Quote

Most recently, a new report from the Financial Times indicates that major record companies are pushing to preserve the profits of the model by pressuring DSPs to raise subscription prices for consumers.

 

In fact, Spotify has already done this for the beginning of next year. According to FT, the company will raise United States subscription prices in 2026's first quarter. Their last price raise in the U.S. was in July of last year, now at $11.99 a month in comparison to the $9.99 a month price point that it launched with 14 years ago. Also, Spotify has reportedly increased subscription pricing in recent months in other countries like the United Kingdom, Switzerland, and Australia.

 

With this in mind, it looks like major labels want not just Spotify to continue these protections of profit, but also all other streaming services such as Apple Music. They have competitive reasons to push for these fee increases. Reportedly, record companies argued that current subscription prices have lagged inflation and that video services like Netflix are rendering their price points as too cheap.

 

Back to Spotify's confirmed price increase, though, they reportedly want to sustain profits for the company with these price increases. JPMorgan analysts reportedly predicted a $500 million boost for the company's annual revenue if they raise their subscription fees by a dollar a month.

 

"We will act when the time is right for each specific market, and we'll do it at the appropriate price based on those market dynamics," Alex Norström reportedly stated regarding U.S. pricing during an earnings call this month. He and Gustav Söderström will take over Spotify's chief executive office following the step-down of cofounder Daniel Ek.

Source

 

 

I think there's an argument to be made for $30/month music streaming, but it's not one worth making until there's a payment structure that puts artists before tech giants and record labels. People pay a LOT more than spotify and apple music for streaming services they use a LOT less.

Edited November 29, 2025Nov 29 by Sheep

Let Luigi free now.

Let me just cancel my subscription and go back to buying CD's

3 minutes ago, Sheep said:

I think there's an argument to be made for $30/month music streaming, but it's not one worth making until there's a payment structure that puts artists before tech giants and record labels. People pay a LOT more than spotify and apple music for streaming services they use a LOT less.

People will go back to buying physicals before they pay $30 a month for streaming.

 

Hell, iTunes might become more viable before people pay that rate.

Streaming is so cheap it should be $30

These greedy labels who barely do any artist development or real marketing anymore thinking they deserve more money

10 minutes ago, 57.5 said:

People will go back to buying physicals before they pay $30 a month for streaming.

 

People pay a lot more than $30/month for video streaming and it's much more inconvenient to swap out dozens of CDs per day then a couple blu rays per week. I agree that iTunes should be a viable alternative to streaming. Right now it isn't and that should tell you that the cost calculation went off somewhere.

 

Again though, this isn't a conversation worth having imo until streaming services and record labels work together to compensate artists instead of themselves.

Edited November 29, 2025Nov 29 by Sheep

Bring back piracy

not to be illegal but if they dare to put it up to 30 dollars like you guys are suggesting then sorry but im just buying a year's subscription for 10 bucks from one of them shady websites , my friend did it and it turned his apps language to Urdu … but he copes 

4 minutes ago, Sheep said:

 

People pay a lot more than $30/month for video streaming and it's much more inconvenient to swap out dozens of CDs per day then a couple blu rays per week. I agree that iTunes should be a viable alternative to streaming. Right now it isn't and that should tell you that the cost calculation went off somewhere.

 

Again though, this isn't a conversation worth having imo until streaming services and record labels work together to compensate artists instead of themselves.

Paying $30+ cumulatively is not the same as paying $30 for one service alone.

 

And if one service alone costs $30 people will ration the others if they feel it is a necessity for them. 
 

The greed has gone too far.

8 minutes ago, glitch said:

These greedy labels who barely do any artist development or real marketing anymore thinking they deserve more money

There is no real reason in 2025 for an artist to join a major label or music listeners to support one that belongs to a major one

 

All they do now is pick a nepo baby buy fake plays and autoplay

 

Music is cheap, visuals are cheap, their performance ability is extremely limited

 

All they do now is cash these new dry cows

 

 

17 minutes ago, Sheep said:

I think there's an argument to be made for $30/month music streaming, but it's not one worth making until there's a payment structure that puts artists before tech giants and record labels. People pay a LOT more than spotify and apple music for streaming services they use a LOT less.

This has to be their end goal. why honestly keep paying for service anymore? Because with AI I wouldn't be surprised if we can just make our own music instantly one day (hypothetically). For so long both industries have been seemingly working against each other but I think they are going to have to work together in defense of human artists vs profit. A lot of people wouldn't mind paying more if it meant artists received a cut that made sense. 

2 minutes ago, 57.5 said:

Paying $30+ cumulatively is not the same as paying $30 for one service alone.

 

And if one service alone costs $30 people will ration the others if they feel it is a necessity for them. 
 

The greed has gone too far.

The everything as a subscription economy is stupid, spill. 

Make audio truly LOSSLESS first and THEN we can talk. 

Comparing Spotify to video streaming services is silly when piracy has seen a 66% increase since 2020.

We can blame that on price increases & every network now wanting their own streaming services. Now networks keep increasing their costs to compensate for the loss in users and it becomes a never ending cycle.
 

 

Increasing the price of Spotify will have the same effect. It won't benefit artists in the long run as users will just move to piracy as we have seen with video services.

Edited November 29, 2025Nov 29 by BTS

8 minutes ago, BTS said:

Comparing Spotify to video streaming services is silly when piracy has seen a 66% increase since 2020.

We can blame that on price increases & every network now wanting their own streaming services. Now networks keep increasing their costs to compensate for the loss in users and it becomes a never ending cycle.
 

 

Increasing the price of Spotify will have the same effect. It won't benefit artists in the long run as users will just move to piracy as we have seen with video services.

Tea, already annoyed at the £2 price rise for Spotify here in the UK, they put it up more than that & i'm jumping ship 

24 minutes ago, BTS said:

Comparing Spotify to video streaming services is silly when piracy has seen a 66% increase since 2020.

We can blame that on price increases & every network now wanting their own streaming services. Now networks keep increasing their costs to compensate for the loss in users and it becomes a never ending cycle.
 

 

Increasing the price of Spotify will have the same effect. It won't benefit artists in the long run as users will just move to piracy as we have seen with video services.

Yeah, but on Spotify you basically get access to all released music, while video streaming services only give you a tiny slice of the total video content out there. So in that regard it makes more sense to pay a higher price for Spotify than what these video platforms are charging right now. 

If they do, I'll just go back to downloading stuff. I'm not paying 30$ a month, no way.

I haven't paid for a single music streaming service ever and never will as long as physical and digital copies are available to buy. Don't have time for the games 

1 hour ago, Sheep said:

I think there's an argument to be made for $30/month music streaming, but it's not one worth making until there's a payment structure that puts artists before tech giants and record labels. People pay a LOT more than spotify and apple music for streaming services they use a LOT less.

at $30/month, it's cheaper long term to buy the music on iTunes. At that point, most people are just going to go back to pirating

7 minutes ago, Cesar said:

at $30/month, it's cheaper long term to buy the music on iTunes. At that point, most people are just going to go back to pirating

Piracy drops to nothing in the developed world when there's affordable and convenient options, we've seen it with music and we saw it with tv/movies before the streaming fragmentation. iTunes still checks both of those boxes. At some point I think there's going to be a backlash to subscription fatigue that isn't just turning to annoying and less convenient free options.

Edited November 29, 2025Nov 29 by Sheep

Okay but can they increase the quality of the artists because these prices are getting out of control.

Most of us listen to no more than 500 songs. It's better to just download them 

The nerve of these labels when they are the ones withholding music on the platform from us. 

Edited November 29, 2025Nov 29 by Taylor fanboy