4 ms·

As I mentioned in the other thread re: Beggar's Group, the 3 months free streaming is likely to represent a significant financial hardship to indie labels. Sinc

by w4 11y ago

As I mentioned in the other thread re: Beggar's Group, the 3 months free streaming is likely to represent a significant financial hardship to indie labels. Since everyone with an iTunes account gets free Apple Music for 3 months, you can expect that sales on iTunes will plummet during that period. While the major labels can weather the resulting loss of revenue, losing a significant number of your sales from the world's largest music store for a full quarter is likely to put some indie labels and artists in a position where they're unable to pay their bills. Apple Music's impact will likely ripple out to sales at other stores, too, which will worsen its impact on revenues. And while artists can at least fall back on touring revenue, small labels don't have that option. I can see why labels and artists are upset. Apple Music's free trial may very well have a ruinous effect on their livelihoods.

dreamfactory2 11y ago
This is exactly why the arrival of mp3s was in reality hugely damaging to the independent music business and favoured the majors.
ghshephard 11y ago
How is this any different than Youtube? I was at a party last weekend, and the host had their PS3 setup to stream a youtube stream from anyone who connected via their WiFi. Basically anyone at the party connected to their Wireless Lan was instantly authenticated to add music (it was pretty slick). Everything I tried (including all the artists like Taylor Swift who had dropped spotify) had pretty much all their music there. everything seems to be there. When I asked how much this cost, given that it was also showing videos, the answer I got was, "It's all free, man!" Everyone talks about rdio, spotify, upcoming apple music, etc... But Youtube already seems to have unlimited free streaming of music + videos, with what appears to be universal selection.
- plorkyeran 11y ago
  Youtube pays royalties from their advertising revenue these days, and Google is shocking good at making money from advertising.
  - ghshephard 11y ago
    I'll take your word for it - I don't recall a single advertisement, and I was listening as closely as I could for one. Not to say they didn't happen, but they weren't anywhere near as annoying as the spotify/pandora ones are.
    - vijayr 11y ago
      Maybe the parent is talking about banner ads on the video and not video ads?
      - ghshephard 11y ago
        Which brings us right back to the beginning - today, on youtube, you can for all intents and purposes stream whatever music you want, on demand (i.e. Not Internet Radio), for free with limited to no interruptions with Youtube. Is it just the case that nobody knows this, so it's not a big deal, but everyone is going to know about Apple Music?
quesera 11y ago
Absolutely true. Most indies operate on such a shoestring that a single quarter is a big deal. Total streaming revenue might realistically drop by 30-50%, assuming a large fraction of Spotify etc users cancel while Apple Music is free. Catalog sales will take a hit too, a large hit for iTunes sales. Probably less for other channels. And artists with new records coming out now will likely take the biggest hit. On the other hand, no one releases records in the summer. October begins the new indie release year, so maybe the timing is almost as good as it could be.
PopsiclePete 11y ago
I'm sorry, but if you can't survive, as a band, for 3 months by playing live gigs or temporarily getting a different job, then maybe....it was never meant to be? Don't get me wrong, I don't want to listen to Taylor Swift and Jason Derulo all day long either, but if some indie band is so obscure and hip that it can't pay the bills for 3 months....I dunno....maybe they were never that good? No band deserves some kind of regular income. Nobody does, in our society. If I listen to your stuff for 3 months, for free, and like it, why would I stop after my trial expires? Heck, with a free trial, I'm more likely to discover your hip obscure super-cool indie band and more likely to support them later.
- DanBC 11y ago
  Most bands lose money on live gigs. At least this is true in the UK.
- w4 11y ago
  > I'm sorry, but if you can't survive, as a band, for 3 months by playing live gigs or temporarily getting a different job, then maybe....it was never meant to be? I specifically mentioned that as an option - hence why this is a much larger concern for labels than artists (though I'm sure it's a concern for artists as well). Also keep in mind that a live tour takes months to pull together. Apple hasn't given artists that sort of lead time. And all of that having been said: in what other industry is it normal to say, "Well, if you can't handle a full quarter of decimated revenues dropped on your head with weeks notice it was never meant to be"? Many SMBs couldn't weather that storm. That doesn't mean they're fundamentally broken.

by w4 11y ago

dreamfactory2 11y ago

This is exactly why the arrival of mp3s was in reality hugely damaging to the independent music business and favoured the majors.

ghshephard 11y ago

How is this any different than Youtube? I was at a party last weekend, and the host had their PS3 setup to stream a youtube stream from anyone who connected via their WiFi. Basically anyone at the party connected to their Wireless Lan was instantly authenticated to add music (it was pretty slick). Everything I tried (including all the artists like Taylor Swift who had dropped spotify) had pretty much all their music there. everything seems to be there. When I asked how much this cost, given that it was also showing videos, the answer I got was, "It's all free, man!" Everyone talks about rdio, spotify, upcoming apple music, etc... But Youtube already seems to have unlimited free streaming of music + videos, with what appears to be universal selection.

plorkyeran 11y ago
Youtube pays royalties from their advertising revenue these days, and Google is shocking good at making money from advertising.
- ghshephard 11y ago
  I'll take your word for it - I don't recall a single advertisement, and I was listening as closely as I could for one. Not to say they didn't happen, but they weren't anywhere near as annoying as the spotify/pandora ones are.
  - vijayr 11y ago
    Maybe the parent is talking about banner ads on the video and not video ads?
    - ghshephard 11y ago
      Which brings us right back to the beginning - today, on youtube, you can for all intents and purposes stream whatever music you want, on demand (i.e. Not Internet Radio), for free with limited to no interruptions with Youtube. Is it just the case that nobody knows this, so it's not a big deal, but everyone is going to know about Apple Music?

quesera 11y ago

Absolutely true. Most indies operate on such a shoestring that a single quarter is a big deal. Total streaming revenue might realistically drop by 30-50%, assuming a large fraction of Spotify etc users cancel while Apple Music is free. Catalog sales will take a hit too, a large hit for iTunes sales. Probably less for other channels. And artists with new records coming out now will likely take the biggest hit. On the other hand, no one releases records in the summer. October begins the new indie release year, so maybe the timing is almost as good as it could be.

PopsiclePete 11y ago

I'm sorry, but if you can't survive, as a band, for 3 months by playing live gigs or temporarily getting a different job, then maybe....it was never meant to be? Don't get me wrong, I don't want to listen to Taylor Swift and Jason Derulo all day long either, but if some indie band is so obscure and hip that it can't pay the bills for 3 months....I dunno....maybe they were never that good? No band deserves some kind of regular income. Nobody does, in our society. If I listen to your stuff for 3 months, for free, and like it, why would I stop after my trial expires? Heck, with a free trial, I'm more likely to discover your hip obscure super-cool indie band and more likely to support them later.

DanBC 11y ago
Most bands lose money on live gigs. At least this is true in the UK.
w4 11y ago
> I'm sorry, but if you can't survive, as a band, for 3 months by playing live gigs or temporarily getting a different job, then maybe....it was never meant to be? I specifically mentioned that as an option - hence why this is a much larger concern for labels than artists (though I'm sure it's a concern for artists as well). Also keep in mind that a live tour takes months to pull together. Apple hasn't given artists that sort of lead time. And all of that having been said: in what other industry is it normal to say, "Well, if you can't handle a full quarter of decimated revenues dropped on your head with weeks notice it was never meant to be"? Many SMBs couldn't weather that storm. That doesn't mean they're fundamentally broken.