Skip to main content

Amazon: the canary in the digital jukebox?

I'm not sure if my title represents the correct allusion I was trying to make.  But the gist of my thought is that this (golden?) age of unlimited digital streaming of music for $10/month may not be long for this world.

My small amount of research on the phrase "canary in the coal mine" informs me that coal miners used to bring a canary down into the mines with them.  This was before the days of ventilation and systems that told miners to get above ground because air levels were getting dangerous.  Canaries served as the early-warning system, due to their higher levels of sensitivity to particular gases present in mines.  If a canary stopped singing (to put it nicely), miners knew they best head towards daylight.  The phrase has colloquially come to mean a harbinger of what is to come.

Today, Pandora (the oft-used streaming radio service) announced that they are cancelling their annual subscriptions and raising fees across the board.  Pandora ($5/month, or free with ads) is not in the aforementioned $10/month club, because their service is more limited than the all-you-can-listen-to services like Spotify, Google Play Music, Rdio, Beats, etc.  Many of these services have their own ways of giving users a free-listen mode too, but their goal is to get paid monthly users and fast.

Pandora's raised monthly fee hits on the point that the current pricing structure of music subscription and royalties is simply not covering costs.  All of the parties fighting for this pie are currently trying to get market-share, and know that to the victor will go the spoils.

Case in point: let's look at the leader, Spotify.  In January, ReadWrite.com penned a cold shower piece to the company (and the industry), titled "Free Music Or Not, Spotify Still Has a Paid-User Problem."  The article came out around the time that Spotify announced a free plan, one that in addition to the already open access on PCs, 1) gave full features and control (with ads) to the tablet, and 2) gave similar access as #1 to mobile, but put further restrictions there by only allowing users to shuffle playlists, artists, or albums.

Why would the all access streaming leader do this?

Because, according to the article, Spotify needs to get to 40 million paid users, which is the point at which everybody - artists, company, labels, etc. - make a profit.  How many does Spotify currently have, you ask?  The article says that as of March 2013, they had 6 million paid users, and 18 million unpaid users.  So, they are 16 million users short of their paid goal, and that is including the legion of the unpaid.  By opening up mobile to a free plan, Spotify is looking to give users a no commitment taste, with the hope that they can raise the user base, and then the further hope that that user base will turn into paid subscribers.

Forty million users paying $10/month seems like a lot of commitment to me.  Anecdotally, many people are not that committed to music purchasing, especially when we have all gotten quite a run of free tasting.  The music business would probably not have taken such a hit during the digital revolution if users all along had been willing to spend the price of one album per month.

Which lastly, leads me to Amazon.  I just finished Brad Stone's "The Everything Store: Jeff Bezos and the Age of Amazon", and am utterly amazed by what the company has been able to accomplish under the stewardship of the (at times Steve Jobs-like) Bezos.  According to reports, Amazon is getting into the music-streaming business now.  The news also highlights the fact that Amazon will reportedly also have some kind of listening limits on their music service, so that you can freely listen to music like some of the other services, but will be driven ultimately to purchasing MP3s after exhausting the limit.  The streaming service will be built in as a new perk to Amazon Prime members.  It could be one of the reasons that Prime's price was just raised $20/annually.

The big question: Why is Amazon, the king of accepting financial losses in pursuit of market-share in seemingly all of their endeavors, not offering an all-you-can-eat music plan with Prime?

Could it mean that the canary has stopped singing?  Are the financials of going all-in just not worth it?

Or, does Amazon, like Apple, have too much stock built up in the selling of digital products a la carte?

I have often wondered why streaming music services went the way they did, giving away everything right away.  Couldn't they have tried to go with a Netflix-like approach, where, like TV shows, you have the availability of back catalogs on demand.  Newer seasons eventually get there, but are availabie immediately by purchasing them outright on services like iTunes, Amazon instant video, Google Play, etc.  Seems to me to be a fair bargain.  Maybe music needs to head that way, or towards what is being discussed with Amazon, so that the system can work for everybody.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Fethead vs. Cloudlifter & My Podcast Equipment

The Triton Audio Fethead and Cloudlifter are two preamp devices that come up a lot for podcasters searching for the best sound.

One reason is that many podcasters looking for a high-end microphone at a lower budget opt for the Shure SM7B, like me!  This is a great microphone, but has a very low base output (more on this later).  Another reason is that these preamp devices allow you to not go pedal-to-the-metal with your mixer or digital recorders' onboard preamps, which typically add a lot of noise the more you push to maximum.

I am no audio engineering expert, but in my zeal to launch the best podcast that I possibly can, I have learned a lot about how you create good sound and all the tricks that go into doing it at a somewhat modest price.

At heart, what the Fethead and Cloudlifter each do is add about 20-25 decibels of "clean gain" to your microphone's audio signal, before that signal even touches your mixer or digital recorder.  Again, they each add only pure, c…

Jane Gagliardo, Sherry Blackman, Patrick Reilly, Melany McQueeny

Jane Gagliardo, Sherry Blackman, and Patrick Reilly join Melany and Matt for a longform discussion on their riveting book, "Call to Witness: One woman’s battle with disability, discrimination and a pharmaceutical powerhouse."

Get Call to Witness on Amazon!

Jane Gagliardo was a throwaway employee, fired after working nearly a decade for this leading vaccine maker when her disability surfaced. Fearless and impassioned, her story will leave readers empowered to stand up for themselves, even if it means standing alone. This 2002 landmark case changed the law and challenges the way corporations do business today. This riveting dramatic account sheds fascinating insight into the world of vaccine production, both past and present, that will have every reader searching through their immunization record—this corporation literally runs in the veins of millions of Americans.
A portion of the proceeds from the book go to Multiple Sclerosis research.

Check out this episode!

Also find the…

Anthony Cumia has 40,000 Subscribers

This according to a new feature on Anthony Cumia - formerly of the Opie & Anthony Show - in Streaming Media Magazine and on StreamingMedia.com.  Cumia has a video and audio podcast available to subscribers through his Website, AnthonyCumia.com.

The monthly subscription for the content service is $6.95.  By my own math, this means Cumia is bringing in about $278,000 per month, or roughly $3.3 million per year.

As a subscriber, you are offered discounts for locking in your subscription for six months ($32.95) or a year ($59.95).

That is not a bad living as your own boss.

There is no doubt that the workload is greater starting up his own endeavor and without the backing of a large radio conglomerate.  He apparently made about $3 million per year doing his SiriusXM radio show.

The revenue he is bringing in now must also go towards paying staff, ongoing infrastructure and hosting costs, and any promotional aspects he engages in.  Still, he does not leave his home and appears to be d…