Streaming music services like Apple Music, Spotify, Google Play Music, Pandora, and others are continuing to grow in popularity and in 2018, were responsible for 75 percent of total U.S. music industry revenues, according to a new year-end music industry report released today by the RIAA. [PDF]
Revenue from streaming platforms grew 30 percent year over year and hit $7.4 billion. Total music industry revenue for 2018 was at $9.8 billion, up from $8.8 billion in 2017 and $7.6 billion in 2016.
/article-new/2019/02/musicindustryrevenues-800x669.jpg?lossy)
Digital downloads from storefronts like iTunes made up 11 percent of total revenue in 2018, and physical sales of records and CDs made up 12 percent. Digital downloads fell for the sixth consecutive year and were eclipsed by physical sales, which were also down, with the exception of vinyl record sales (up 8%).
Paid on-demand subscription services like Apple Music were responsible for much of the music industry's revenue growth, with ad-supported services and customized radio services making up a smaller portion of the growth.
/article-new/2019/02/musicindustrystreamingrevenues-800x641.jpg?lossy)
Overall subscription revenues increased a total of 32 percent from 2017 to 2018, totaling $5.4 billion, thanks to 42 percent growth in the average number of paid subscriptions.
The RIAA does not break down revenue by subscription music service, but at last count, Apple Music had 50 million paying subscribers, while Spotify had 87 million.
Top Rated Comments
(View all)Yes, we’ll inevitably have the comments about “I like to keep my music local”, and whilst I’m the same, these numbers don’t lie.
When I was younger, the only way to listen to an album at home was to buy it or to pirate it — and that’s if you had a modem connection which could download your 64kbps WMA, or if the Limewire share was the actual song.
Streaming is the currently the best of both those worlds, and whilst it’s not perfect, it’s a great choice to have.
Amazing. After 30 minutes nobody has thought up anything they can argue about related to this article.
I can always see it the other way...That's $7.4 Billion thrown away by music consumers. In the past, we'd buy an LP or CD and own it forever. Over the years if we were enthusiasts, we'd have hundreds of "Albums" we owned forever.
Now with renting streaming music, after a year of listening to music, you own nothing. Zero. And after 5 years, spending all that money on monthly subscriptions, you'd still own nothing.
Renting music via streaming may be convenient and worthwhile in the short run, but in the long run it's definitely a loser. No wonder is so excited about it.
Sure there’s certain pride for collecting physical music. At some point I did it myself. But I’ve been dissapointed way too many times. Bought a CD album only for 2 or 3 songs I like (the rest is filler garbage). There’s also dirty tricks like double dipping with enhanced, collector edition that comes much later with bonus exclusives I might love, so I'd have to buy the entire album, again? What a waste of money.
On the other side, you can also never purchase or own your internet, netflix, utilities or cable tv, you can only rent them each month. Doing the same for music isn’t exactly the end of the world. It is already a familiar concept.
I’d rather listen to millions songs I rent, instead of playing 1000 songs I purchased, over and over.
As a bonus, no more double dip duplicates or garbage fillers. Any collector edition albums will also be available to stream.
Streaming is great...until it isn't (price increases, increasingly fragmented libraries, availability changes frequently, quality control of titles, etc.)
My fear is that in the future rights holders will only offer via streaming - essentially eliminating any option to purchase/own outright.