Today the triumvirate of Universal Music, UK broadcaster Channel 4 and UK mobile operator Orange announced a Pay As You Go (PAYG) mobile music service called Monkey. The service is aimed squarely at younger consumers, which matches the demographic of PAYG users and Channel 4’s audience. The underlying principle of the service is that it has a low barrier to entry: it utilizes the voice network rather than data network and is thus available across all handsets and does not require any application download. Instead consumers simply dial 247 to listen to playlists streamed at 64 kbps. Most of the more sophisticated behaviour, such as playlist creation, music discovery etc., is expected to happen online, using a cloud based player, where tracks will be streamed at 128 kbps. Playlists can also be shared using widgets for major social networks and via text.
So what impact is this offering likely to have? It’s clearly aimed at enticing young consumers away from file sharing and the positioning point is effectively ‘free music when you top up your phone’. I think there is a risk of worst of both worlds here. Firstly, I don’t buy into the argument that streaming reduces file sharing penetration. It may cause file sharers to download less from P2P networks, but it’s unlikely to entice them away from them as they’ll still want music for their MP3 player, to burn onto CD for their friends etc. Granted, Monkey steps closer to being a replacement in that it has a portability story (of sorts) and it has a sharing story (of sorts). But it doesn’t provide true portability (what do you do when you’re underground for example) and it only offers partial catalogue.
The killer point though is that it uses voice minutes and the cost of calls is 20p per minute. So it will cost about 70p to listen to a single and an entire 10 pound top up will give you about 1 album and no time left for talking. So consumers are paying the same amount as an iTunes single download (even more for an album) but only getting a low quality analogue audio stream. (And what happens when somebody wants to call them when they’re listening over the voice line?)
*Orange just called me to clarify their press release. The press release reads:
- “Monkey customers can access the service on their phones by dialling [sic] 247.”
- “Calls cost 20p per minute”
However, following my phone call from Orange it transpires that the per minute pricing applies to voice only and not music calls, even though this isn’t actually explained in the release.
Also another interesting detail emerges: the service is actually a limited mobile music service, not an unlimited mobile music subscription, hence the careful use of the term ‘access to music’ in the release. Customers are only allowed to listen to 600 minutes of music per month on their phone (again not in the release), which translates into 14 albums. If you take a 30 pounds top up, that then translates into 2 pounds ten per album listen, so if you listen to an album, say 3 times in a month, that’s 6.30 an album. Which isn’t far off the cost of a standard album, but of course you don’t get to keep it after you’ve finished listening . The ’3 listens’ cost drops to 4.20 for a 20 pound top up, 2.10 if you just take a 10 pound top up. So still far from free, even though they’re being told it’s ‘free’ music, which in turn reinforces conceptions that music is a free commodity (thus further undermining perceived values of music).
The additional fact that Universal will make some releases available here before anywhere else is a brave move and underlines the major’s persistently adventurous product innovation. It will certainly be a key asset for demonstrating consumer value, but it will need careful positioning alongside premium products. How, for example, would a high-end 15 pounds a month subscriber to Virgin’s unlimited MP3 subscription service (also in conjunction with UMG) feel if they realized they were getting new releases after the lower end Monkey customers were?
The other interesting sub text here is the underwhelming success of Comes With Music (Universal and Orange are both key UK partners for Nokia). Is this picking up where CWM has failed to do so? As I’ve stated here many times before, I am a firm believer in the CWM model and I believe it is the best tool that the music industry currently has for fighting piracy. It is a genuinely compelling alternative to file sharing as it has a viable portability and ownership story. Unfortunately it’s been hindered by channel issues, marketing problems and limited consumer awareness and understanding.
When I asked how Monkey would be positioned alongside CWM, UMG’s Rob Wells said Monkey was aimed more at younger, lower end consumers and Orange’s Pippa Dunn said that Monkey was for PAYG customers whilst CWM was for subscription customers. Orange’s positioning is clean and elegant, but it’s a shame that CWM is effectively being marginalized as a high-end proposition. That is not its sweet spot. Indeed the strong CWM association with the 5800 illustrates Nokia’s understanding that CWM is best positioned at younger, lower spending consumers and that it does not stand up as well when held up against higher end digital music offerings. Also, from a broader music industry perspective CWM needs to be reaching younger consumers. I hope Monkey doesn’t distract from that.