Vevo could make paid subscription in the future

[Colton]

Don’t be surprised if Vevo doesn’t remain completely free for much longer.



The video service, co-owned by Sony Music, Universal Music, Google and Abu Dhabi Media, has made its first ever acquisition: ShowYou, an online video platform which recently added tools to enable viewers to pay subscriptions or one-off transactions.



Vevo is currently an entirely free music streaming platform – a model which is fast becoming the enemy of major labels, especially Universal.



Spotify offers both free and premium tiers, with Universal believed to be pushing Daniel Ek to lock some content for paying fans only.



Meanwhile, SoundCloud has announced plans to launch a subscription tier this year. And even the majors’ biggest ‘frenemy’ in the digital space, YouTube, has recently launched a subscription tier to its offering with YouTube Red.



MBW understands that Vevo is keen to capitalise on its relationships with artists and managers to create more ‘premium’ content for their individual fanbases.



The question now is if, and how much, Vevo will charge for such footage.



The video site, which boasts 12 billion monthly views globally, has seen its financial model famously challenged in the past few years.



Last year, Vevo was reported to be on the block for a sale, but failed to find a buyer – ultimately because the amount it was paying in licensing fees to co-owners Sony and Universal didn’t make sense for potential acquirers.



The firm is yet to strike a licensing deal with Warner Music Group, but negotiations were believed to be revived in August after the appointment of former BBC exec Erik Huggers as CEO.



“With the acquisition of Showyou we take a significant step forward in re-positioning Vevo as a best-in-class product-driven organization,” said Huggers.



“Showyou allows us to accelerate our pace of innovation with the ability to rapidly add new and differentiated features as we iterate our products in 2016 and beyond.”



Vevo will be thinking long and hard about its strategy for any subscription move.



A YouTube rival offering windowed content to customers who paid just $2.99 a month, Vessel, launched in March and was trumpeted by Universal Music Group CEO Lucian Grainge.



However, MBW understands that the major labels have been disappointed by both consumer take-up and financial return from the startup thus far.



Added Mark Hall, Founder and President, Showyou:“With the streaming media segment still very much in its infancy I believe we have a tremendous leadership opportunity in front of us as we combine forces and become part of Vevo.



“Showyou’s capabilities, combined with the breadth and scale of the Vevo platform, will enable us to create an exciting new class of products that should delight both music fans and artists.”

www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/vevo-poised-for-subscription-move-after-first-ever-acquisition/

[wjr15]

Easier on the eyes to read this way

Dec 8, 2015 18:37:02 GMT -5 Colton said:

Don’t be surprised if Vevo doesn’t remain completely free for much longer.

The video service, co-owned by Sony Music, Universal Music, Google and Abu Dhabi Media, has made its first ever acquisition: ShowYou, an online video platform which recently added tools to enable viewers to pay subscriptions or one-off transactions.

Vevo is currently an entirely free music streaming platform – a model which is fast becoming the enemy of major labels, especially Universal.

Spotify offers both free and premium tiers, with Universal believed to be pushing Daniel Ek to lock some content for paying fans only.

Meanwhile, SoundCloud has announced plans to launch a subscription tier this year. And even the majors’ biggest ‘frenemy’ in the digital space, YouTube, has recently launched a subscription tier to its offering with YouTube Red.

MBW understands that Vevo is keen to capitalise on its relationships with artists and managers to create more ‘premium’ content for their individual fanbases.

The question now is if, and how much, Vevo will charge for such footage.

The video site, which boasts 12 billion monthly views globally, has seen its financial model famously challenged in the past few years.

Last year, Vevo was reported to be on the block for a sale, but failed to find a buyer – ultimately because the amount it was paying in licensing fees to co-owners Sony and Universal didn’t make sense for potential acquirers.

The firm is yet to strike a licensing deal with Warner Music Group, but negotiations were believed to be revived in August after the appointment of former BBC exec Erik Huggers as CEO.

“With the acquisition of Showyou we take a significant step forward in re-positioning Vevo as a best-in-class product-driven organization,” said Huggers.

“Showyou allows us to accelerate our pace of innovation with the ability to rapidly add new and differentiated features as we iterate our products in 2016 and beyond.”

Vevo will be thinking long and hard about its strategy for any subscription move.

A YouTube rival offering windowed content to customers who paid just $2.99 a month, Vessel, launched in March and was trumpeted by Universal Music Group CEO Lucian Grainge.

However, MBW understands that the major labels have been disappointed by both consumer take-up and financial return from the startup thus far.

