Apple to pay more than Pandora for streaming radio

Apple’s iTunes Radio, one of the many feature slated to come to iOS 7 later this year, took an incredibly long time to get off the ground. Why? Because labels want to make sure they’re getting paid enough, while at the same time Apple doesn’t want to feel like they’re being ripped off. According to The Wall Street Journal, not only did Apple agree to terms that were better than Pandora, they’re nearly twice as big.

Here’s the quote:

“During iTunes Radio’s first year, Apple will pay a label 0.13 cents each time a song is played, as well as 15% of net advertising revenue, proportionate to a given label’s share of the music played on iTunes. In the second year, that bumps up to 0.14 cents per listen, plus 19% of ad revenue. That compares to the 0.12 cents Pandora pays labels per listen on its free service.”

The real question is will people even want to listen to iTunes Radio? Think about it. You have all your music on your phone, with no ads. If you really want to play a specific track, you could load up YouTube and probably find it. If you want radio, why not use a cross platform solution like TuneIn, Pandora, iHeartFM, or one of the many other streaming clients out there?

We’ll have to play with the service before judging it, of course.

Like this post? Share it!

Categories: Apple News

Related
  • randomMAN

    iTunes Match at $25 a yr gets you ad free music so y not if I have a low gb capicity iPhone

  • JD

    if it runs like spotify, where i can make songs available offline, im down. I lost my library of music a year ago and just refused to redownload it so ive been using streaming services since. you cant multitask or use youtube while the screen is locked….why would i use youtube as my primary source for music on a phone. why will people use it over other services? you already said why. their library of music will be unmatched.