Audible subsidizes its streaming plan via premium credits

⚠️ Article status notice: This article has been marked as incomplete

This article needs additional work for its sourcing and verifiability to meet the wiki's Content Guidelines and be in line with our Mission Statement for comprehensive coverage of consumer protection issues. In particular:

1. Relies too heavily on Youtube sources

This notice will be removed once the issue/s highlighted above have been addressed and sufficient documentation has been added to establish the systemic nature of these issues. Once you believe the article is ready to have its notice removed, please visit the Moderator's noticeboard, or the discord and post to the #appeals channel.

Learn more ▼

This Article Requires Additional Verification

---

This article has been flagged due to verification concerns. While the topic might have merit, the claims presented lack citations that live up to our standards, or rely on sources that are questionable or unverifiable by our standards. Articles must meet the Moderator Guidelines and Mission statement; factual accuracy and systemic relevance are required for inclusion here!

Why This Article Is In Question

---

Articles in this wiki are required to:

• Provide verifiable & credible evidence to substantiate claims.
• Avoid relying on anecdotal, unsourced, or suspicious citations that lack legitimacy.
• Make sure that all claims are backed by reliable documentation or reporting from reputable sources.

Examples of issues that trigger this notice:

• A topic that heavily relies on forum posts, personal blogs, or other unverifiable sources.
• Unsupported claims with no evidence or citations to back them up.
• Citations to disreputable sources, like non-expert blogs or sites known for spreading misinformation.

How You Can Improve This Article

---

To address verification concerns:

• Replace or supplement weak citations with credible, verifiable sources.
• Make sure that claims are backed by reputable reporting or independent documentation.
• Provide additional evidence to demonstrate systemic relevance and factual accuracy. For example:
  • Avoid: Claims based entirely on personal anecdotes or hearsay without supporting documentation.
  • Include: Corporate policies, internal communications, receipts, repair logs, verifiable video evidence, or credible investigative reports.

If you believe this notice has been placed in error, or once the article has been updated to address these concerns, please visit the #appeals channel on our Discord server: Join here.

📰	This page or section is about an ongoing event. Check again later for more coverage.

Audible, an audiobook marketplace and subsidiary of Amazon, is changing its royalty structure to subsidize its streaming service with premium credit purchases. In August 2025, the new structure took effect. It works by spreading the reader's plan value and premium credits across all books the reader listened to during the month, regardless of whether or not the audiobook was purchased or streamed using Audible's streaming service.

Background

Audible, founded in 1995, is the longstanding global market leader for purchasing and listening to audiobooks. 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. Common knowledge suggests if a credit is spent on an audiobook, the author and audible split that credit by some agreed upon percentage. 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 shifting more focus on its streaming service. In August 2025, Audible unveiled a new royalty structure to siphon money from credit purchases to subsidize their streaming library.

Disingenuous pricing structure

In August 2025, Audible rolled out their new royalty structure which fundamentally changes how authors are paid when their books are streamed. Instead of the streaming plan being primary funding method for streamed books (via an up-front fee), the new structure takes the reader's plan value, adds the the value of any additional credits used, and then divides that value among the titles the reader listened to over the month.

Streaming favors larger authors and publishers

Audible determines which authors and books are included as part of its streaming library. This disproportionately favors larger, more established authors and publishers who can negotiate premium rates with Audible. In 2022, via his blog, Brandon Sanderson says:

However, they treat authors very poorly. Particularly indie authors. The deal Audible demands of them is unconscionable, and I’m hoping that providing market forces (and talking about the issue with a megaphone) will encourage change in a positive direction.

This quote highlights two things: that the idea that Audible treats their indie authors poorly and that a very large author can directly negotiate with Audible where indie author cannot.

Audible updates their royalty structure

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. 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. 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. 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. Even if authors opt-out of the streaming catalog, they are not protected from the royalty split. 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

Lawsuit over royalties

In June 2025, a federal judge allowed an antitrust lawsuit against Amazon/Audible to proceed. 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.

Consumer response

Authors and listeners alike have reacted strongly against the royalty structure change, pointing out the underhanded feel of the royalty distribution change and harm streaming has caused the artistic industries.

One user expressed displeasure at the restructured royalties:

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.

Another user on the petition said:

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.

The user hawaiianshirtwizzard9542 on where they expect their audible credit to go:

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.

The user RariettyC said:

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.

The user sacredwisp said:

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

Audible's response

Audible frames the royalties change as one that "prioritizes equity, flexibility, and insight for creators". The platform says the new royalty model creates new opportunities for smaller authors by allowing all titles to generate revenue. Audible has not yet responded directly to the petition.