Slashdot Mirror


Spotify Raises $526 Million As Apple Charges Into Streaming

An anonymous reader writes: Spotify has raised an enormous $526 million in funding to fight off Apple's new Apple Music subscription service. As part of the funding round, European carrier TeliaSonera is responsible for $115 million. The music service now has 20 million paying subscribers and 75 million monthly active users, doubling the subscriber base since May of 2014. The LA Times reports: "U.S. companies participating in the Spotify funding include Halcyon Asset Management, GSV Capital, D.E. Shaw & Co., Technology Crossover Ventures, Northzone and P. Schoenfeld Asset Management, said the person familiar with the matter, who was not authorized to comment publicly. British investment firms Baillie Gifford, Lansdowne Partners and Rinkelberg Capital, along with Canadian hedge funds Senvest Capital and Discovery Capital Management also took part. In a statement disclosing its investment, TeliaSonera said it would work with Spotify to come up with innovations in media distribution, customer insights, data analytics and advertising."

52 of 72 comments (clear)

  1. 256 Million? by TFlan91 · · Score: 1

    Techies trying to be techy with money raising?

    1. Re:256 Million? by zlives · · Score: 1

      512 M + error correction

    2. Re:256 Million? by dotancohen · · Score: 1

      Techies trying to be techy with money raising?

      I've got a better solution. If Spotify could take care of this:

      Spotify is currently not available in your country.

      ...then they wouldn't need to "raise" money, I would give it to them voluntarily.

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
  2. 526 Million? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Dyslexics trying to be dyslexy with article reading?

    1. Re:526 Million? by TFlan91 · · Score: 1

      HA!

      Totally read it as 256.

  3. competition is good but where does the money go? by danomatika · · Score: 1

    I don't stream music except via internet radio, but I can see this as a good sign for upcoming competition. What I don't see will be any change for the small working musician in the pie. These are services to provide data and harvest data from users, not benevolent online record stores. I also like how Apple is reinventing Shoutcast but getting people to pay for it.

    No thanks guys. Long live freeform, listener supported WFMU.

  4. Re:competition is good but where does the money go by alen · · Score: 1

    you want money you have to play live. the era of living off royalties, reselling your music in new formats and greatest hits collections is over

  5. Hasn't apple heard of pandora? by Rooked_One · · Score: 1

    I really don't have much else to say....

    1. Re:Hasn't apple heard of pandora? by gnupun · · Score: 1

      Pandora = internet radio
      Apple music = spotify = you rent and play whatever songs you want.

    2. Re:Hasn't apple heard of pandora? by abhi_beckert · · Score: 1

      Pandora = internet radio
      Apple music = spotify = you rent and play whatever songs you want.

      No. Apple music is a hybrid of four things:

        1. rent/play whatever you want (like spotify
        2. purchase whatever you want (like old school iTunes)
        3. internet radio with an algorithmic dj (like pandora)
        4. internet radio with a human dj (like old school radio)

      It costs $10/month for the first item, $1 per song for the second one, and items 3 and 4 are free.

    3. Re:Hasn't apple heard of pandora? by gnupun · · Score: 1

      1. rent/play whatever you want (like spotify
      2. purchase whatever you want (like old school iTunes)

      Isn't (2) a waste of money if you already pay for (1)? It's like paying twice for the same song unless you plan to discontinue using Apple Music in the near future.

  6. So by cdrudge · · Score: 1

    Spotify raises $526m. Apple as of earlier this year had $178b in cash reserves. Now obviously Apple isn't going to spend all it's reserves, but you're going to need a lot more than that money to win a fight against Apple.

    1. Re:So by Keruo · · Score: 1

      Well, spotify works on android, windows phone, iphone, and has browser-based client too.
      They also provide sdk for subscribers so you can write your own player if you want.

      Itunes, it's probably one of the worst applications I've used. Platform support? One, more perhaps later..
      Sdk so you can write your owwn app? Yeah no.
      From technical standpoint, apple is hopelessly late to the game.
      They could compete by undercutting pricing but this is apple we're talking about, profit before anything else.

