Spotify gets all the attention, but they aren't the clear-cut winner anymore. In the US, Muve Music is ahead, and outside of the US, Deezer's subscription levels are extremely competitive. And Deezer could be planting the seeds for a huge lead: after adding 22 countries this week, Deezer now has a global footprint that spans 182 countries.
Which means, this is what Spotify's footprint looks like...
And this is what Deezer's footprint looks like...
So which would you rather have?
One obvious question is whether Deezer is playing a game of quantity over quality. Licensing Guyana, for example, sounds great for the citizens of Guyana, but it may do very little for the broader subscriber pot. And, it takes lots of effort to build such a massive global spread. So why not focus more on the big boys, like Germany, Japan, and the US?
Let's see. Deezer could be building the bed for a sleeping giant, but Spotify has obviously been prioritizing the US over the United Nations. Which translates into critical stateside mindshare and marketshare, and a tough, uphill climb if/when Deezer finally arrives.
LostInDigital Tuesday, January 29, 2013
And, from an artist's standpoint, Deezer payouts rates are much higher than Spotify ones.
So, another good point for them.
cybearDJM Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Deezer grew thanks to Orange, French telco that's in its capital, and still relies on it in many countries for future growth (bundling).
TJ Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Following Spotify's strategy, like the writer suggests, doesn't make sense at all. A blue ocean strategy, carving out their own way, makes more sense.
CptCock Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Getting distribution to a bigger geographical market is one thing, making succesfull marketing to every single country is another :-)
calle Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Except from a few countries in Europe like Italy and Portougal Spotify is so far ahead of Deezer if you compare to countries that you want to be in. Countries that has a population with high income and need to buy these kind of services. I meen come on, Greenland Africa. To compare with maps is not so smart...
Adrian Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Once more Digital Music News seems to be more positive with Deezer than Spotify ?
Probably because you guys in the US you did'nt have to suffer their methods yet !
Deezer is a bad service, technically poor compared with Spotify. And Deezer pays less than Spotify due to its deals with Orange.
Their repertoire is limited and their search engine is terrible.
Matthew Bailey Wednesday, January 30, 2013
Grooveshark has the most membership for a music streaming service - 35 million at the last count. Others are on catch up. Grooveshark is a sustainable business as it uses different approaches to Spotify and Deezer.
In terms of sustainable business model, Spotify, Deezer do not stack up. They are experiencing the same problem as Padora (early days) and LastFM - yes they turn over revenue but royalty costs, cdn costs and opex costs kill the bottom line.
These music streaming businesses have been awesome bringing new forms of music experiences to the general population - but they have created much negativity in terms of investor confidence. Without Warner and Scandanavian oil money,both businesses would be dead.
There are new business models emerging such as psonar pay per play - that not only deliver far more wealth per play to an artist (AND no advertising) but more importantly the business is sustainable. What did Spotify return to 1 million lady gaga plays - $200, where are psonar would have returned in the order or $5k. Not too shabby eh?
Furthemore, Deezer and Spotify mobile propositions are not geared to emerging economies. Psonar usesm "pay as you go" levering bango micro payment technololgy without the need of a credit card - works beautifully with current consumer engagement approaches AND embraces demographics that do not have credit cards - which many do not have.
Paying a flat $10 (£10) or whatever fee Deezer and Spotify charge is unethical to the listener, who is likely to listen to a different quantity of tracks per month. However, using a pay per stream, is ethical where the listener only pays to what they listen to, thus the cost model follows their listening habits.
$0.01 per play equates to equates to 1000 tracks and an equivalent to $10/month. 1000 tracks equates to about 33 tracks of music per day. This is normal for heavy music listeners but certainly not for the masses who will peak and trough with an average below this level.
So, to conclude, Deezer and Spotify are not the biggest services, have unsustainable business models, they do not cater for emerging territory consumers and do not personalise costs for the listening trends of target audiences.
None of these large music services offer real personalisation and true music discovery, thus the independant labels are walking away, looking to new types of services like Viral Promote from which higher returns are generated from their content.
However, Spotify OTT apps are interesting. Lets see what these so called Big Boys can do in terms of transformation and having a positive impact to bring benefits to artists, consumers and shareholders - globally.
mdti Friday, February 01, 2013
go, deezer, go... but improve the user interface because 182 countries means nothing in itself... what is it behind ?
for example, when i type the name of my own stuff, i'd like to actually find my own stuff, not some top 100 bloddy titles that only other people care about ;-)