Record labels are not giving up on free streaming -- but they're growing weary of its 'unlimited' nature, and want digital services to find more paying customers.
A renewed focus on the value of music comes as a transition point for the record business. Rob Wells, Universal Music Group's president of digital who brokered deals with "freemium" services like Spotify, left the company
in late February. Now the company is rethinking the value of unlimited
free streaming, according to a label source. At the same time, Apple's
upcoming subscription service, slated for a June launch according to an
industry source and media reports, will forego the freemium model for a
paid-only approach. It's an approach Beats Music co-founder Jimmy Iovine, an executive at Apple since the acquisition of Beats Electronics, has consistently favored.
Negotiatons for Apple's upcoming subscription service are
evidence labels are standing firm on pricing. Industry sources say Apple
has backed down from its effort to lower monthly pricing for its
subscription service to $7.99 from $9.99. Apple would have to absorb the
loss if it sets a price lower than the standard $9.99.
Few specifics about Apple's subscription service are known
at this time. It is widely believed that Apple will replace the Beats
Music name with the iTunes brand. Label insiders say Apple has not
revealed features or given demos. There is no indication if Apple will
integrate iTunes Radio with a subscription service. But these insiders
believe Apple is confident it can create a service that stands out from
competitors and delivers enough value that consumers will pay the full
price.
Apple is said to be talking to labels and artists about
exclusives for its upcoming subscription service. An industry source
dismisses rumors that Apple will be able to outmaneuver and outbid its
competitors on exclusives for most key releases. "Apple is one of the
biggest companies in the world. If they want exclusive content, they're
going to have to get out the checkbook."
The music industry eagerly awaits Apple's reboot of Beats
Music, and the timing couldn't be more perfect. The showdown between
Apple's pay-only business model and Spotify's freemium model could
change how people think about using free music to get paid music.
Industry sentiment about free music is years in the
making. The previous decade was marked by brutal declines in revenue
that reshaped companies -- and the entire structure of the music
business. iTunes provided a helpful transition to digital formats. Fives
years later, services like Spotify won labels' over, with a pitch to
both generate revenue and reduce piracy. Now there are dozens of other
streaming services with licensed content.
There has been a frenzy of licensing activity as labels
became more flexible in their terms with digital services. "The last two
or three years has been about stopping the [sales] decline and creating
as many platforms and as many services and opportunities to capture
money," Universal Music Group chief Lucian Grainge said last year at a Wall Street Journal conference.
Now the smoke is clearing and different attitudes are
forming. Some labels feel Spotify should have more than 15 million
subscribers, sources tell Billboard. Apple's pay-only service could be a
turning point. If Apple is successful in attracting large numbers of
subscribers without unlimited, or at least significant, free listening,
Spotify's business model could fall under more scrutiny. "Spotify is
good at giving it away for free, but it's bad at getting people to pay
for it," says an industry source.
The complaints from artists have grown louder. Artists
have been vocal about streaming services' royalties and the lack of
transparency in the licensing terms. The freemium model itself has come
under fire. Taylor Swift and Bjork have
recently expressed their unwillingness to make music available to a
subscription service's ad-supported tier. "This streaming thing just
does not feel right. I don't know why, but it just seems insane," Bjork told Fast Company last month.
Prompted by the public sparring between Taylor Swift and Spotify, Warner Music Group CEO Stephen Cooper brought up the topic
in an earnings call in December. He voiced support for ad-supported
streaming but warned that services with a "freemium" model -- the object
of Swift's scorn -- must clearly differentiate the benefits of the paid
and ad-supported tiers.
Spotify has long taken the positioon it ad-supported tier is an
effective way to acquire customers. Four in five subscribers comes from
the ad-supported service, says Jonathan Prince, Spotify's global head of communications and public policy. Indeed, Spotify's freemium approach has allowed the company to scale far better than its competitors. Second place Deezer's 6 million subscribers and 16 million monthly listeners are well behind Spotify's 15 million and 60 million, respectively. Rhapsody, which has a paid-only model, reached 2.5 million subscriber last month.
Prince also argues Spotify brings in consumers who hadn't previously paid for music. As for the worry that Spotify is eating into download sales, Prince says Spotify's internal research shows only 12% of former iTunes users use Spotify. "We're on the same page as the labels in wanting to rebuild the music industry," he says.
One option is to implement listening caps. Spotify had listening caps in place in Europe until January 2014 and
had various restrictions in place in various countries. (For example,
until March 2013 free users in the U.K. could play an individual song up
to 5 times.) Sources say labels believe listening caps would help
differentiate between free and paid services.
But labels are also realistic about the need to provide a
free service. "People don't think you can just turn it off," says a
label source. As Cooper said in December, a free tier can be an
effective conduit to subscriptions. And free streaming has undoubtedly
helped reduce the number of people that turn to illegal channels. There
is ample research -- some by Spotify -- that shows music piracy has declined in many countries.
There's also an element of geopolitics at play. A weakened
Spotify could help create a more powerful Apple subscription service.
That would remove the comfortable, valuable counterweight to Apple that
labels don't have in the digital download space. There's even some doubt
that Apple is out to beat Spotify rather than grow the music
subscription marketplace. "If they're out to kill Spotify, it's news to
us," says an industry source. "And it's the last thing we want. We want
Spotify to be a strong competitor."
No comments:
Post a Comment