Do you think artists will have their own apps instead of Apple, Spotify in the future?

[valet]

If you get a chance check out this discussion from former members. 54:50 mark. But a spinoff from their discussion. Could you see people who put out high music content (Future, Drake, 06 Wayne) having their own app? Now, I know Drake, Future have deals. But I'm saying someone else.

Instead of paying $10 for millions of people you don't listen to. You just exclusively get that one artist music? But you make it real cheap for super fans/stans.

 

[New Username]

Labels won't approve, they need their cut too

 

[str8up]

I don't see it anytime soon, not many people would even be able to pull it off.

Either their fanbase is going to be too small or it is so big that you can just release an album like normal and make way more off it

 

[valet]

Labels won't approve, they need their cut too

What if they did it under the umbrella of that major then? But again, make it cheaper then Spotify, Applemusic?

 

[Matt504]

I don't see that kind of model working. Imagine every artist you like had their own app all charging $1 dollar a month, for 10 artists that'd be $10 a month for 10 artists you DO listen to but nothing more when right now you can pay that same $10 dollars and have access to more music than you know what to do with.

even $10 is too good to be true in my opinion.

 

[valet]

Like a Cash Money App but you chose which artist you want (Wayne, Drake, Nicki, etc?)

 

[zerozero]

This is like the intersection of two of the hardest businesses brehs... nobody wants to buy music (and labels want their cut) and people install very few apps

I think artist-specific apps are better off used as marketing ... tour dates, their latest tweets, merchandise, stuff for fans and supporters, contests..

 

[Poh SIti Dawn]

Perhaps artists who are up and coming, but these artists right now I don't see them having a financial future that's in their hands.

There's gotta be another way though, it's killing me to figure out. I think giving music away for free and touring solely off of datpiff and soundcloud would be the better way.

I like what Jay-Z has done though tbh, it really gives him control of the market in the long run if he doesn't get eliminated. It's kind of a shame though people like Dre would rather work with a corporate company who exploits hip hop then try to regain it. Probably because he's been getting used his whole career so he doesn't mind.

 

[Kill Dat Noize]

is that really where you want the industry to go? a la carte? now we gotta pay for each artist separately?

if the average person can get every song ever for 9.99 a month, realistically how much can they charge the average consumer for JUST one artist's music?

 

[CodeBlaMeVi]

What if they did it under the umbrella of that major then? But again, make it cheaper then Spotify, Applemusic?

the artist will have to create and share a lot of content to keep subscribers.

 

[CodeBlaMeVi]

Perhaps artists who are up and coming, but these artists right now I don't see them having a financial future that's in their hands.

There's gotta be another way though, it's killing me to figure out. I think giving music away for free and touring solely off of datpiff and soundcloud would be the better way.

I like what Jay-Z has done though tbh, it really gives him control of the market in the long run if he doesn't get eliminated. It's kind of a shame though people like Dre would rather work with a corporate company who exploits hip hop then try to regain it. Probably because he's been getting used his whole career so he doesn't mind.

Really?

 

[valet]

the artist will have to create and share a lot of content to keep subscribers.

True, that's why I brought up someone like Future who puts out alot content all the time (dude drop 2 albums in a matter of weeks). And I know some people music wise who mainly listen to Future. And don't get into a lot other artists.

 

[Matt504]

is that really where you want the industry to go? a la carte? now we gotta pay for each artist separately?

if the average person can get every song ever for 9.99 a month, realistically how much can they charge the average consumer for JUST one artist's music?

it wouldn't even be worth it at 99cent a month.

 

[New Username]

What if they did it under the umbrella of that major then? But again, make it cheaper then Spotify, Applemusic?

Now, that's logical .

But, it will still fail.

The app would need to go through R&D, marketing/promo, and a bunch of hurdles to even be mentioned.....a lot of money being thrown down the drain

Let's say the service cost $5 a month.

Why would anyone pay $5 a month for one label worth of artist when they can have almost every artist at their disposal for $12 a month plus whatever exclusive deals tidal, Spotify or Apple offer.

 

[Poh SIti Dawn]

Really?

do you disagree