According to the Wall Street Journal, CÜR Media has received ”licenses from all three major record companies, giving them a collective $8 million in advance money.”
In addition to the $8 million advances, CÜR has given each record company a ”5% stake in the company.” However, despite receiving such a high volume of investment cash, CÜR Media ”still needs to raise more money to launch the service”, says Tom Brophy, CÜR’s chief executive.
Brophy says low monthly price points were ”the centerpiece of his pitch when he started licensing negotiations with record companies several years ago.” Accordingly, CÜR will have three tiers, one called “Octo” which will be priced at $1.99 a month that includes ”eight on-demand songs a day,” and will also feature a custom radio similar to that of Pandora’s. The other two tiers will be priced at $4.99 and $9.99 a month.
The low price, along with CÜR’s strong social components, which allow users to share songs with attached photos and short personal videos, are a definite way to attract young consumers, like college students for instance. ”Octo” is targeting the younger demographic who may not have the disposable income to pay for other streaming services, like Spotify, Apple and Tidal.
It will be interesting to see how CÜR plans to get the service off the ground. It may continue to sell stakes in the company to raise the rest of the money it requires. It is unknown at this stage exactly where this vital money is going to come from.
”Octo” is targeting the younger demographic who may not have the disposable income to pay for other streaming services, like Spotify, Apple and Tidal for instance.
They’re gonna lure young people with 8 on-demand songs a month?
25 cents to listen to a song?
Good luck with that.
8 a day, it says.
Thank you. I missed that twice.
It’s still interesting to watch the majors work with “retailers” (streamers) to see how much pain and friction the market will endure. I guess I’ll have to go elsewhere to read what their plans are for ads, how close this is to paying for shitty radio, and what differentiates the paid tiers. But maybe they don’t know yet themselves.
This seems like an excellent use of $8 million.
Every executive at Cur should forced to attend at least one RDIO bankruptcy proceeding.
Sorry but it seems the logic in this article is all screwed up.
>In return for the $8 million, CÜR has given each record company a ”5% stake in the company.”
In fact, the company “paid” the majors a total $8 million in advances for the use of the catalogs, as well as a combined 5% stake in the company. Not “in return”.
I believe it’s not CÜR that is receiving “such a high volume of money”, they are the ones paying it out.
Might want to get a clearer understanding of the deal if you’re reporting on it.
The title of the article is correct though… proofreader/editor please?
Of course CUR paid 8M. It’s hard to believe the author of this article is so clueless on how music licensing works.
DMN – 8MM.
The wording is throwing things off, but yes, CÜR is making $8 mln in advance payments, plus giving way stakes in the company.
Any American-based company that uses umlauts (Ü) in their name is clueless from the start.
(queue toilet flushing 8 million dollars)
You laugh, but CÜM will make a ton of money….
That’s very funny and very true.
Not that they actually made the payments:
http://curmediainc.com/all-sec-filings/content/0001477932-16-009696/curm_8k.htm
Great find…
Item 8.01. Other Events.
As previously reported, the Company has entered into agreements (collectively, the “Content Agreements”) with certain music labels and music publishing companies (collectively, the “Content Providers”) for the non-exclusive right and license to use certain musical works owned, controlled and/or administered by the Content Providers in connection with the Company’s CÜR-branded Internet music service, CÜR Music. Pursuant to certain of the Content Agreements, the Company was required to make initial payments of content fees to the applicable Content Providers, in the aggregate amount of $8.0 million (the “Initial Content Fees”), on January 31, 2016. The Company was not able to make these payments when due, and each of the applicable Content Providers has agreed, either orally or in writing, to provide the Company with additional time to pay the Initial Content Fees. Pursuant to the new payment terms, the first of the payments toward the Initial Content Fees were due on April 12, 2016. On April 12, 2016, the Company paid an aggregate of $500,000 to the Content Providers from the proceeds of the Note Offering. The additional amounts are due to be paid by June 15, 2016.