Here’s the next contestant in the never ending stream of music services, each of which, inevitably, slide into financial disaster at some point. Music service MOG says they’ll launch MOG All Access by Thanksgiving this year. It’s an on demand music streaming and Internet radio service that will cost $5 per month. The four major labels – Universal Music Group, Sony Music, Warner Music Group and EMI Music are on board, plus thousands of indie labels via IODA and Beggars Group.
Sounds great, except users can listen to streaming on demand music for free today at MySpace Music and Spotify, which is preparing to launch in the U.S. Will MOG’s user experience be so compelling that users will pay $60/year for something they can get free elsewhere?
In January we first heard MOG’s plans for the service. At the time it sounded compelling – it combined a great user experience with a free streaming model. But the crucial part of that service has vaporized – it’s no longer free. And non-free music subscription services don’t work, despite years of attempts by major companies and startups alike.
We’ve championed MOG in the past, but this looks like yet another music failure to us. Too bad the labels didn’t agree to a pure revenue split, which is what CEO David Hyman was hoping for back in January.
MOG has raised around $12 million to date from Menlo Ventures, Simon Equity, Universal Music Group and Sony Music, among others.
I just got in and read about it here first…
So, the Zune Pass is considered a failure? Microsoft’s still riding with it, and expanding it to include OS X and Windows Mobile in the future.
You’re not wrong Dan, but it is my understanding that there is a significant difference in streaming on-demand license and music downloads (ZunePass etc.).
What will happen to the subscription download services when the default isn’t to download music at all? That may be the question to ask.
I read on the NYTimes article by Brad Stone ( http://bit.ly/TsOaP) that there is little certainty that Spotify will be free here in the US, like it is in Europe…
>>”Spotify says it hopes to bring the service to the United States early next year, but it could look somewhat different here. American music labels are increasingly resistant to the idea of licensing their catalogs to any new service offering free music with ads, because they have already backed free music downloading sites like MySpace Music and Imeem.
“We like Spotify as our partner in Europe, but we would like them to move more toward a paid subscription environment,” said Thomas Hesse, president of global digital business at Sony Music.”
The premise in Brad’s piece is that there is an opening for Mog, and maybe some others.
Not sure why the slam on MOG considering it’s the labels that are changing their tune. I would think you would be applauding another go at it, despite the difficulties of the past.
http://bit.ly/bT0yc
Over at Wired, MOG identified the problem with their service:
“…Hyman says that is not possible due to the high cost of licensing on-demand music for the United States.
“We were exploring that model, but ultimately, that model doesn’t work,” Hyman told Wired.com. “That’s not limited to MOG — that’s for every company… none of these labels are doing it at a price point where you can offset it with ad dollars. It’s very simple economics.”
i.o.w. the labels are still fighting innovation. wtg!
If major label music were a startup, it would be over valued and under funded.
Ads support tv and movies on the Internet. And as a product, they consume many more manhours of effort to produce than the average song; they utilize more bandwidth to distribute; and, have many more stakeholders to remunerate at the end of the day.
Labels are just greedy.
And tech companies and VCs aren’t?
Labels are greedy curmudgeons. Tech companies and VCs are greedy innovators who have consumer interests in mind to make profits. The people like the free music, but the labels like their money more.
dead on arrival.
I still don’t see how a free service is supposed to work. If Mog delivers as described, with all the streaming and the playlists etc., and there wasn’t a free equivalent competitor, I would definitely poney up the $5.
Spotify isn’t sounding too confident…
http://www.nyti...succ-31491.html
revolutionary
Free ad-supported model will not work. MOG is unfortunately at the mercy of the misguided labels here, yet they seem to have developed a pretty compelling and user-friendly service considering the circumstances.
Why the thorns for MOG? Pretty cool site created primarily for people who love music. I would support this company before others in this space as they try to help determine the future of music distribution and consumption.
It still sounds and is compelling!
I have followed Mog from the start. If their music streaming product comes close to what we are used to from Mog, they’ll have a winner. For $5/month, I will be subscribing.
$12M down the drain. MOG sold out awhile ago. The original vision was disruptive and great, what it is today is a doomed farce.