Apple urging record labels to reduce streaming rates, wants to offer Beats Music for $5 per month

Shawn Knight

Posts: 15,253   +192
Staff member

apple beats music itunes music price cut beats itunes radio streaming music

As streaming music becomes even more mainstream, providers in a crowded market are looking for new ways to lure paying customers. We’re at a point now where all of the major players have deals with all of the major record labels and features like playlists, recommendations and offline listening are common.

Aside from offering high-quality lossless streaming (something that’s still a niche market), the one area left for major players to compete with each other on is pricing.

We’ve seen it just earlier today with Spotify’s announcement of a new Family plan and now we’re hearing rumors that Apple wants to slash the price of its recently-acquire Beats Music service.

apple beats music itunes music price cut beats itunes radio streaming music

According to a report from Re/code, Apple has been pushing music labels to offer price cuts which would then be passed along to the consumer. The Cupertino-based company reportedly wants to relaunch the subscription service sometime next year at price point of just $5 per month – half of what it costs today.

People familiar with Apple’s pitch to record labels tell it like this: the top iTunes buyers spend roughly $60 a year on downloaded music, which comes out to $5 each month. If subscription services were able to match that price, downloaders would be tempted to switch to a streaming model that would generate the same amount of money for music labels.

Whether or not Apple will be able to talk industry executives down that much remains to be seen. Perhaps somewhere in the middle might be a more realistic goal.

Permalink to story.

 
Normally, I applaud efforts to make things cheaper for consumers, but the only people who will profit from this are Apple and the music industry. The Artists making the music won't get more than a few pennies a year, which is plain sad.

Of course, we all know Apple hippies only listen to "Sweater Weather" on repeat while wearing turtlenecks in a coffee shop, so maybe it won't matter. :p (I kid, I kid...)
 
Musicians need to accept that their hobby isn't worth what it once was. I understand making music take a lot of time and effort, but it's like they all expect to just make a huge living just from their hobby. They need to do it as a service of mankind rather than just obtaining currency.
 
Holotus - I absolutely disagree with your comment. Let's say I started a company and advertised your talent/abilities (whatever they are) to others. Customers came and said "Yes, I would like that!". Then, you do ALL of the work, but I take all of the money from your work, and give none (or may 1/100,000th) of it back to you. Then, when you complain that you did all of the work and received nothing in compensation, I say "Hey, it's just a little talent and should be a public service. You should just think of it that way, and be happy. Money is for losers." That is what music services and music labels have done to artists.

Would you be happy with that? Especially knowing you spent thousand of dollars on your own gear, and literally years of your life perfecting your craft and abilities, only to have someone else steal your compensation for it? Most musicians play in local bands, and do so for the love of performing, and expect little in return, but there are many artists who treat it as a professional service, and rightly so. If someone thinks that entertainment is not a service that deserves compensation, then they have all the wrong ideas about what they are "owed", versus what they are "allowed". Nobody is owed entertainment.
 
Back