June 19, 201510 yr I hope the 1989 singles do get added, as that would boost her chart position. Although in the Red era prior to the album getting added, WANEGBT was the only song available to stream even when the others were singles, so I doubt it.
June 21, 201510 yr Taylor has written an open letter to Apple today and here it is from her Tumblr page: To Apple, Love Taylor I write this to explain why I’ll be holding back my album, 1989, from the new streaming service, Apple Music. I feel this deserves an explanation because Apple has been and will continue to be one of my best partners in selling music and creating ways for me to connect with my fans. I respect the company and the truly ingenious minds that have created a legacy based on innovation and pushing the right boundaries. I’m sure you are aware that Apple Music will be offering a free 3 month trial to anyone who signs up for the service. I’m not sure you know that Apple Music will not be paying writers, producers, or artists for those three months. I find it to be shocking, disappointing, and completely unlike this historically progressive and generous company. This is not about me. Thankfully I am on my fifth album and can support myself, my band, crew, and entire management team by playing live shows. This is about the new artist or band that has just released their first single and will not be paid for its success. This is about the young songwriter who just got his or her first cut and thought that the royalties from that would get them out of debt. This is about the producer who works tirelessly to innovate and create, just like the innovators and creators at Apple are pioneering in their field…but will not get paid for a quarter of a year’s worth of plays on his or her songs. These are not the complaints of a spoiled, petulant child. These are the echoed sentiments of every artist, writer and producer in my social circles who are afraid to speak up publicly because we admire and respect Apple so much. We simply do not respect this particular call. I realize that Apple is working towards a goal of paid streaming. I think that is beautiful progress. We know how astronomically successful Apple has been and we know that this incredible company has the money to pay artists, writers and producers for the 3 month trial period… even if it is free for the fans trying it out. Three months is a long time to go unpaid, and it is unfair to ask anyone to work for nothing. I say this with love, reverence, and admiration for everything else Apple has done. I hope that soon I can join them in the progression towards a streaming model that seems fair to those who create this music. I think this could be the platform that gets it right. But I say to Apple with all due respect, it’s not too late to change this policy and change the minds of those in the music industry who will be deeply and gravely affected by this. We don’t ask you for free iPhones. Please don’t ask us to provide you with our music for no compensation. Taylor This is of course a much kinder response than Taylor gave to Spotify a few months ago. Once again Taylor does have a key point and it really is refreshing for a major artist to get so involved in issues like these and I do agree that it is wrong for Apple to not be paying the label during the 3 month free trial. They are a very rich company and I'm sure they could've afforded to compensate the labels for these 3 months. It does seem like once the free trial is over, Taylor looks like she will be happy to put '1989' on Apple Music - and possibly even sooner if Apple respond to Taylor and the independent labels' complaints about the free trial and give them compensation.
June 21, 201510 yr Wow, Taylor is 100% right! I even think she was too mild to Apple. Not paying anyone for three months is so unfair and ridiculous. Not only we indeed "don't ask for free iPhones" but also it's extremely uncompetitive to Spotify, if I were Spotify I'd sue Apple and make a complaint to anti monopoly agency. It seems that the record labels didn't really push for "free trial royalties" because they don't want to spoil the relationships with their by far biggest music distributor. I hope this open letter could shake up things a bit.
June 21, 201510 yr i didn't realise they weren't getting paid for these free trial plays!! Taylor's definitely in the right to refuse streaming of her album for those 3 months in that case, she makes a good point
June 22, 201510 yr Apple have already backed down and are going to pay artists during the free trial! Fantastic work Taylor and good on Apple on admitting they were wrong. Taylor has tweeted she is "elated". Ooh I do love a happy ending! Full story: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-33220189
June 22, 201510 yr And NOW don't you guys think it's all orchestrated? I mean, as I said, not paying artists was ridiculous idea by any means, and I'm sure so many labels, especially indie ones, would sue Apple for not paying royalties. That would cause a huge backlash towards Apple brand. I'm sure Apple couldn't go with that, as it would damage their reputation for a while. And decisions about hundreds of millions of dollars of extra payments aren't made in a DAY after one of the artists wrote an "open letter". This is not how financial models work, trust me. In such big companies like Apple it would be no less than a WEEK (and more likely far more but given they are about to open they could hurry up) to accept these extra payments. So to me it now all seems like a very cynical yet clever marketing strategy. But we have to wait and see. If Taylor puts her music on Apple streaming now AND doesn't put it off in like 6 months, then it is 99% orchestrated. And if so, Taylor went off Spotify not because she didn't like royalties, but because she had a good deal with Apple.
