Slashdot Log In
Napster - Music Subsciptions Are Overrated
Posted by
Zonk
on Fri Nov 02, 2007 09:30 AM
from the hope-they-don't-pull-your-access dept.
from the hope-they-don't-pull-your-access dept.
kevinbr writes "Napster has concluded that PC-based music subscriptions aren't a growth business ... because it's retreating from its core business. 'Six months ago the subscription music service had 830,000 subs, three months ago it had 770,000, and now it has 750,000. The company says that last drop was expected, because kids stop using the service during the summer. But it's not as if those numbers will swell this fall: NAPS projects only a 4% revenue increase for next quarter. So instead of talking up its core subscription business, Napster is now pinning its hopes on the mobile industry. Music on your cellphone may one day be a real business, but hard to see why Napster is going to be the company that will capitalize on it.'"
Related Stories
[+]
Napster On the Block 144 comments
Ars Technica has a good wrap of
Napster hanging out a "For Sale or Partner" sign. With half a million subscribers (down from the previous quarter) and $100M in annual revenue, the company is still bleeding cash. El Reg pinpoints the trouble: "The subscription crowd – and Apple via iTunes – must fight over a few pennies per song in profit. More from the Vulture: "You have to wonder if Napster's customer base is really worth the effort for a company such as Microsoft or even Real. The Napster brand has all the gravitas of a Che Guevara t-shirt."
[+]
Why Make a Sequel of the Napster Wars? 280 comments
6 writes "Cory Doctorow has an interesting article over at Information Week about Hollywood's strategy of suing sites such as YouTube. Says Doctorow: 'It's been eight years since Sean Fanning created Napster in his college dorm room. Eight years later, there isn't a single authorized music service that can compete with the original Napster. Record sales are down every year, and digital music sales aren't filling in the crater. The record industry has contracted to four companies, and it may soon be three if EMI can get regulatory permission to put itself on the block. The sue-'em-all-and-let-God-sort-'em-out plan was a flop in the box office, a flop in home video, and a flop overseas. So why is Hollywood shooting a remake?'"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Napster - Music Subsciptions Are Overrated
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 205 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
I could have told them that years ago (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:I could have told them that years ago (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I could have told them that years ago (Score:5, Insightful)
But they'd never go with a pay-to-access Napster-esque service.
The cost is about the same. ~$10/month. With both of them, you lose access to the music as soon as you stop playing. Both are DRM'd (poorly and can be analog-hole'd). Both require access to a network, though the S-Radio is easier to connect to in the car. (No reliable metro wifi in Toronto yet).
So why would they pay for one, but never for the other. After talking about it, the reason we all seemed to agree on is the promise of what's offered. The S-Radio people are right up front with it. "Pay us money. We'll pipe you channels of music. If you stop paying, we stop piping. It's a service we're offering. Okay?"
Whereas these music places are a bit shadier with their promise. "Pay use money, and you can download music, as much as you want.". They say it knowing full well that people associate "download music" as "I transfer a file to my computer and it's there forever, and I can play it however much I want". They think of iTunes, which instantly brings up the thought of "pay per song". So Napster et all are effectively trying to trick people into thinking that they're just like iTunes, but you get unlimited music rather than paying per track. They dance around the "lose access" part of the deal. It comes off as very, very scummy and untrustworthy-- and people don't like dealing with companies like that. After all, if they're going to lie right to your face about this (outright or by omission), then what else are they going to lie about? What else can't you trust them with? Are they REALLY unlimited? It's already too good to be true-- and isn't true at that-- so what else is going to screw you out of your cash?
The satellite radio company tell you right up front what you'll get, and they give it to you. They're business is music.
Napster (and other Music Services) tells you a veiled lie, and seems only intent on taking your money. They're business is exploiting people's desire for music. They don't care about the music at all.
THAT'S why they will always, always fail.
