Google shopping for a streaming music service?
There is some speculation that Google will make a run at Spotify. With 10 million subscribers and a valuation of $4 billion, Spotify is set to go public this fall. But with its stock priced at $553 a share, Google has a high-priced currency that it can use to purchase Spotify before the company's stock trades. If Google waits until Spotify's IPO to make a move on the company, the potential price could be much higher and more than Google is willing to pay.
Another big name in the streaming music business that might be easier for Google to purchase would be Pandora. Already a public company, Pandora currently has a market capitalization of $5.1 billion. Figure a 25% to 40% premium for Pandora stockholders, and a purchase of the music streamer would certainly be a manageable transaction for Google.
1. j_scorp (Posts: 29; Member since: 22 Oct 2013)
I'm buying Pandora stock ASAP. Hedging my bets.
10. sgodsell (Posts: 1834; Member since: 16 Mar 2013)
Google you got the money. Just buy both Spotify and Pandora. ;-)
2. PBXtech (Posts: 997; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)
Develop your own. Google did an outstanding job with Google Now, put that same effort to making their own music service just as good.
And the more of these companies that get purchased, the less options we have as consumers.
16. phonetekmek (Posts: 70; Member since: 04 Oct 2013)
Google has Play Music All Access and has plans to do another competing service on youtube. But if you can instantly get millions subscribers with a purchase why not. Google has no obligation to worry abouth consumer options, their job is to please the investors and make sure they have returns on their investments. Same with Pandora. Spotify being private is for the benefit off the owner. Apple could've easily have built their own streaming service and high end headphone line, but the easier choice was to buy Beats.
22. PBXtech (Posts: 997; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)
I know, I used their music service when it was introduced. As I said though, Google buying another service already in existence just lowers the variety consumers have to choose from.
As for Apple, I'd bet my money they purchased Beats more for the brand recognition than the actual service. Their own music service wasn't doing as well as they had expected so an injection of Beats users, and more importantly, the hardware was a draw for the purchase to be made.
7. Mxyzptlk (Posts: 5358; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
No no no. Google can keep their hands off iheart radio. I don't want it butchered like they did with youtube.
8. Antimio (Posts: 280; Member since: 11 Nov 2013)
youtube is awesome, man! if you have a better idea, well, i would like to know!
9. XperiaFanZone (Posts: 1563; Member since: 21 Sep 2012)
YouTube is awesome. But Google shouldn't have owned it.
11. PBXtech (Posts: 997; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)
Not a fan of the advertisements in YouTube.
17. phonetekmek (Posts: 70; Member since: 04 Oct 2013)
So what revenue stream would you have liked youtube to pursue? Subscription based?
18. phonetekmek (Posts: 70; Member since: 04 Oct 2013)
iheart is owned by ClearChannel if I am correct. I doubt they will sell.
12. HTCOE (Posts: 603; Member since: 20 Nov 2011)
If you owned youtube would you leave out ads? think about it deeply
and iheart radio is a way for google music to access vehicles via radio (including ads or none if you ditch traditional satellite radio and subscribe to some google loon radio blah blah blah)...you know if apple does it first they will somehow with the beats aqcuisition have it where after listening to a track in your car you can purchase it right there and store it on the "whatever they will call it" integrated with their car play and etc.
imagine controlling the radio hits with your service
did i say too much....ooooops
13. PBXtech (Posts: 997; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)
YouTube doesn't need ads before the videos, or during either (especially). Ads on the pages to the side are more than enough.
25. blazee (Posts: 337; Member since: 02 Jan 2012)
The ads on the video bring profit to video creators. They can opt out of the ads if they want to
14. GreekGeek (Posts: 891; Member since: 22 Mar 2014)
Nooooooo not Spotify, for the love of God! Google will torment the free user base if ever this happens
15. galanoth (Posts: 371; Member since: 26 Nov 2011)
I say Google just buy both.
Integrate Pandora radio algorithm into Play Music Radio.
And Play Music will get all the Spotify user base.
They have the cash.
They would be the biggest name in streaming music.
It wouldn't be a monopoly because of Apple/Beats, Rdio, iHeartRadio.
20. phonetekmek (Posts: 70; Member since: 04 Oct 2013)
I like the Play Music All Access service. I have over 3000 songs uploaded, access to their huge catalog and their radio service (which is admitantly just ok). I signed up with the free trial and have the old 7.99 monthly fee. If they had the Pandora algorithim it would be the best service hands down. Radio is the only way that it is lacking. Or simpily steal the best talent from Spotify and Pandora and have them work for you.
24. downphoenix (Posts: 2585; Member since: 19 Jun 2010)
Spotify has a better radio service than Pandora. When I pick an artist station, about 20% of the songs are that artist. When I do the same with Spotify's radio, it's more like 80%.
26. dorian827 (Posts: 131; Member since: 28 Jul 2012)
Hopefully they purchase Pandora or something else. Spotify is such a GREAT service provider stand alone. Google once they purchase something seem to attach a bunch of unnecessary components and requirements to continue using the product.
I'll definitely be leaving Spotify Premium in that case