after people who don't currently have a streaming service.
If it launches in the UK then it also might be for me since we can't get Pandora and while I like Spotify well enough, it didn't seem to work as well as Pandora did when I tried in in the US.
Either way, more competition in the streaming space will be good, surely.
Re: (Score:2)
> I would need to see something really compelling tomorrow if i'm to be convinced to try something else, let alone in addition.
Such as "all competing apps have been removed from the app store per Apple policy"?
Walled Garden (Score:4, Insightful)
So, seeing as they are becoming competitors, when will Spotify disappear from the Apple App Store?
Re: (Score:2)
If they do, spotify would have good chances in courts, because thats abuse of market power.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Nothing requires Apple to carry everything in their store. They can deny any app for whatever reason they want.
This is definitely not true, even if you only count the US. When you are in a position of market dominance you have to obey antitrust laws. If US law applies to this case or not is somewhat debatable as Apple has less than half the smartphone market, but I don't think it would be legal in Europe for example.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So, Apple is dominant this week, not doomed, beleaguered, suffering dramatic loss of market share, and just about to finally be utterly destroyed by the superior-in-every-way-both-morally-and-technologically juggernaught that is Android... like they were last week?
It's so hard to keep that straight.
Re: (Score:2)
Debian's case is completely different because you can choose a different repository than their official one and install from it. No such luck with the iStore.
Also this is not like other retail businesses. Apple does not consume any shelf space to 'stock' applications. At all.
Re: (Score:3)
It would absolutely be legal in Europe. Stores in Europe are free to chose what they want to sell and not, they are not required to carry everyone that wants to.
Microsoft has already paid over a billion dollar in fines to the EU over anti-trust charges, they've had the browser selection screen, the forced unbundling of WMP... technically you're correct, they will never force Apple to ship Spotify. What they will do is to say that banning Spotify in favor of their own in-house app is an anti-competitive practice and fine them millions of dollars per day until it ends. The most relevant article in the EU treaty is 102 that explicitly mentions blocking off markets in
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Which did not forbid people from wanting to break up IBM's mainframe business at one point.
Re: (Score:2)
Keep in mind that the FTC may define a "market" differently than you do.
For example, Microsoft attempted to use market-share of Apple computers to claim that they did not have a monopoly in the personal computer market. However, they did have a monopoly in personal computers run by Intel CPUs (at the time, Apple computers used PowerPC CPUs). In other words, the FTC had a different market in mind.
Re: (Score:2)
I am sure Apple has consulted with lawyers much smarter and more knowledgeable than you to determine their legal risk. For one thing, a brief perusal of the Wikipedia article on US antitrust and the Sherman Act would show you how wrong you are.
Re: (Score:1)
Nothing requires Apple to carry everything in their store. They can deny any app for whatever reason they want.
This is definitely not true, even if you only count the US. When you are in a position of market dominance you have to obey antitrust laws. If US law applies to this case or not is somewhat debatable as Apple has less than half the smartphone market, but I don't think it would be legal in Europe for example.
So what market are they dominant in? The sale of Apple-branded products?
Or are we forgetting that Apple is only a "dominant monopolist" when it suits slashdot, and the "failing has been" when talk abut how Android has so much market share?
It can't be both.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Why would they remove Spotify?
They already carry Google Music in App Store, do we have more conspiracy theories while we're at it?
Re: (Score:3)
So, seeing as they are becoming competitors, when will Spotify disappear from the Apple App Store?
Has Apple ever removed a major competitor's app from the store? After it was approved?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
So, seeing as they are becoming competitors, when will Spotify disappear from the Apple App Store?
Has Apple ever removed a major competitor's app from the store? After it was approved?
No, but facts are a very pesky issue for Apple bashing so they're frequently ignored in favour of baseless speculation and fabrication.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not just about facts. It's about spirit and essence. Nobody fucks the customer as hard as Apple. No one.
Right, no ONE. Only Microsoft, Google, Amazon...
Re: (Score:3)
They didn't remove Pandora when they launched iTunes Radio. They didn't remove the Kindle app when they launched iBooks. Netflix is still available, despite the existence of the Movie and TV sections of the iTunes store. Chrome is available as an alternative to Safari. And when Apple dumped Google maps from its default position, Google fairly quickly came up with a less embarrassingly out-of-date maps app that's in the app store right now.
Why should it be any different with Spotify?
Re: (Score:3)
Because Apple.
It worked before, why shouldn't it this time?
Re: (Score:2)
The internet radio stations don't allow you choose the songs you want to listen to whereas you choose the songs with music streaming services.
But I wonder if the 0.5 cents or whatever per song played given to the song copyright owners is enough money. Suppose iTunes and CD sales became obsolete, would streaming music pay enough to support artists financially?
Re: (Score:2)
If most of the money goes to artists, I'd say better then today.
Apple Innovation Survival Kit (Score:2)
APPLE INNOVATION SURVIVAL KIT
ONLY BREAK SEAL IN CASE OF EMERGENCY
Contents of Packet A: Introduction of new streaming iTunes service.
Contents of Packet B: Introduction of new streaming iTunes service.