Re:I could have told them that years ago (Score:5, Insightful)
That's one way to look at it. I see it a bit differently. I've subscribed to a music service for quite a while now. (Rhapsody, if anybody's curious.) There are a few benefits to it that are worth $10/mo. to me.
1.) I have access to all their music. Often I go find a bunch of new albums to listen to. That means if somebody recommends a song, for example, I'm listening to it like 20 seconds later.
2.) I don't have a big collection of music to take with my everywhere. Lots of people don't mind that, but I do. I have 3 different computers I constantly access. (Home desktop, home laptop, work desktop.) If I switch computers at work, I just reinstall Rhapsody and I'm hearing music again.
3.) Yes, if I terminate the service, I lose the music. On the flip side, there's lots of songs I used to listen to all the time that I don't anymore. This became wasteful, trying to manage all that. Here I just delete it from my list, and if I want it back like a year later, I just go hunt add it again. Before I was a packrat, keeping songs I didn't know if I really wanted to keep anymore. I can go buy them later if I really really want to make a long-term investment. I haven't done that in ages, though. My playlist today is far different than the one I had a year ago.
4.) This was sort of covered in the first point, but I'm always on the prowl to find new music. This service often gets new albums just as they're released. I pop them into my list and explore. I've found a ton of new music this way. One thing I didn't like about my music scouring before is that it was often tied to how much disposable money I had in a given month. I hated buying 3 or 4 albums and only getting a handful of interesting songs. In theory I could hear the clips and decide, but too many times I've not really liked a song until I've heard it a couple of times in its entirety. This makes me squeamish about buying a whole album.
5.) There's lots of stand-up comedy on this service. I use it to enterain myself at work from time to time during long monotonous days.
Subscription's not for everybody, but it's certainly not for nobody. Yeah, you've got a point. For me, the termination of services doesn't multiply the other values of it by 0. To me it's sorta like cable TV for music, only this is on-demand. I certainly like it better than satellite radio or other subscription services just for that reason. Considering all the new music I've found, I'd say there's plenty of value in it for some people, especially those with multiple computers or finicky music tastes.
Re:I could have told them that years ago (Score:4, Insightful)
Who even uses Napster anymore? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Who even uses Napster anymore? (Score:5, Insightful)
Napster never had a corporate reputation to bank on like they thought they did, they were only a tool to get free stuff. Then, when the music business came knocking, and everyone who used Napster started fighting, Napster itself folded like a cheap suit. They shut down and came back with a boneheaded business model: You can still get (some of) the same music you got for free before, but now it's crippled and you get to pay for it. I don't know anyone who thought even at the time that this would succeed.
Other companies with tighter relationships with the record companies have since come up with far more successful ways to market music online (such as tying the store to a hugely popular MP3 player, for example). I don't understand why Napster is even still in business.
Napster's pinning its hopes on the mobile industry (Score:1)
Music subscriptions aren't overtated (Score:1, Insightful)
imeem is the real napster 2.0 (Score:1)
Napster is overrated (Score:4, Insightful)
Do you know who's in that position. Apple. I bet my money if Apple introduced subscription model that works with iTunes (Win/Mac), iPhone, and iPod, then it'll be largely successful.
Napster just have a somewhat recognizable name and a funny cat logo.
Makes Sense (Score:3, Insightful)
That said, the actual service (and Yahoo! Music, a competitor) is/was really awesome, for who enjoy listening to a huge selection of music - and have an always-on Internet connection - and have their stereos hooked up to a computer. I guess it was a niche, it was just too small of one.
idear (Score:2)
Would be fun though.
Napster--Very Worth It (Score:5, Interesting)
I am a Napster customer with the all you can eat model and I LOVE IT.
I am sorry, but I do not want to pay $0.99 for a DRMed music file that I can only use on so many systems, etc. This buck-for-a-song model has existed for far too long and I have only bought four songs this way, through iTunes, and all four were immediately burned to CD and ripped back so I could stip off that horrible DRM.