      I think I'll keep my spotify subscription for now.

      --
      There are no atheists when recovering from tape backup.
    2. Re:So by monkeyxpress · · Score: 2

      I agree with all your points, but the big thing Apple has is that they will effectively be pushing this service to every iOS user, and after the free subscription period it is a simple 'buy' click and you're signed up. I think the lack of friction is going to get them a lot of customers very quickly.

      As to whether they can compete on Android that will be very interesting. I think it will be hard for them as Android people (speaking anecdotally) can be quite polarised against Apple. This is probably the main reason they are doing the radio station stuff and poaching the top DJs. I'm not sure about that strategy though, we will probably have to wait for the first couple of Apple Watch results to see whether this post Jobs technique of buying coolness is going to work.

      I imagine Spotify figure that if they do a surge now and try to match or beat Apple on ancillary services they may very well be able to keep them off Android. Anyway, hopefully the consumer wins out of all this and both companies up their game.

    3. Re:So by adolf · · Score: 1

      Spotify also works on the PS3. And Sonos. And on the $99 Android tablets that everyone got their kids a few years ago that were lousy for playing games, which are generally findable for free at this point, and often include an HDMI output (so the crappy built-in DACs aren't an issue).

    4. Re:So by grahamsz · · Score: 1

      Well it's hard to make it use standard os widgets and also be cross platform.

      Spotify should be applauded for making a first class linux app. It really has almost every feature that the windows or mac apps have (even if that does leave it rather bloated)

    5. Re:So by jopsen · · Score: 1

      Well it's hard to make it use standard os widgets and also be cross platform.

      last.fm did a great job half a decade ago using qt, they were multi platform with a decent app, having a somewhat native feeling everywhere.
      It's not hard, it's more that everybody wants their app to special (it's particularly bad with commercial apps, and music related apps in general).
      AmaroK didn't have success because it had a ton of unique features, but because they made a music player that wasn't designed for kids. Just think of winamp, designing a music player to look like an actual physical music player, it was awful. (IMO; I know others love it)

      Spotify should be applauded for making a first class linux app. It really has almost every feature that the windows or mac apps have (even if that does leave it rather bloated)

      Web player is better than the linux client...

    6. Re:So by Altus · · Score: 1

      Thing is. Apple doesn't care. This service can loose money and as long as it makes the iPhone more attractive to potential buyers it is worth it to them. Same with the new news app. I'm honestly shocked they didn't make the streaming service cheaper.

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    7. Re:So by Wycliffe · · Score: 1

      From technical standpoint, apple is hopelessly late to the game.

      Sure, they have clients on a bunch of devices but spotify is still sorely lacking in many areas mostly which includes actually listening to their customers. Take explicit lyrics. Despite years of requests, they refuse to put a explicit filter which effectively excludes a huge chunk of family friendly and business friendly environments. To make matters worse, they can't even hit the other end of the market where a quick google search shows a large group of people who WANT to listen to explicit lyrics getting annoyed that it plays the clean version instead. A quality service in just this one area could steal a good chunk of market share from both ends of spotify's base as most people either want to listen to explicit, don't want to, or are not allowed to because they are at work, etc...

    8. Re:So by dj245 · · Score: 1

      Thing is. Apple doesn't care. This service can loose money and as long as it makes the iPhone more attractive to potential buyers it is worth it to them. Same with the new news app. I'm honestly shocked they didn't make the streaming service cheaper.

      Why would they make it cheaper? They can sell expensive razor blade handles AND expensive razor blades.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
  7. Re:What are you going to do with all this cash? by allquixotic · · Score: 2

    They're going to pay off the music cartels to convince them to give Spotify a few more months of life before they cave in or get bought out, of course.

    Half a billion dollars will satisfy the RIAA's greed for about 6 months.

