Another Study Predicts Cloud Music To Boom

Seth_boom Earlier this month, ABI Research predicted that cloud music to boom in the next five years, reaching a subscriber of 161 million by 2016. They believed that smartphone penetration, a lowering in price, and an emerging Asia-Pacific market would give services like Spotify and Rhapsody a boost. Now, Juniper Research is saying similar things; they suspect that subscribers will reach 178 million by 2015, due to an increased 3G Access, i.e. smartphone penetration in China and India, also known as the emerging Asia-Pacific market.

According to the study's author Daniel Ashdown, "markets where a combination of a large population, rising mobile subscriber penetration, and developing economies that represent a golden opportunity for mobile music services." By 2015, Ashdown believes that mobile music will become a $5.5 billion industry.

As Hypebot has said before, increased mobile access and a lowering of price does not guarantee a boom, and even if it does occur, its sustainability depends on elements – like the balance of effortlessness and investment and increased awareness of cloud-based services – that haven't even been figured out yet.

There's no signs that the record industry can handle a boom of this magnitude either, because it could topple their iceberg and erode profitability before they're ready to watch CDs and digital downloads decline. Musicans also lose, if not prepared. The fact is that convenience devalues culture and access impedes ownership. Spotify and Rhapsody are only great for artists and the industry if done correctly, yet consumers will have music streams their way regardless.

Juniper Research:
Subscribers – 178 million by 2015
Emerging Markets – China and India
3G Access Boom

ABI Research:
Subscribers – 161 million by 2016
Emerging Markets – Asia-Pacific
3G Access Boom

Share on:


  1. Ohohoh, seriously disagree with part of the last paragraph.
    I highly doubt that convenience devalues culture. It might be true on a piece-by-piece basis; but not true on the whole. In other words: now people want to consume 1000 works of culture for 20 per month, instead of 20 years ago, when they just wanted 100. (totally making up the numbers here)
    On the other side of the equation there’s the fact that it’s now easier to produce good music than ever before and (arguably) more people are making and releasing their own ‘recordings’/productions. This fact could be argued to be equally devaluing as the prior side of the equation, in my opinion.
    Anyway, I think we both have a lot to say about this topic 🙂 Plus I understand that your point is a hyperlink, but it was still a little too easy to just let it slip by 😉

  2. I understand that the statement alone is too sharp. The link expands on it. Also, when effort is taken out of music, it does lessen the perceived value of it. I'm not really talking in momentary terms, more so psychological processes that shape the monetary expense we justify.

Comments are closed.