Contents of Packet C: Introduction of new streaming iTunes service.
why would i want single-vendor music streaming? (Score:1)
OK this is admittedly a guess but it seems likely from their track record that this service will only work with Apple devices.
Why in the hell would anyone want a single-vendor music steaming service? Music isn't specific to Apple (or Sony or Google). I can outright BUY unencumbered mp3 files for so dirt cheap that streaming doesn't make any sense. Why stream when I can just buy them and copy them to whatever device I want, whenever I want, and use them long after the streaming service goes bust?
It makes
why stream them when you can download them? (Score:2)
Good question. If there were an answer to it I think the industry would be in a different spot than it is.
It turns out customers greatly prefer streaming music (essentially paying per-play) to buying it. Music downloading is down and streaming is up.
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of the streaming is ad based or subscription based. If you listen to recent music a lot it makes more sense to have this subscription service. If you listen occasionally to old music it often doesn't make sense to own it. Plus the streaming services are a good way to sample and find new music.
Re: (Score:2)
Listening at work.
Re: (Score:1)
OK this is admittedly a guess but it seems likely from their track record that this service will only work with Apple devices.
Why in the hell would anyone want a single-vendor music steaming service? Music isn't specific to Apple (or Sony or Google). I can outright BUY unencumbered mp3 files for so dirt cheap that streaming doesn't make any sense. Why stream when I can just buy them and copy them to whatever device I want, whenever I want, and use them long after the streaming service goes bust?
It makes no sense.
Sure you can buy music for dirt cheap - you'll still be able to after this launches.
It's almost as if different people have different needs when it comes to products and services. I'm sure there's some sense in there somewhere. Could it be that people are different from each other? Help me out here. This isn't making sense.
Laugh (Score:1)
Spotify has never really advertised because it's never been profitable.
So you should only advertise when you're profitable?
If Doug Morris thinks this is a good thing that means it isn't a good thing for the end users.
Re: (Score:2)
Spotify has never really advertised because it's never been profitable.
So you should only advertise when you're profitable?
If Doug Morris thinks this is a good thing that means it isn't a good thing for the end users.
The summary is oddly worked but it means that it has not been a net benefit financially to advertise. They would spend more in advertising costs than they would gain in income.
Re: (Score:1)
Perhaps, it is odd though, I don't stream or even go looking for streaming yet I hear and read about Spotifiy constantly.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps, it is odd though, I don't stream or even go looking for streaming yet I hear and read about Spotifiy constantly.
That's the point.
It's like Pizza Express, whose first advert was "word of mouth since 1936" or something.
Spotify haven't used traditional advertising because it's expensive and they are already getting a lot of exposure as it is.
Re: (Score:1)
That makes sense, I have to admit I am experiencing schadenfreude thinking of music execs raging because their markets have dried up.
Sounds like paid PR... (Score:2)
A rising tide will lift all boats," he added. "It's the beginning of an amazing moment for our industry."
Anyone remember Apple Pay with the already available credit card information? Well, according to some, it looks like a dud [bgr.com] already. This could well be the same because I for one, have no intention of ever being a subscriber. I am sure I am not alone.
Re:Sounds like paid PR... (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, pretty much anything that Slashdot pans seems to make it big.
The iPod, Windows, Bill Gates, the iPhone, the iPad, the iWatch.
We like Nokia, Blackberry and god help us, Windows phone.
There is a lesson here....
Re: (Score:1)
The iWatch has 'made it big'??
Let's wait a year and see how many people buy the new iWatch 2.
Re: (Score:1)
It depends on the country. When Apple Pay inevitably launches in the UK it will be an enormous hit - contactless payment is all the rage here and has seen massive growth in the past 2 years.
It doesn't surprise me that the US is lagging behind. You guys don't even have chip and pin.
Spotify (Score:1)
The chief executive of Spotify, Daniel Ek, has predicted that the free online music service will help the industry grow to as much as 10 times its current size, in a future where old distinctions between providers break down.
http://www.theguardian.com/tec... [theguardian.com]
Fuck it, why not (Score:2)
"It's the beginning of an amazing moment for our industry."
I'd appreciate if someone would pull the CEO of Sony out from under his rock and let him know it's the year 2015.
You've got to be fucking kidding me with this. As if no one has ever heard of a streaming music service before.
On a related note (ba dum tiss), must be fun to be a board member for Apple. Fuck it, why not has become the financial motto, especially when identifying cash-on-hand as the justification here.
Re:Fuck it, why not (Score:4, Insightful)
"It's the beginning of an amazing moment for our industry."
I'd appreciate if someone would pull the CEO of Sony out from under his rock and let him know it's the year 2015.
You've got to be fucking kidding me with this. As if no one has ever heard of a streaming music service before.
On a related note (ba dum tiss), must be fun to be a board member for Apple. Fuck it, why not has become the financial motto, especially when identifying cash-on-hand as the justification here.
Considering their cash on hand, they actually seem surprisingly reluctant with new ideas.
grrrhh (Score:1)
Sony music FINALLY sees an opportunity for profit! (Score:1)