Added Mark Hall, Founder and President, Showyou:“With the streaming media segment still very much in its infancy I believe we have a tremendous leadership opportunity in front of us as we combine forces and become part of Vevo.

“Showyou’s capabilities, combined with the breadth and scale of the Vevo platform, will enable us to create an exciting new class of products that should delight both music fans and artists.”

www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/vevo-poised-for-subscription-move-after-first-ever-acquisition/

[YourFaveIsAFlop]

Colton why do you insist on center justifying every post that you make? Do you not see that nobody writes posts that way because it makes them ridiculous to read?

The days of free streaming are numbered. It won't be long before the only free content on YouTube is amateur user produced content. Anything done professionally will be paywalled. Ad revenue just doesn't generate enough money for labels to keep doing it for free.

[tommymonster44]

Dec 9, 2015 9:34:59 GMT -5 YourFaveIsAFlop said:

Colton why do you insist on center justifying every post that you make? Do you not see that nobody writes posts that way because it makes them ridiculous to read?

The days of free streaming are numbered. It won't be long before the only free content on YouTube is amateur user produced content. Anything done professionally will be paywalled. Ad revenue just doesn't generate enough money for labels to keep doing it for free.

I'm not so sure that labels can start charging for currently free content, even though I'm sure they desperately want to. The problem that they face is that it is deeply ingrained in consumers' minds that Youtube videos are worth $0. Its difficult to make people throw money at what they consider to be a worthless service. If Vevo started charging money to watch music videos, people just won't watch music videos (see: Feeling Myself). I just don't think that most Youtube content is important enough to consumers for them to spend their paycheck on a subscription.

[Joe1240]

Really not surprised at all when you got people downloading the songs off of VEVO even through the quality doesn't match Apple Itunes. It was bound to happen sooner or later.The labels got to make money off the songs,they make none when someone downloads the song off of a VEVO music video.

[Envoirment]

If they start charging to watch music videos then the amount of views videos will get via Vevo will drastically reduce. Artists will then just upload their videos to their own non-vevo channels and make money from that. It doesn't make sense to me to charge people to watch a music video, it defeats the purpose of what a music video is meant to do (promote the song by being available to view). I mean, don't they make a lot of money from it anyway with advertisements?

[Au$tin]

Dec 12, 2015 10:45:22 GMT -5 Envoirment said:

If they start charging to watch music videos then the amount of views videos will get via Vevo will drastically reduce. Artists will then just upload their videos to their own non-vevo channels and make money from that. It doesn't make sense to me to charge people to watch a music video, it defeats the purpose of what a music video is meant to do (promote the song by being available to view). I mean, don't they make a lot of money from it anyway with advertisements?

This. VEVO isn't meant to be the same streaming service Spotify is. VEVO is meant to be a visual promotion aid for music, not a site where people go to listen to music casually. It can be used that way, but it's a bit weird of a service to do that with, especially when the free Spotify is such a better alternative. VEVO serves its purpose in the music industry greatly. I don't see why any record label would get behind this. They will lose out on free advertising because people won't be able to share videos that you have to be subscribed to a service to view. None of their friends can view it! Ergo, less people can see their artists' music, less people purchase or stream the music, less people buy tickets to their shows. Bad move all around.

[lyhom]

yeah I can understand why they could consider this since stuff like adblock exists but I doubt that many people would pay for a service just to watch music videos tbh

[Deleted]

I'm a strong believer of not paying for music unless its worth my coins. The number of music i paid for after checking out Youtube and the promotion value to free platform is unmeasurable. Sure make it a paid service but you wont get me or many others to pay for it and in the end lose on opportunities to make money of us for your artists future projects.

[YourFaveIsAFlop]

Dec 12, 2015 10:45:22 GMT -5 Envoirment said:

If they start charging to watch music videos then the amount of views videos will get via Vevo will drastically reduce. Artists will then just upload their videos to their own non-vevo channels and make money from that. It doesn't make sense to me to charge people to watch a music video, it defeats the purpose of what a music video is meant to do (promote the song by being available to view). I mean, don't they make a lot of money from it anyway with advertisements?

The labels each own a share of vevo, UMG being the biggest I believe. The labels by and large are the owners of the videos, not the artists. If they chose to go exclusive on a paid vevo service, there's not much the artist could do about it.

I would argue promo is not the purpose of videos anymore. That's an 80s conception of the function they serve. Videos are getting hundreds of millions of views from people who will never buy the song. The video is the product, not the way a product is being promoted.