So with the buck-a-song model it made me do something that probably made RIAA very happy--I bought CDs. I'm sorry, but on a CD I get songs for less than a buck each (while there are some I won't like, there will also be gems I may never have heard had I not bought the CD) plus you get cover art, a media that's higher sound quality than a digital downloaded file. It just didn't make sense to me.
Then look at Napster. Suddenly I had a LEGAL world of music open up to me. I was able to explore the libraries of artists who are somewhat less popular. I'd never have spent $12 for their CDs, but a "Download Album" button had me pulling down every song I could find and listening to it.
Moreover, it is VERY easy to strip the DRM from a Napster WMA. I am an iPod user and Napster WMAs won't work with an iPod (though I wish Apple would relent and add that as a firmware/software upgrade to the iPod). So I use FairUse4WM and, bam, now I have MP3s that play on my iPod. I still pay the Napster music subscription every month and if I cancel I will delete all those MP3s. I'm only playing while I'm paying, so I'm playing by their rules.
This model has weened me from buying CDs altogether. I used to have a $200-$300 per month CD habit. I'm not kidding on that, I have over 3000 CDs and just kept buying every month. But with Napster I don't need CDs, I just get what I need from Napster. It's saving me THOUSANDS of dollars every year.
And my wife and I have very different music tastes. She used to not get music she liked becuase she didn't want to spend as much on CDs as I did. Now for one low monthly fee we both have all the music we want.
Sure, sometimes Napster is frustrating. I was looking for some songs on there that were "album only", "purchase only", or not available at all. It's not a silver bullet. But it is DAMN close.
If Napster doesn't see it as a growth business, that's because WMAs aren't a growth format. If you could do a subscription format that worked on iPods natively then you would have a model that would grow with each iPod sold. PlaysForSure??? If you're basing your business model off of Zune sales, well good luck with that!
But anyone who reads
What an odd post, why focus on DRM? (Score:5, Insightful)
I am sorry, but I do not want to pay $0.99 for a DRMed music file that I can only use on so many systems, etc.
Three statements in one sentence always leads to problems. The WMA files from Napster, as you later admit yourselve, are DRMed and run on only so many systems. Your claims of the DRM being easy to strip are meaningless, you can do it with equal ease with iTunes music. IF you are willing to violate US law as a US citizen, then both formats can be easily converted to non-drm formats (mp3) that plays on the fast majority of systems.
So we are left with your complaint that music at iTunes costs 0.99 per song.
How does this cost work out in the long run. The iTunes song is yours for "life". If napster closes, there goes your music collection. ALL your downloaded music, GONE. For good.
Ah but your ripped it (and made yourselve a criminal by doing so) although you do claim that if you stop paying the subscription, you will delete those MP3's. Right. Sure, I believe that. There must be an honest person among us. Perhaps you are it.
But what if you don't cancel, but Napster goes out of business. YOU may still be willing to pay, but you can't. Bye bye collection.
As for spreading the good word, IT IS AGAINST US LAW and the RIAA does prosecute people. You may not agree with the law, but civil disobedience sucks when you are the one being made an example off.
I just wish you had left the DRM part out of your argument and concentrated simply on value for money. Is 15 bucks per month enough to rent music (It isn't unlike a library card and I think most of accept that) OR do we pay perhaps more per song but it is our song.
Currently both models suck. 99 cents for a few megabytes of data is idiotic next to the cost of production. Loosing all your songs because a company goes out of business in a format that doesn't work on the majority of players sucks as well.
Frankly the entire industry is screwed up. The music industry has become so obsesses with fat profits, that they are unable to see that by simply lowering the price they can make theft totally undesirable.
Say that for 15 bucks per month you could download ANY music you wanted in the format you desired. WHY BOTHER WITH FILESHARING THEN? Oh sure, there will be small percentage who will do so anyway, but it should be almost trivial to get most of the western world to sign up just by putting ALL music in the system, ALL means ALL, including "bootlegs" classical music and rare recordings.