June 22, 201510 yr 1989 isn't on any streaming sites, so I don't buy that what apple were doing (which was bad) was the only reason for her to withhold the album, unless of-course she does put the album up on napster, tidal and other premium steaming services at the same time it goes on apple music
June 22, 201510 yr I have to say I didn't expect anything to happen, and certainly not within hours of Taylor's letter. That said, Apple have suffered a lot of negative press over the past week but then again all publicity is good publicity I guess. Personally I don't think it was orchestrated, and I wouldn't be surprised to see '1989' still kept off all streaming services, but the thought did cross my mind!
June 24, 201510 yr HDD are claiming that '1989' will now be on Apple Music when it launches next week, although maybe it is just a presumption: In addition to driving a stake through the controversy, Apple’s 11th-hour conversion means that it has the earnest support of Taylor Swift going into its launch—the service will not only have her catalog, along with mega-selling 1989, as part of its streaming offerings, but her blessing as well. Had they paid for that endorsement, it’s unlikely it would’ve had such impact. http://hitsdailydouble.com/news&id=296540 And Apple have announced their first exclusive, Pharrell's new single 'Freedom' will launch exclusive on Apple Music on June 30th: The song was heard for the first time at the Worldwide Developers Conference earlier this month when it was used in a promo video for the Beats 1 radio station. Pharrell released the above teaser video on his Facebook account to promote the track, confirming the release date and Apple exclusivity at the end of the footage. http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/news/a65...-exclusive.html
June 24, 201510 yr Oh, and Apple have now landed deals with over 20,000 independent labels following their change in artist payments during the free trial! Beggars comprises the imprints 4AD, XL, Matador and Rough Trade and has had a hand in the careers of Adele, Radiohead and Arcade Fire, among others; Merlin represents 20,000 labels and distributors worldwide. Apple Music, the hardware giant's soon-to-launch streaming service, has landed an eleventh-hour coup, striking deals with the independents’ digital rights organization Merlin and with Martin Mills’ indie powerhouse Beggars Group, sources tell Billboard. http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/660...-merlin-sources
June 24, 201510 yr And NOW don't you guys think it's all orchestrated? I mean, as I said, not paying artists was ridiculous idea by any means, and I'm sure so many labels, especially indie ones, would sue Apple for not paying royalties. That would cause a huge backlash towards Apple brand. I'm sure Apple couldn't go with that, as it would damage their reputation for a while. And decisions about hundreds of millions of dollars of extra payments aren't made in a DAY after one of the artists wrote an "open letter". This is not how financial models work, trust me. In such big companies like Apple it would be no less than a WEEK (and more likely far more but given they are about to open they could hurry up) to accept these extra payments. So to me it now all seems like a very cynical yet clever marketing strategy. But we have to wait and see. If Taylor puts her music on Apple streaming now AND doesn't put it off in like 6 months, then it is 99% orchestrated. And if so, Taylor went off Spotify not because she didn't like royalties, but because she had a good deal with Apple. Exactly what I'm thinking - both Apple and Taylor get to look good from it. I'm assuming the plan was for Apple to pay royalties regardless as a a 'loss-leader'. Thus, this whole charade brings a huge amount of publicity for both their new service and the wonderful amazing Taylor Swift. Hurrah for everybody! Edited June 24, 201510 yr by Doctor Blind
June 25, 201510 yr Taylor Swift @taylorswift13 1 hour ago After the events of this week, I've decided to put 1989 on Apple Music...and happily so. In case you're wondering if this is some exclusive deal like you've seen Apple do with other artists, it's not. This is simply the first time it's felt right in my gut to stream my album. Thank you, Apple, for your change of heart. Taylor coming for that UK chart longevity again! :cheer:
June 27, 201510 yr My question is: will Apple Music immediately count towards the chart? I would assume so~
June 27, 201510 yr We've had no confirmation but I'd think that as Apple are paying royalties the streams will count towards chart sales totals. I would expect streaming figures to go up a lot anyway. Can't be much longer before we get a new record for lowest actual sales for a sales #1 (Deorro sold less than 40k last week and the record is I think ~19k)
Create an account or sign in to comment