Well she has a big selling power and Spotify would actually hurt her, so she makes right decision. After the album dies down, she will upload it there for sure.
It's a good strategy for an artist
living in 1989
with a large fanbase.
But not a good policy for someone looking to grow their fanbase.
Since she appears to be going after a more global pop audience, I'm not sure if this is such a good idea. In some markets, people don't buy music, but if they get a chance to listen they might buy concert tickets.
If they're following the pattern similar to Red, I predict that the second/third singles won't be on Spotify until months after they've peaked. The fourth single will probably be available once it's sent to radio (22 teas). The actual album will go up sometime in mid-Summer.
Now that Youtube is counted into the Hot 100, her label will probably bank on the majority of her streams to come from there.
Bad idea. You should want to have as many people hear your album as possible but unfortunately most artists/labels think it's all about sales.
That's the one thing I hate about Adele's albums. They should have been on Spotify sooner.
That's an AWFUL idea, especially considering her Deluxe exclusivity deal with Target.
Her team knows that her fans are actually shelling out cold hard cash for physical copies and iTunes. So why would they put it out for streaming (which people can illegally rip)? Especially when streaming barely generates the same amount as an album or single sale.
It's obviously because she and her label don't want to hurt 1989's sales? None of the albums thats been released this year hasn't gone platinum because people rather listen music by free than buying it. Streaming is taking over both album and single sales so it's smart. I'm sure they will put it 8 months later or something.