  8. Too late to entry by buk110 · · Score: 1

    I'm trying to figure out the benefits here. I have amazon prime so I get free music already. Sure I can't listen to the white album at work, but I get the majority of what I want. So for them to enter the market they need to do it 2x as good as the next guy or at 1/2 the price. I don't see either happening

    1. Re:Too late to entry by JazzLad · · Score: 1

      Duhno about buk above, but I got my Prime account free (just for 1 year & I prolly won't pay for it when it runs out, but I have it & didn't pay for it).

      --
      "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
    2. Re:Too late to entry by OakDragon · · Score: 1

      I have amazon prime

      I get free music already.

      I don't think you understand what "free" means.

      Perhaps they live in a civilized country where the universal human right to free music is recognized, and the government picks up the tab.

    3. Re:Too late to entry by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      I'm trying to figure out the benefits here. I have amazon prime so I get free music already. Sure I can't listen to the white album at work...

      Why can't you? You don't even need Prime.
      They have a web based player for songs in your library of purchased MP3 -- so if you bought the White Album in that format you could.

  9. Do one thing and do it well by omems · · Score: 1

    They could use some help on metrics. I use the free (ad-supported) version, and despite a pretty clear avoidance of Pop/Hip-hop or Rap, almost all of the external ads (ie not for upgrading to "premium") are for artists solidly in those genres. It wouldn't take a genius piece of software to make some attempt at focusing the ads. Likewise, use my "skip" history in the rare cases that I do try one of their premade (sorry, "curated") playlists--pretty much entirely those genres.

    Likewise, stop fucking up the interface!! (play queue, 3rd party integration, etc)

    Having seen the terms in Sony's contract, I don't envy their position--they'll likely burn through that cash pretty quick. But due to their poor software implementation, it's hard for me to feel bad for them.

  10. Plex Media Server by xeoron · · Score: 1

    Roll your own music service to any of your devices using the media you already own! No monthly fees, no features always being added, invite family/friends, and you control the data!

    1. Re:Plex Media Server by xeoron · · Score: 1

      *no=more

  11. Re:competition is good but where does the money go by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

    My brother is in an indie band that played rockfest kc this year {about 55k people attended} and toped at 41 on cmj chart. The money is in merchandising not digital sales or live events {although a lot of merch is sold at live events}. They sound successful but honestly can't afford to quit their day jobs.

     

  12. Live365.. by wolverine1999 · · Score: 1

    Is Live365 dead after Pandora, Spotify, Apple streaming?
    Just wondering if it makes any more sense to broadcast on Live365... I'm guessing not anymore

  13. That's great ... by Egg+Sniper · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ... perhaps now they can hire at least one person to work on the many long-standing issues with their interface. It shouldn't be too difficult; media players all the way back to the original Winamp had features that Spotify is still lacking.

  14. Apple wants to kill all free music streaming. by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1
    1. Re:Apple wants to kill all free music streaming. by macs4all · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Apple wants all the big music publishers to cease allowing any free streaming of music. Apple pushing music labels to kill free Spotify streaming ahead of Beats relaunch Why Apple wants to end the era of free music streaming

      And again, like I asked (and was not answered) in the other thread in which you posted this screed yesterday:

      Citation, please; or STFU, hater.

      And no, a single blog quoting "multiple [unnamed] sources" doesn't count as a "citation". Nor does another article that quotes the blog that quotes "multiple sources". Someone has to actually stand up and say "Yes, I saw this, I heard this." Unnamed sources don't cut it. Especially when the Business Insider article you proffered seems to say that multiple entities from mulitple related angles (labels, artists, etc) are on the "No Free Streaming" bandwagon; but it is clear that "The Verge" is the one-and-only-source that is saying that Apple is actively pushing that agenda.

    2. Re:Apple wants to kill all free music streaming. by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      I sort of suspect that's where things will have to go anyway. Spotify is operating at a loss and "we'll make it up on volume" is one of the oldest lines in the book.
      They either will have to drop the free tier entirely or restrict it to the point most people don't really want it unless they want to become another brand for the .com bust books.

    3. Re:Apple wants to kill all free music streaming. by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      You could ask your boss, but you're probably under NDA.

    4. Re:Apple wants to kill all free music streaming. by macs4all · · Score: 1

      You could ask your boss, but you're probably under NDA.

