Taylor Swift today announced via Twitter, “After the events of this week, I’ve decided to put 1989 on Apple Music… and happily so.”
Shocking. (dripping sarcasm) As you can see from the linked articles below, we’ve been rather skeptical that this is chain of events is mere happenstance. We see a manufactured conflict and resolution instead. It’s a win-win for all parties (not counting Spotify et al., of course).
If you’ve been following along, we predicted that this would happen on Monday:
So, will Apple Music now have Swift’s “1989” tracks among the its catalog of over 30 million songs? Exclusively, of course? Or, is that the cherry on top, the “news” that comes even closer to, or just after, Apple Music’s June 30th launch in order to guarantee another round of free publicity for the service (and Swift)? If so, kudos for that flourish, too!
And again on Tuesday:
Spotify is hating life even more today. Just wait until Swift announces that “1989” is exclusive to Apple Music.
Now, here it is on Thursday:
https://twitter.com/taylorswift13/status/614092816940167168
MacDailyNews Take: There have been no announcements that “1989” is coming to Spotify, so Swift’s latest album is exclusive to Apple Music vs. the current market leader.
We love it when a plan comes together (however transparent it may be to us).
SEE ALSO:
Apple Music signs 20,000 labels and distributors worldwide – June 24, 2015
Apple and ‘boneheaded’ decisions – June 23, 2015
Metallica’s Lars Ulrich backs Apple Music after its Taylor Swift moment – June 23, 2015
How Taylor Swift became music’s most powerful voice – June 23, 2015
Apple Music to pay rights holders on a per-stream basis during three-month free trial – June 22, 2015
Taylor Swift wins streaming battle as Apple backs down on royalty payments – June 22, 2015
Apple responds to Taylor Swift, indie label complaints; will pay royalties during Apple Music 3-month free trial – June 22, 2015
😉
I’m so shocked by this 😉
You go girl💥👀😍
I think I will play 1989 over and over and over, until I can listen to nothing else. Must have 1989.
Every song, every play, is 2 cents for Talor Swift. After 14,950 times listening to Bad Blood, she will be able to buy an iPod of her very own. I am so happy to help. I think I can do it within the trial period. I think I can, I think I can, I think I can…
Every song is 0.2 cent to Swift’s label. 5 plays = 1 cent to Swift’s label.
Sorry, thought it was 2 cents per play. New figures have me listening to Bad Blood for 10 and a half months. I don’t think they’ve done the science on that. It might have dire consequences. All for an iPod. Glad I didn’t say Apple Watch Edition.
0.2 cents per song
Cent. One or less penny.
Cents, more then one penny.
$0.002 = 0.2¢
What a trooper.
Well, if she can get all of her twitter followers to stream her album continuously for three months, we might be talking some real money here (not that she needs it!)
To be accurate MDN, your “prediction” is simply a list of questions that convey a suspicion.
The Tuesday statement was closer to a prediction.
Note: I agreed with your take earlier in the week.
I doubt very much this has been manufactured. Swift is too smart to risk her reputation and image. Apple knows better as well, especially since they have learned through bitter experience that any anti-trust “investigation” would bring such an agreement to light.
As MDN is obviously proud of their conspiracy theory, I am willing to give them a pass. But you’re right, it seemed dubious to me too.
from 1989 I prefer Skid Row’s album
I think she only did this because Pharrell announced some exclusive content to Apple Music. I wish she would go away.