Follow Us

DMN on Feedburner
Connect with:
divider image

Amazon’s Streaming Service Will Launch in Two Months or Less…

Screen shot 2014-05-29 at 4.54.53 PM

Amazon Cloud Player

Finally, more news about Amazon’s upcoming music streaming service.

BuzzFeed has spoken to five industry sources who are familiar with Amazon’s plans.

They say the streaming service will launch in June or July, and will be incorporated into Amazon Prime.

Prime is currently $99 a year (recently up from $79). It includes two day shipping, instant streaming of TV shows and movies, and eBook lending.

Hopefully the new service will not be based on the dismal design of Amazon Instant Video or Cloud Player.

Amazon is trying a different approach with their streaming service, but I imagine this was a decision made by labels  and not Amazon.

The service will only have music that is at least six months old, and will be restricted to releases selected by labels.

Amazon has reached agreements with Sony and Warner. The status of negotiations with Universal is unknown. There are no details on agreements with indie labels.

Last we heard,  independent publishers were saying Amazon’s streaming contract is “entirely unacceptable”.

Nina Ulloa covers breaking news, tech, and more. Follow her on Twitter: @nine_u

blue bar background graphic
Comments (35)
  1. Me

    So, this is going to be like the WalMart of streaming services?


    Reply
    1. TuneHunter

      He hopes!
      I had hopes that he is the one with logic and would put boxing gloves and box in LABEL BOYS TO NEW BOX.

      We do not need another MUSIC SHREDDER! There is $100 billion dollars of music for grabs, time to smart-up.


      Reply
      1. Me

        What the hell are you talking about?!


        Reply
        1. TuneHunter

          To help you understand
          HE= Jeff Bezos

          … yes he is ready to follow hopeless folks like Ek with his Sotify.


          Reply
          1. Me

            I was more confused by the “put boxing gloves and box in LABEL BOYS TO NEW BOX.” What the hell are you talking about?


            Reply
            1. TuneHunter

              Today they just wonder around with no plan on the legislative side or long term monetization side. They gave away the goods to YT ads machine and few fashionable Turbo-Napsters and hope they the great future will come. Box described above will bring just ASHES, 30 to $35B by 2025 – if we are all lucky.

              We need to shake up custodians of music and shave them in to new and better BOX – box which will produce serious money.
              Looking at this article Bezos is not the guy, for sure Tim Cook with Beats is not cooking anything that is meaningful for music. I hope he will not cook borsch out of those beats!

              Google has the biggest potential to change the game bard, even without legislative help, but they are blinded by advertising. They just live in their own self created digital Middle Ages.


              Reply
      2. Nina Ulloa

        what exactly did you think amazon would be doing?


        Reply
        1. TuneHunter

          First, someone hast lock the music in virtual walls so it can become merchandise again. Than we can sale it like beats or potatoes. Very few folks can pull that, Bezos is one of them.


          Reply
  2. Anonymous

    “The service will only have music that is at least six months old”

    Great, another museum like Spotify.


    Reply
    1. Me

      Ummm… Spotify has tons of albums streaming the day of release.


      Reply
      1. Anonymous

        Unfortunately not by the stars people love — like Taylor Swift, Daft Punk, Vampire Weekend, Black Keys, Adele, Beyoncé or the latest extremely successful Spotify-holdout, Coldplay…


        Reply
        1. Nina Ulloa

          there’s more than enough taylor swift and beyonce on spotify.


          Reply
          1. Anonymous

            Sure, if you prefer the old stuff.

            Most people don’t.


            Reply
            1. Nina Ulloa

              i really don’t think its as big a deal as people are making it out to be.


              Reply
              1. GGG

                Pretty sure this Anonymous is literally the only person on earth who complains about this in a “Spotify is bad” way.


                Reply
                1. Anonymous

                  Go ahead GGG, ask Spotify what they think about the windowing trend. :)

                  They hate it — because customers hate it.

                  People want new pop music immediately when it’s released, not next week!

