Audible subsidizes its streaming plan via premium credits: Difference between revisions

'''[[Audible]],''' an audiobook marketplace and subsidiary of [[Amazon]], is transitioning from a traditional purchase model into a streaming service.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last=Greene |first=Daniel |date=2025-08-25 |title=Nail in Audible's coffin |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BJIZA_OpDw |url-status=live |access-date=25 Aug 2025 |website=[[YouTube]]}}</ref><ref name=":1">{{Cite web |last=Hartness |first=John |date=25 Aug 2025 |title=AUTHORS ASSEMBLE! Audible generative AI takeover {{!}} How this hurts Authors and Narrators |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLKQAASI6y0 |url-status=live |access-date=25 Aug 2025 |website=[[YouTube]]}}</ref><ref name=":4">{{Cite web |last=Greene |first=Daniel |date=12 Aug 2025 |title=Audible is Broken |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhTmMv_s578 |url-status=live |access-date=25 Aug 2025 |website=[[YouTube]]}}</ref><ref name=":3">{{Cite web |date=25 Aug 2025 |title=Learn more about audio books with virtual voice |url=https://kdp.amazon.com/en_US/help/topic/G3QRL9HQNF273Q2H |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250825204046/https://kdp.amazon.com/en_US/help/topic/G3QRL9HQNF273Q2H |archive-date=25 Aug 2025 |access-date=25 Aug 2025 |website=[[Amazon]]}}</ref> In August 2025, Audible has changed their royalty structure to subsidize this transition, by taking money consumers spend on audiobooks and distributing it across all the audiobooks the consumer listened to that month, regardless of whether or not the audiobook was purchased or streamed using Audible's streaming service.<ref name=":4" /><ref name=":8">{{Cite web |last=Sullivan |first=Robin |date=8 August 2025 |title=Convince Audible to revise it's New Royalty Model |url=https://www.change.org/p/convince-audible-to-revise-it-s-new-royalty-model |url-status=live |access-date=26 Aug 2025 |website=[[Change.org]]}}</ref><ref name=":5">{{Cite web |author=paigevoice |date=13 Aug 2025 |title=Audible's new royalty mess |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QZEEXOtJik |url-status=live |access-date=2025-08-25 |website=[[YouTube]]}}</ref>

Audible, founded in 1995, is the longstanding global market leader for purchasing and listening to audiobooks.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |last=Knight |first=Lucy |date=2025-05-13 |title=Audible unveils plans to use AI voices to narrate audio books |url=https://www.theguardian.com/books/2025/may/13/audible-unveils-plans-to-use-ai-voices-to-narrate-audiobooks |url-status=live |access-date=25 Aug 2025 |website=The Guardian}}</ref> Since 2020, Audible has offered two plan-types to consumers: a premium plan that gives credits consumers can use to purchase audiobooks and a non-premium plan that allows consumers to stream an Audible-curated selection of audiobooks.<ref>{{Cite web |last= |date=24 Aug 2020 |title=All-You-Can-Listen Membership Option, Audible Plus, Rolls Out in Preview |url=https://www.audible.com/about/newsroom/all-you-can-listen-membership-option-audible-plus-rolls-out-in-preview |url-status=live |access-date=26 Aug 2025 |website=[[Audible]]}}</ref> Common knowledge suggests if a credit is spent on an audiobook, the author and audible split that credit by some agreed upon percentage.<ref name=":5" /> For an audiobook streamed through Audible, it is reasonable to expect the subscription price is split between all streamed audiobooks for the given month.

