Ondrej Holzman Apple made a big and almost unprecedented turn at the end of the weekend. The Californian company responded in a flash to an open letter from Taylor Swift, which complained that no royalties would be paid to artists during Apple Music's three-month trial period. Eddy Cue, who is in charge of the new music streaming service, announced that Apple will pay for the first three months as well.
At the same time, literally a few hours ago, it seemed that the situation was clear: Apple will not collect any fees from users during the first three months, and will not pay a share of the profits (which logically will not arise) to the artists. To them everything would follow compensated with a slightly higher share, than they offer competing services, even if it were projected in 8 long years.
The words of the American singer Taylor Swift, who called Apple's tactics "shocking", but had extraordinary power. Senior Vice President of Internet Services Eddy Cue personally called Taylor Swift just hours after the letter was published to inform her that Apple will eventually pay artists during the free trial.
#AppleMusic will pay artist for streaming, even during customer's free trial period
- Eddy Cue (@cue) June 22, 2015
Eddy Cue announced the change of plan on Twitter and subsequently pro BuzzFeed he revealed, that artists will be paid based on the number of streams, but declined to say what the rate would be. But it will certainly be lower amounts than the artists will subsequently receive based on the more than 70% share that Apple has prepared for them. In particular, independent artists protested against zero remuneration, although not directly and publicly, but rather during negotiations with Apple. It's not yet clear who he'll have on board when his new music service launches on June 30, but the latest change in tactics could change things. Eddy Cue revealed that Apple has been closely following the live discussion for the past week and finally decided to respond after Taylor Swift announced why she would not even provide Apple Music with her latest and hugely successful album 1989. “We want artists to be paid for their work , and we listen to them, whether it's Taylor or independent artists,” Cue stated.
I am elated and relieved. Thank you for your words of support today. They listened to us. — Taylor Swift (@taylorswift13) June 22, 2015
Taylor Swift even immediately phoned Eddy Cue his decision. "She was thrilled," he revealed. "I am happy and relieved. Thank you for your support today. They heard us," Taylor Swift herself also confirmed her feelings on Twitter. However, that still doesn't mean that Apple Music will get her complete discography including 1989; the Californian company continues to negotiate with the popular singer.
In any case, this is a completely unexpected and unprecedented action on the part of Apple. Eddy Cue announced a fundamental change in the upcoming service on the social network, no press statements were prepared, even Taylor Swift did not know about it in advance, and apparently everything happened mainly between Eddy Cue and Apple CEO Tim Cook.
"It's something we've been working on together. In the end, we both wanted to change it," stated pro Re / code Eddy Cue that he discussed the change of plan with his boss. At the same time, Eddy Cue revealed that he has not yet spoken to any other artists, publishers or recording studios besides Taylor Swift, so it is not clear how the community will react to the changes.
Cool Taylor can go back to bathing in $$$
That will probably meet the whole of Apple in the same pool.
Anyway, brilliantly thought out promo... it all turns out well in the end. :)
Well, suddenly it works.
Look at the article we don't want free iPhones and the comments you wrote about it... Taylor is greedy, but no more so than Apple... I use it because it's quality, but their pricing policy and speculation is probably no longer possible... Taylor was absolutely right, and when they started to burn under their feet, I'm already calling him :D I don't know how long I'll continue to rob us like this, but I personally don't like it anymore... Personally, I have a job and a household built on it, but what's a lot, that it's a lot... I'm curious how much the products will cost in 5-6 years... And accessories for them especially... Only sick people subscribe to apple music... and movies from them, I won't even say that... probably just a fanatic
So far, it seems to me that Apple can really afford everything. The competition does not push him anywhere. I myself own a Note 3 and I'm satisfied, but the bazmeks that are often sold with Android are often really laughable. I myself have not had Windows on my computer for about 5 years. Ubuntu suits me. So far, I don't miss the absence of professional programs for graphics and perhaps sound. However, if I needed a professional program, I would have to go for a Mac, because I really hate Windows. XP after a month slowed down so that the computer took several minutes to start. I'm not talking about vistas. They started in a matter of minutes from a clean installation. Sevens the same. Eights are not worth talking about. The subway is horrible, non-ergonomic, unsuitable for professional work. I've had Win 3 installed for about 10 days now. Much better than 8.1, but still slow. Start is several times longer compared to Ubuntu. So in the end the expensive Mac is still the best choice and as a pro we will all meet at it. And once you buy a Mac, iPhone and iPad are the only reasonable choices. So it's really hard.
