> Spotify vs Apple Music – no clear winner.
When Apple on on Thursday unveiled its long talked about music service Music was the usual over the words that the service will change the way you listen to music forever. Frequently, as it has become somewhat standard in streaming the turn – when Spotify recently showed off its new version was even the whole life would change.
Something revolutionary was it is understood not as the bedagade music mogul Jimmy Iovine had the honor to rattle out the details about. This does not mean that Apple has taken in from the toes – Apple Music brings together all conceivable functions in one and the same music service that frankly seems rather overloaded. Purchased music in iTunes, streaming, a new radio channel and a social network for artists. All in.
I have no idea whether the service is better or worse than what Spotify offers, we must come back to, but it is possible to see both headaches and opportunities from Spotify’s perspective.
The biggest headache is Apple’s huge user base of 330 million people. Apple Music will be preinstalled on the new iPhone, and considering how the phones operate flights from store shelves teaches it to go quickly for Apple to become the largest in the market, provided that the service is not Apple Maps lousy.
It is certainly no guarantor of success to send the services in your phone, see the Google Music, which is hardly a smash hit, but there is still enough Apple fans munching up everything Tim Cook gives them and asking for more.
Another headache, that is not broken out yet, is if Apple Music’s streaming offer will cover the entire iTunes catalog, which is bigger and has more great artists of the grumpy Beatles-type than the other streaming services. We are not there today, but I understand that it is Apple’s intentions.
What does not is a headache, I think, is Apple’s seemingly close love for the music industry, with artists to cure playlists and communicate with fans via social network Ping, sorry, Connect. Where is Spotify in the driver’s seat, for several reasons.
First, I think not to payments to artists from the music streaming will be significantly higher than from Spotify. It is already established that the major bottleneck, or the black hole, lies with the record companies. This is where the bulk of the money to the performers disappear, more and more are beginning to realize.
First, it seems that Apple as part of its increasingly clear Integrity safeguarding strategy will not offer artists to take part in detailed audience data. I think that is shooting itself in the foot sharply.
Data is, if is not now so in the future, as important to artists as to which media companies anywhere. Was consumed the contents? By whom? What liked? What is unpopular? It is the foundation for building content business online today.
Spotify offers here an advanced analysis tools, for free, to artists and their managers. A tool, Next Big Sound, which in itself was purchased by Spotify’s American competitor Pandora just a few weeks ago, but that if it is taken out of Spotify’s happening guaranteed to be replaced with something else.
The advantage of to get the artists involved in the analysis of listening is that the artists would be more likely themselves to become involved in the dissemination of their material. I believe this will be a key for Spotify to come, getting the artists to share their songs on Twitter, Facebook and other social media.
For the Spotify need is more users. It is basically the only Spotify needs. Talking about Spotify must be profitable, it is the black that is the target, I do not buy. No one believes well that the billions invested in Spotify will be refunded by return of profits?
No, everything Spotify makes is about building user base. “Free” variant of Spotify, advertising, does not give much money, but builds the user base. New features for everyday listeners and runners based user base.
Apple Music will of course make it more difficult for Spotify to continue to grow at the same rapid pace, not least because Apple for the first time takes a service to Android. But for Daniel Ek and his investors, it is sufficient to grow although at a slightly slower Mak. It is enough to take the company to the stock market and allow investors to cash in.
Otherwise remains the to be acquired. Daniel Ek swayed a little on the answer when DN recently asked him if Apple could be a potential buyer. And Apple is not, of course, given yesterday’s launch.
However, there is another IT giant who lack their own successful music service, and increasingly opens wallet for young companies that can provide punch and cred to the product portfolio.
Yep, Microsoft. Have Satya Nadella called Daniel Ek yet?
No comments:
Post a Comment