                  This is not an opinion, it’s a fact. The proof is in the sales numbers: Release week is the most important time in the life of a record.


                  Reply
                  1. GGG

                    As per our usual arguments, that has nothing to do with what I just said. If you want to hear music on release day and it’s not on Spotify, there’s about a billion other places on the internet to find it. Nobody thinks “ah man, Spotify sucks!” except you because you are the most delusional, out of touch person I’ve ever interacted with and instead of accepting that you can’t write a popular song, you blame Spotify for all your failures. People know it’s the artist’s/labels choice and just move on and find it elsewhere. Is it bad for Spotify? Of course, they lose out on millions of plays, but that’s not Spotify’s fault.

                    Plus, also as per our usual arguments, you are so myopic when it comes to the industry its absurd. You don’t care about artists, you care about Taylor Swift, and people her size. There are TONS of new, hyped up indie releases every week on release day.


                    Reply
                    1. Anonymous

                      “If you want to hear music on release day and it’s not on Spotify, there’s about a billion other places on the internet to find it”

                      Yes, and recent success stories from a lot of artists prove that iTunes is a very popular one.

                      But I really don’t think it makes sense to continue these discussions until YouTube Music launches. It will change the entire landscape.

                      “Is it bad for Spotify? Of course, they lose out on millions of plays, but that’s not Spotify’s fault.”

                      It shows that their business model failed: People don’t want to pay for the service — artists don’t want to use it for releases.


        2. Me

          The newest Daft Punk was available on Spotify on the release date. The newest Vampire Weekend album was available a week after the release date. There are a few major artists that are withholding their albums from Spotify, but the majority of them aren’t.


          Reply
          1. Anonymous

            “The newest Daft Punk was available on Spotify on the release date. The newest Vampire Weekend album was available a week after the release date”

            I can assure you it was a PR-disaster for Spotify that Random Access Memories was available on iTunes a week before you could stream it from Spotify.

            Same thing with the newest VW album.


            Reply
        3. TuneHunter

          Let’s get more of those big stars and KNOCK ON THE LABELS DOOR.
          Obviously Bezos is not planing to do it!

          There’s $100B of music for grabs with simple methods known to any farm market merchant!

          We do not need Spotify, PANDORA and YouTube/Vevo music RETARDANTS!

          Last year they have made over half of streaming traffic and delivered just $2.5 billion to music industry. Nobody (possibly Tim Cook) noticed that they have ERASED at least $5B from ITunes, Amazon and all of the Radio.


          Reply
  3. Anonymous

    So how long will it take until one service finally offers everything instead of these ridiculously crippled packages?

    People don’t want to pay Spotify, Amazon, AT&T, and NetFlix each month.

    They want one site to deliver it all: Movies, music, Internet, news, communication.

    Who’s it gonna be?


    Reply
    1. Nina Ulloa

      hopefully no one….

      i’ll stick to paying amazon, spotify, & netflix


      Reply
      1. Anonymous

        Well, all these $10/month services only get so many customers.

        Why?

        Because NetFlix customers still have to pay for Internet; Spotify customers still have to pay for cabel tv, etc.

        So sell them a package that offers everything rolled in one — Internet, phone, music, TV, movies — and 1 billion customers will be happy to pay $20/month.


        Reply
        1. Nina Ulloa

          that’s like when phone carries bundle in weird streaming services and hardly anyone wants / uses it


          Reply
          1. Anonymous

            You’re talking about extremely limited services such as Spotify — and you’re correct, hardly anyone wants that.

            But I’m talking unlimited access to everything.

            And that’s the future.


            Reply
  4. Magic Mr. P*

    Normally, I don’t feel inclined to chime in with my thoughts, but this time I will.. (yes.. yes.. keep the cheers to a dull roar people).

