Last week, I listened to the Podnews Weekly podcast with interest about how Spotify have taken over Apple in listener numbers which sparked conversations about why they’re falling behind. It got me thinking about the commercialisation of podcasting, how Spotify have an obvious income stream whereas Apple rely heavily on their own Premium Subscription paywall.
This was the response from my boostagram as discussed on the following episode (from around the 01:05:13 mark)
https://weekly.podnews.net/1538779/15044081-the-iab-s-new-numbers-and-our-first-week-using-fanmail
Transcription
1,000 sats from Si saying you talk a lot about Apple opening up their data, building podcast apps for non-Apple devices and capitalising their market share against Spotify. But what is their incentive? They can’t monetise through ad revenue, whereas Spotify have a reliable paywall that commercialises podcast content. How much do Apple even make through their podcast subscription model? Great idea on the virtual event in September. See you there and at Podcast Show London next week.
Apple does make a substantial amount. I mean they make 30% on all of their paid podcast subscriptions. So you’ve got that sort of side of it. Apple do sell advertising in some ways, and you could see that Apple could make a little bit more of that if they were in Android as well, but yes, I do take your point that it is easier to see a return for somebody like Spotify, who sell advertising within the app, than it would be for Apple. I think if you’re asking me why Apple hasn’t launched in Android yet, I think I would answer that by saying look, apple don’t want to give Google 30% of all of the money from a podcast subscription. That puts Apple into a very difficult place. So that’s what I think actually is going to be the case.
Sam:
But anyway, si, thank you for that. Well, I was going to say, I mean, one of the things I’ve banged on about, and no one else cares, is that Apple should put podcasts behind their subscription, just like Spotify has. And what I mean by that is, you know, if you pay your Apple Music and you pay your subscription for Apple Music, you get podcasts. Rather than podcasts being totally free, apple skews the market, spotify they’re totally free as well.
James:
No, but they can add supported right. Apple don’t have ads. I mean another Apple failure. I failure, I ads, if anyone remembers them.
Sam:
Um, look, apple skewed the market because anyone can get a podcast for free through apple. Everyone else has no chance really. Or charging, I mean value, for value is there because people out of their, you know, generosity will pay you, as a creator, some money, but the reality is, if they don’t want to, they just go to Apple. Oh, I’ll just go and listen to it on Apple for free then. And that Pavlovian behaviour that Apple’s created in the market is what skews podcasting, If they didn’t make everything free like that and it’s the only thing they do make free. So I’m totally weird as to why they do that. They make no money out of podcasting and they make everything free. I mean Mark Asquith did say it the first party data that’s available through Apple. If you’re not making any money, Apple, then at least give it back to the hosts. You know anyone who does delegated delivery, who supports Apple. Give them back that first party data. At least do something with it rather than leave it, you know, in a server that no one looks at.
James:
Yes, no, I would. I would certainly agree with that. I think that Apple should be much more open with the data that they have. I think that would be a very helpful thing.