      For what? I write Windows apps for a living nowadays. Used to do embedded development for decades. Whole embedded Dev. World sucks ass now. Never have done Mac or iOS development professionally.

  15. Re:Are we caring? by OakDragon · · Score: 1

    Hah, suckers! I listen to Grooveshark!

  16. Re:Am not really impressed either... by rogoshen1 · · Score: 1

    well you can download tracks for offline listening (i do this on my cell phone for conserving bandwidth)

    You can also use audacity to make mp3's out of what you're listening to. But I somehow doubt spotify would approve of that use case.

  17. Re:competition is good but where does the money go by GNious · · Score: 1

    Merchandizing being the place bands get their money, has been true for as long as I can remember - Tours and live-gigs are simply a way to bring the merchandize to the buyers.

  18. Re:competition is good but where does the money go by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

    Unless you have the power of commercial radio behind you and merchandise in every mall and record store, chances are your not making squat.

  19. Re:Better models by Sloppy · · Score: 1

    "They" need it? The musicians who want it, already have it. They'll sell you music. Buy it from them.

    And if you simply must stream it, instead of playing it from local storage, then stream it from your file server.

    Don't have a file server? Bad nerd!

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  20. Spotify is losing money at its current streaming p by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    ... while at the same time giving zero to artists, but intends to make it up on volume. Another $526 million from investors will enable it to build out still more volume while offering even less to artists. Why doesn't it just buy tulip futures on margin and have done with it?

  21. Re:competition is good but where does the money go by bitingduck · · Score: 1

    you want money you have to play live. the era of living off royalties, reselling your music in new formats and greatest hits collections is over

    That era never existed for most artists, even large, well known ones. The money has always been in live shows, merch, and more recently licensing.

  22. Re:What are you going to do with all this cash? by gnupun · · Score: 1

    Don't forget royalties to copyright holders/labels (although not necessarily artists) -- that's the biggest chunk of expenditure.

  23. What's spotify? by PyroGX · · Score: 1

    What's spotify?

  24. Re:competition is good but where does the money go by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

    Is this a bad thing? I mean I hear musicians complain all the time about not making enough money, but what is the appropriate amount of income for someone effectively doing their hobby part-time?

  25. Re:competition is good but where does the money go by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

    That would be the part you didn't understand, music isn't a hobby for a recording artist. What you have are indie artists putting in full time hours plus working a regular full time job, sometimes their regular job is related to music but most of them just have regular jobs. They travel and sometimes a show doesn't even cover their costs even though there are 1k people attending.

  26. Re:competition is good but where does the money go by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

    Records are usually sold as a collectors item they can be very expensive to have cut, my brother is trying to find a good supplier that isn't going to break the bank.

  27. Re:competition is good but where does the money go by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

    That would be the part you didn't understand, music isn't a hobby for a recording artist.

    Yes it is. They might try to convince you otherwise, but I'm a hobby musician, know people in bands etc Even managed to work at a few festivals for some big international acts, and have minor experience in a studio
    A good musician can write and record a song in a week. Why should I pay royalties for 75 years for this amount of effort?

  28. Re:competition is good but where does the money go by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

    if all you do is play some local festivals, events, bars, etc.. have a few t-shirts and a home studio recording you can even be loved locally but you are not the person I'm referring to.

    I'm talking about the guys that write songs, record albums, do or commission cover art, merchandise designs, promotional art, music videos, have supply chains, promoters, and administrative overhead, tour for months at a time, do crap music blog interviews, internet radio shows, college and commercial radio shows, magazine interviews.

  29. Re:competition is good but where does the money go by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

    But you said recording artists? If you are a musician, there is still a place in the new world for you. If you are one of the supporting services that only exist because of the outdated 20th century business model then too bad. Change or die.

  30. Starting a small business by jibu · · Score: 1

    Starting a small business is a big challenge. Starting a new small business is not an easy task. But if you follow some simple task it can be easier. Small business is good for a new investor who wants to start and learn business. http://www.smallbusinesstips.g...