Re:Napster--Very Worth It (Score:4, Insightful)
So, you love the service, but really only love how easy it is to get around their limitations?
"I still pay the Napster music subscription every month and if I cancel I will delete all those MP3s."
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that, but how many other people honestly keep their legally-purchased mp3's completely separated from their less-than-legal mp3 files, so they can delete them at a moment's notice?
So, I don't doubt that you've made very good use of a subscription model, but I think your example also shows why it doesn't work very well for most people, esp. if they don't have the expertise to work around the DRM, and why it doesn't work very well for the music industry, if most people don't share your scruples about deleting the music after the subscription ends.
What's so wrong with subscription? (Score:2, Insightful)
The problem (Score:2)
But making it work with my various different music devices was just too much of a pain. I didn't mind the DRM per se - I very much mind that there isn't DRM that works seamlessly across a whole range of devices.
$10 a month to listen to music anywhere - no problem.
$10 a month to listen to music at my computer - no chance.
What's the big deal with Ring Tones (Score:1)
Exit strategy? (Score:3, Interesting)
I have one friend who really enjoys Napster's subscription service probably have 1000 songs he listens to. If Napster were to shut down the service I think there would be a lot of very unhappy customers.
Gee, sounds like really solid research (Score:2)
What the hell does that mean? What's the basis for this supposed drop? Sounds like fluff to me.
I enjoy Napster's streaming service (Score:1)
No Music in the Summer. What's up with that? (Score:1)
Really, kids don't listen to music in the summer? Since when? Now I could understand sales at iTMS dropping in the summer but if you drop your Napster subscription your music is gone.
How true (Score:2)
My mileage varies (Score:2)
It is freaking awesome, and as soon as I get a car with an input jack, I will be even more in heaven than I am now (screw you Infiniti, your radio system SUCKS).
Every album on this 4GB player (with 2GB MicroSD chip I got for 20 bucks) is an album I don't have to own.
So far I'm finding Rhapsody to be worth every penny, even more so now that I have this portable player.
They already are in Japan (Score:3, Informative)
There are two more data points to note.
1. The monthly flat fee format is very popular at least in Japan. In particular, ring tones are a big business, but also all kinds of other media like games, weather reports, and what looks compelling to me is NaviTime which tells you the combination of train and other transportation to get you to your destination in the shortest time. Flat fees though are usually I think 300 yen per month though (for a subscription to downloadable Java games from a game manufacturer). Perhaps you can get more money if bundled when you buy the phone.
2. The HSDPA [wikipedia.org] high speed data network rollout is marketed to people as the way to deliver songs to your phone. Personally I wanted to go to the Internet at high speed but it turns out (at least until sometime in the future) that this is only within the carrier's network, perhaps only to registered sites. So a Napster-like unlimited service is very useful for HSDPA rollout especially for carriers (all of them) who just want to stuff things down your throat and could care less about connecting you the rest of the world.
I should note two things: it may be possible to get out of the network but you will go broke, and also the docomo person told me they might come out with a pcmcia card or some such that could do it. Anyway I'm waiting for the model supposed to come out this month or so that can also do roaming (World Wind service) in the U.S. (the last country to be added it seems).
...That's not going to work (Score:1)
I was thinking about a subscription... (Score:2)
Fuzz factor (Score:1)
Ford to City: Drop Dead (Score:1)
no, I'm not a shill! (Score:2)
Amazon has what I want.
I can get mp3 files that have no DRM whatsoever.
I can get video downloads, (unfortunately still have DRM)
I can get books and literally anything else you could imagine.
I'm a member of Amazon prime. Free 2-day shipping is great. $3.99 overnight is even better.
I buy most of the stuff I buy from Amazon. With a new baby on the way, we're going to save bundles on diapers and other baby stuff.
