Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > News > Tech News > Apple proposing half Pandora's royalty rate for streaming

Apple proposing half Pandora's royalty rate for streaming
Thread Tools
MacNN Staff
Join Date: Jul 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 7, 2013, 02:11 PM
 
As an initial offer to a record label for a forthcoming streaming service, Apple recently proposed a royalty rate of just 6 cents per 100 songs, sources for the New York Post claim. "Apple wants a rate that is lower than Pandora's," one executive is quoted as saying. Pandora pays labels 12 cents per 100 songs, which itself is below the Copyright Royalty Board's standard 21 cents for digital-only streaming. Spotify pays 35 cents, according to the Post's sources.

Apple's lowball demands have reportedly led to rejection by multiple labels. An Apple "iRadio" service has been rumored for some time; the sources say, though, that the company was most recently hoping to launch the service alongside the iPhone 5, but couldn't secure deals in time. Apple's main negotiator for music, Eddy Cue, initially tried to secure an arrangement from Sony/ATV, but the company's resistance forced it to talk to the major labels, Universal, Sony, and Warner. "Everyone's had their initial meetings and everyone is preparing counters," one source says. It's said that Apple may be considering bundling iRadio alongside iTunes Match. Match is designed to be a convenient way of backing up a person's music library, regardless of whether content was bought on iTunes, and making it accessible on multiple devices.
     
Forum Regular
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Collinsville, IL, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 7, 2013, 03:25 PM
 
Even with paying half the royalties of Pandora the record labels would probably make more money on an Apple streaming service than other existing services. They just aren't that popular. Pandora is juggling its business model and putting caps on the vast majority of its users who are freetards with no intention of paying for the service. Just like the 99ยข model Jobs negotiated for iTunes the labels will make a bundle going with Apple.
     
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 7, 2013, 05:45 PM
 
Apple will probably get away with it - not enough it's taking 30% cut on everything Apple-related anymore, now they're the worst at short-changing artists.
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jul 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 7, 2013, 08:26 PM
 
Yes, how dare Apple only pay artists vastly more than they get from traditional music publishers, in exchange for handling everything related to distribution and hosting!

Do you seriously think the various music publishers who make up the RIAA let artists keep 70% of the money coming in, the way Apple does? If so, you're way too naive.
     
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: London, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 8, 2013, 08:08 AM
 
You might want to read up on how artists generally do under streaming schemes before claiming that Apple will be better than the existing model. Given what Apple is offering as a royalty payment compared to what Spotify *currently* offers it seems likely that musicians *will* do worse: 1) http://www.cnbc.com/id/100416172/As_Music_Streaming_Grows_Royalties_Slow_to_a_Trick le; 2) http://pitchfork.com/features/articles/8993-the-cloud/ ; 3) http://www.npr.org/blogs/therecord/2012/09/26/161758720/how-musicians-make-money-by-the-fraction-of-a-cent-on-spotify
     
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2010
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 8, 2013, 11:16 AM
 
Pandora pays ten times the rate that radio pays per listener, so even at half apple would being paying 5 time the rate of radio.
     
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 8, 2013, 11:33 AM
 
@The Vicar huh, the article itself states that other services give at least twice as much... you might want to read the article again, and a little closer this time too.
     
   
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:36 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2