==Consumer rights impact summary==

===Digital ownership erosion===

Since 2020, Audible has been transitioning its marketplace from a traditional purchase model into a [[Subscription service|streaming service]]. In August 2025, Audible unveiled a new royalty structure to siphon money from credit purchases to subsidize their streaming library.<ref name=":4" /><ref name=":8" />  

In the past, if you wanted to purchase an audiobook on Audible, you purchased a credit and then used that credit to buy the audiobook you desired.<ref name=":5" /> The understanding was the cut of the credit that went towards the author, only went to the author of the audiobook that was purchased. In August 2025, Audible unveiled a new royalty structure combining its credit-based sales with its streaming service, creating a system that indirectly pushes authors toward the streaming environment.<ref name=":3" /><ref name=":5" /><ref name=":6">{{Cite web |date=2024-07-11 |title=Audible's New Royalty Model: More Opportunities for Authors and Publishers |url=https://www.audible.com/about/newsroom/audibles-new-royalty-model-more-opportunities-for-authors-and-publishers |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240711211955/https://www.audible.com/about/newsroom/audibles-new-royalty-model-more-opportunities-for-authors-and-publishers |archive-date=11 Jul 2024 |access-date=25 Aug 2025 |website=Audible}}</ref> When a user purchases a book using a credit and also streams another title in the same month, the royalty pool from that single credit is split between both the purchased and streamed works.<ref name=":8" /><ref name=":5" /> While financially efficient for Audible, this structure dilutes the revenue earned per title and forces authors to subsidize the growth of Audible's streaming catalog.<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":8" /> Even if authors opt-out of the streaming catalog, they are not protected from the royalty split.<ref name=":4" /><ref name=":8" /> Audible has created a system that encourages the streaming catalog to be increasingly populated by works that can be produced cheaply or en masse, such as AI-generated content. Over time, this dynamic risks reducing the diversity and sustainability of high-quality content, narrowing consumer choice.

A petition at change.org has been made to convince Amazon to change this. https://www.change.org/p/convince-audible-to-revise-its-new-royalty-model?source_location=psf_petitions

In June 2025, a federal judge allowed an antitrust lawsuit against Amazon/Audible to proceed.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Scarcella |first=Mike |date=2025-06-20 |title=Amazon must face authors' lawsuit over audiobook distribution, US judge rules |url=https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/amazon-must-face-authors-lawsuit-over-audiobook-distribution-us-judge-rules-2025-06-11 |url-status=live |access-date=25 Aug 2025 |website={{Wplink|Reuters}}}}</ref> The lawsuit, filed by independent author Christine DeMaio (CD Reiss), alleges Audible discriminates against authors who do not participate in its 90-day exclusivity program by offering higher royalties (40% vs. 25%), potentially violating antitrust laws. The court found sufficient grounds to move forward.

One user expressed displeasure at the restructured royalties: <ref name=":8" /><blockquote>

I've been a plus user for years. Learning that how it's been restructured is actively harming the indie authors I discovered through this platform is disappointing. If you won't correct this then I'll have to take my business elsewhere.</blockquote>Another user on the petition said: <ref name=":8" /><blockquote>

I've been an Audible subscriber for years (at least 12... maybe more... I don't know). If I'm being honest, I've never given much thought to exactly how my Premium Plus membership is being divvied up, but I can tell you for sure, the proposed Audible breakdown is not how I would have guessed or expected it to be done.</blockquote>

The user hawaiianshirtwizzard9542 on where they expect their audible credit to go:<ref name=":4" /><blockquote>

When I spend money on a credit, I assumed the full value (or whatever agreed upon percentage of that credit) was going to that one author. Never in my life would I have expected that part of that credit would go to some pool of  authors I wasn’t paying for. Audible thinks its users are stupid and I’ve had enough.</blockquote>

The user RariettyC said: <ref name=":4" /><blockquote>

God, the streaming/subscription model really is tearing through artistic industries. I feel like so much of the conversations I see are surrounding Netflix, Spotify, and other platforms’ devaluing movies, TV shows, music, and video games but every single artistic field seems to be shifting towards more power and profit going to conglomerates who control access rather than the actual creatives who created.</blockquote>

The user sacredwisp said: <ref name=":4" /><blockquote>

They're obviously doing this intentionally to get more people over to the new system, because it benefits them more long term.</blockquote>

{{Reflist}}