Stuff, it's what being American is all about.
750,000 subs (Score:1)
Hell, I would be happy with 750,000 subs, either the kind from Jimmy Johns [jimmyjohns.com] or the nuclear variety.
Napster is Losing Customers to Competitors (Score:2)
My guess is that Napster is losing customers to their competitors. Subscription based music is actually a pretty great alternative to stealing or buying for $1.99/$.99/$.89/whatever.
It's an especially great way to legally listen to new music and find new artists. I know that the Zune Marketplace (as does iTunes and most of the major online music stores) offers "Sounds Like" artist/album lists. If I had to buy these songs I would be MUCH less likely to listen to them... but being able to download and listen to anything I want on up to 5 devices makes it a no-brainer.
And I don't care that the music stops working if I stop paying. I really don't.
Monthly Rental Fees (Score:2, Insightful)
Napster software broken and napster doesn't care (Score:1)
Napster (Score:1)
Napster business growth (Score:1)
Their revenue and earnings are increasing. We also really like their music service. Rock on.
Music is for *LISTENING* (Score:2)
The annual subscription rate is $72/year. How many of you have spent over $1800 on CDs? Howsabout taking $1800 and buying a T-Bill at 4%? Guess what, your subscription is paid for. If you have a mortgage or a balance on your credit card, the interest rate is even higher, and about a $1,000 worth of music CDs will cost you more than an ongoing subscription. And that's not even counting the cost of a honking big multi-terrabyte raid array for storing your collection.
Another thing about internet radio (and satellite radio, for that matter) is that it does the collecting and playing for you. I live in Canada, and could download with impunity. Then after spending hours and hours looking for stuff I think I might like, downloading, and saving it, and organizing it, I could sit back and listen to it. But I happen to be in my mid-50's, and I make $66 K per year, I have a life beyond the internet, and my time is worth more to me than spending it screwing around with downloading/cataloging a honking big MP3 collection.
So I either spend thousands of dollars of money per year, buying music in my favourite niches, or waste who-knows-how-many-hours downloading and collating it, or I spend a fraction of that time and money, sit back and listen to music until I get sick of it, and still have a lot more time to spend enjoying life (or posting to Slashdot).
I can't take it with me, but I probably spend more time *ENJOYING MY FAVOURITE MUSIC* than many avid P2P downloaders. That's the angle to promote in today's busy society.
Re:Music, in general, is overrated (Score:2)
You're completely right. There are too many manufactured bands around at the moment singing covers of covers and these talentless nobodies being backed by the Simon Cowell hype juggernaut.
Meanwhile a good band will turn up, only to be ignored because everyone's paying attention to a group that will be forgotten in 6 month's time.
And that's why I'm not buying or listening to your song, Leona Lewis.
Re:Music, in general, is overrated (Score:2)
Agreed, but we should be careful to make the distinction between new mainstream music, and all new music. There is good stuff still coming out, and (as you stated) a lot of it falls in the "independent" category. That said, I think that the various music subscription services actually help provide better visibility to artists that are off the beaten path.
For me, I LOVE my Sirius Satellite Radio and I've been turned on to several artists that I likely would never have heard of had it not been for Sirius(or if I had, probably wouldn't have felt compelled to buy their music). I too cannot bear to listen to the crap playing on standard radio anymore (and that's when there's music and not commercials playing). If you haven't already tried Sirius [sirius.com]I really suggest that you give them a shot. 3 day free trial, you'll be surprised at how good some of the music stations are, I certainly was.
Wow (Score:2)
I should paste the entire Birth of a label-sanctioned pirate radio station [kuro5hin.org] here, that would cause a few of the RIAA trollsuits to have strokes!
-mcgrew
PS- I have excellent karma, do your worst you MAFIAA sleazeballs.
Re:PSU Dropped Napster (Score:1)
http://www.wired.com/entertainment/music/news/2003/11/61093 [wired.com]