Ondrej Holzman Apparently, Apple does is going to show its new music service in June based on Beats Music, and top executives of the Californian company are using the most aggressive tactics when negotiating terms with publishers and other interested parties. Now, Apple is said to have one main goal: to cancel the free version of Spotify, the biggest potential rival of its new service.
According to the information The Verge Apple is trying convince major music publishers to end contracts with streaming services like Spotify that allow users to play music for free, albeit with advertising. For Apple, the cancellation of free services would mean a significant relief when entering an already established market where, in addition to Spotify, Rdio or Google also operate.
Aggressive negotiations are also being monitored by the US Department of Justice, which has already questioned top representatives of the music industry about Apple's tactics and its behavior in the industry. The Californian company is aware of its very strong position in the world of music, and therefore its pressures to abolish free streaming cannot be taken lightly.
Today, 60 million people use Spotify, but only 15 million pay for the service. So when Apple comes up with a paid service, it will be difficult to persuade tens of millions of people to switch to it, when the competition does not have to pay anything. Apple certainly plans to invest heavily in exclusive content, but that may not be enough. Decisive will be the price, which in Cupertino they know.
Apple had already followed suit The Verge also to offer Universal Music Group to pay the royalties it receives from Google to prevent uploading of its songs to YouTube. If Apple really manages to wipe out the free competition before the launch of its new streaming service, it could be the deciding factor in its eventual success.
Unreal! Apple is digging its own grave!
I don't see why Apple should be digging its own grave by blocking the competition and thereby increasing potential profits.
Maybe by not paying "Think different" anymore?
because it changes people's view of themselves
apple was a company that went its own way, now it's a company that has endless resources and instead of innovating, it's going to screw up 45 million users of a flooded service for further profit
http://bgr.com/2015/05/04/apple-beats-music-vs-spotify-free-tier/
I don't need to elaborate, this article did it for me later
Apple knows it's late and doesn't have much to offer, so at least it's hurting others. Quite sad where they moved from the position of innovator.
This is about the whole article (I am not the author, but I fully agree):
very interesting to see how this story morphs as it moves from blog to blog. The original story — on Re/code, not the Verge — is pretty explicit that the impetus is coming from the major labels, not Apple. In fact, Universal is in the process of renegotiating its terms with Spotify — totally independent of anything Apple wants or does — and is looking to change the "freemium" model.
Also, the "target" is not simply "free music streaming" as this article suggests, but free on-demand streaming (the ability to select specifically what you want to hear when you want). For some reason, this article mentions Pandora (neither Re/code nor Verge does), which doesn't have an on-demand service option at all, free or paid. Who decided to just drop that name in there? Why?
Can I ask for the source? I tried to find the article, but Google is silent. Thanks.
I have a Spotify Premium subscription and use Apple products. Theoretical
I might even have a reason to switch to beatsmusic. But as I read this, it is being done
I'm just sick of Apple and I'll be their new service in principle
boycott.
So, if someone wanted the original, at that time already significantly distorted, article from Re/code.
http://recode.net/2015/03/06/big-music-labels-want-to-make-free-music-hard-to-get-and-apple-says-theyre-right/
I wonder why everyone is demonizing Apple?? Where has objective journalism gone???
Thanks for the link. The problem is that the Verge doesn't link to Re/code at all, because it refers to its sources and presents it a little differently. But I'm looking into the situation and we'll see where the truth emerges.
Thank you for your response Mr. Holzman, I appreciate this approach. I'm curious about the jump.
I wonder if the closure of Grooveshark is related to this... If Apple has a hand in it