    SO, Beats/iTunes streaming, whatever it will be called, has the upper hand in the streaming market right now. They built a model that is profitable and subscription only AFTER Spotify had already hooked the US, and arguably the world, on streaming music. So, kudos to Jimmy and Dre for a savvy business move, but even more kudos to them for proving it works in a short time and selling it to Apple. I always wondered how Apple would remain competitive in the streaming world as iTunes sales saw their first year of drop offs, and iTunes radio was kind of meh.. I predicted, along with many others, that they were developing their own service or would buy out one of today’s top streaming companies.

    We all know the problems that Spotify is having financially, after Beats proved they could offer similar content without having a free version of their service, this was a no brainer for Apple. Beats, from my understanding, is better for artists too (but probably not that much, nonetheless, better is better) so they’ve positioned themselves to have the best business model for their own pocketbooks and artist’s pocketbooks. I predict that Spotify will be out of the game very, very soon as a major player. They just have way too much debt and now they received the final nail in the coffin with the Beats/Apple deal. It’s too bad, because I believe Spotify has the best service, but Apple’s brand recognition alongside with the Beats brand will inevitably beat them out, no pun intended.

    The void caused by Spotify’s exit within the market will open the door for someone to come up and be the #2 streaming company. Will it be Amazon? Gee, I hope not, based on their offerings within prime instant video (seriously, how come every show seems like it was an MTV reality show, and how come they post every season as if it’s a separate show.. I scroll endlessly through their crappy shows to only see the same things but with different seasons.. How I Met Your Mother season 4, Workaholics season 2, then how I met your mother season 1.. workaholics season 4.. lame. cmon guys). Unfortunately, Amazon has the prime membership thing locked in, and it will probably be the second largest player. As one comment above said, will they be the Walmart of streaming? Probably, and Beats/Apple will be the Target.

    The question that remains is what are other services going to do to take advantage of this opportunity? Will Digster come in and try filling the void? What about Mog, Muve, hell even Rhapsody? OR, will Spotify finally start capitalizing on subscriptions? The only way they will is if they start going subscription only, and hope to god that their free users convert to full on subscribers. It’s the only option they have, otherwise they’ll be pushed down to the basement and they’ll spend the next 5 years lingering around, trying to claw their way back up a la Napster and Rhapsody.

    Personally I hope Spotify survives, because, while I love Apple computer products, iTunes has always felt like an unnecessary and cheap service (when you can buy a CD for the same price and rip it to your iPod, why pay for a crappy sounding MP3 through iTunes?). Now that they’ve positioned themselves with Beats Audio (and we all know how quality those headphones are…. newsflash, they’re overpriced colorful pieces of junk) they’re going away from quality and getting into the trend business. Which is fine, I get it, it works and it will continue to sell and make Apple a bundle of profits off of the tweens and now early 20 somethings who are easily swayed by marketing tactics that employ professional athletes and rap/pop musicians. HOWEVER, personally, as a man of integrity, I’m keeping my fingers crossed that Spotify remains as a valid competitor.


    Reply
    1. Anonymous

      “when you can buy a CD for the same price and rip it to your iPod, why pay for a crappy sounding MP3 through iTunes?”

      Because A/B-tests prove that it’s impossible to distinguish modern compression (the AAC files iTunes sells today) from CDs.


      Reply
    2. Nina Ulloa

      i highly doubt that beats is profitable / that anyone is convinced it will be. apple wanted the brand and dre / iovine.


      Reply
      1. Anonymous

        You don’t think Beats (Electronics + Music) is profitable?


        Reply
        1. Anonymous

          You must just mean Beats Music.


          Reply
          1. Nina Ulloa

            i do.


            Reply
            1. Anonymous

              Then yes, nowhere in the general vicinity of profitability. Spotify is much closer, for whatever that’s worth.


              Reply
  5. kpopmeetsusa

    There is nothing that distinguishes amazon from other streaming competitors. At best it will build more prime members for amazon, makes music even cheaper for the public, takes more money away from music industry. -Elizabeth from kpopmeetsusa.com


    Reply

Leave a Reply

Connect with:


two + = 6

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

  1. OUR SPONSORS

  2.  
  3. Most Heated!