"I don't know how long I will continue to rob us like this..." - No one is forcing anyone to buy Apple products. So I would probably tone it down a lot with the robbing. That's like you claiming that when you go to buy a tatranka, that its manufacturer is robbing you, because the production price of the tatranka is x and the selling price is y. Everyone who produces something or provides a service and sells it gives their margin. Apple is also not in business for entertainment for 0, but for money. Just like everyone who runs a business :-)
Yes, yes, Karl, you're right...But still, if the cost of making a watch with advertising and the like is 2 crowns, then a watch won't cost 120 crowns...See the example of the Apple Watch, and quite the opposite, I think what happened now and what Taylor Swift did , that he will open their eyes and that the path is not just "we want everything for free, but we will sell as we decide and you will be quiet and happy to be part of us" we will see that Apple has recently forgotten that "our customer, our master" so to your comment
I don't agree. If the company that sells the tatranka has an established brand and it sells for that price, it will sell it for 120. She had to spend some money on how the tatranka will taste, which is not included in the 2 KC per production. If you had the company for those tatrankas, how much would you sell them for? If people were buying them for 120, would you go for 80? There could be a danger that in 80 it would no longer look like a "luxury" Tatranka and sales would paradoxically decrease... It's not that simple and everyone is trying to make as much money as possible in the finale.
He didn't go, but I wouldn't go 130-140-150-160 every year, and he tried to "sell" xy things around... I say again, I'm an Apple fan and user, but I think you need to open your eyes and not look at what Apple is doing everything is correct...everyone has their mistake
I think that every company has the right to its own pricing, unless the market in which it produces or offers a service is somehow regulated. Apple is lucky that the consumer electronics market has no boundaries, so it sets the price it needs. I agree with Jadro that if Apple lowered the prices, its products would no longer be exclusive. Although lately I've noticed that the iPhone has some problems and I use it mainly on Instagram :D Apple knows very well that by raising the price it will annoy a few of its customers, but those few, even if they were thousands or tens of thousands, for millions of Apple users still just a drop in the bucket :-) in the final stage, different products and prices suit different markets and vice versa, so it's still worth it for them to do it their way :-) anyway, I don't want to argue here, I just wanted to say that they are not stealing people :-) just make something you want and sacrifice your money for it, which they earn, nothing more nothing less :-) the only one who robs people is the state :-) it still makes 21% on your iPhone here in the Czech Republic margin (alias VAT) :-)
Of course, I don't want to argue either, but I think that their products are not so perfected every year that the price keeps going up... of course it depends on a lot of things around and around, but I'm probably just too stubborn, but their margins are excessive in my opinion ! that's just my opinion.
Disagreement.
That development costs something. That thinking costs something.
Being original and innovative costs something.
That's just the way it is.
I borrowed an ASUS laptop for a while for 25k and I can tell you,
that it's heaven and bagpipes. 200% in favor of Apple.
The price is adequate for the quality, regardless of the fact that the software is always up-to-date and always free!
There's no point in churning out copies without order and stock and outrunning the price.
Look at Nokia or Windows…
Stando, you're certainly right, yes... I have an iMac, a Mac Pro, and of course, if I compare it with an Asus or Lenovo that my colleagues have at work, it's done... But I'm already bothered by their thinking, see the example of the Watch straps, or that Siri hasn't been able to learn Czech or Slovak for x years, I personally don't have a problem with English...Also, the start of sales in our regions and similar...I keep reading articles about how they are the most valuable, that they have the most cash, but some things really bother me...Answers to the tip , so don't buy it if you don't have it, or something like that... I'm not saying that I don't have it, I'm saying that their margins are already in the sky somewhere.
And imagine what the margins are in the food and textile industry... In contrast, Apple's margins are ridiculous :)
Apple has nothing to thank for. They simply tried to use the dominant position and o.ebat of the artist as much as possible and best not to invest a single dollar in the launch of a new service (I don't really consider hiring three DJs and a new software version to be an investment) and it didn't work out. Apple behaves like any "nasty" profit-maximizing corporation. Strangely enough, what is unforgivable for Microsoft has been passed by Apple for a long time (see the threat to some labels and artists that if they don't sign up for 3 months for free, they will remove their albums from sale in iTunes). It's similar to if Walmart came to Europe and wanted suppliers for half the price of goods for the first month, otherwise they will drop them. Just suck.
Under pressure, they put it in reverse and after all they release a few dollars, which they then quickly take back from the subscription, but I don't know why to be grateful for it and thank them graciously. They don't give the trial period out of love for people, but for future profits, just like the test drive is for selling the car and not as a gift for the customer.
I couldn't have written it better myself... I personally like them very much, i.e. their products, but you don't need to look at it with the eyes of a fanatic of the brand, but if you think about their logic, sometimes I feel like throwing away the iPhone and everything around …Dollars have rubberized their brains…
Apple could have just left it as it was.
After all, the point is to present the service and attract as many listeners and potential payers as possible.
Who will profit from this service in the long term are artists,
they should be happy that the service exists, and that someone invented it and it reaches so many millions of people.
After the demise of the CD and the rise of piracy, this is salvation for artists.
Well, now if they would start listening ... to their customers, e.g.
Bugs in OS X and iOS. They stopped disrupting pro apps, etc., etc.
Here's making a case for one! singers. OMG.
Taylor ♥
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6Ikw9SCY0k
Well, good day
Didn't it hit you that this is PR for Apple and popular singers for new services to attract even more people? They have to be talked about, you know?! Apple never broadcasts tons of commercials, it advertises itself smartly and this is one of the modern, contemporary ways to "hook" people.