YouTube Music reached the top spot in Korea by monthly active users (MAU) in the first half of 2025.
Bundling strategies and competitive pricing from foreign platforms have shifted user choices.
The decline of homegrown services signals a reshaping of the industry ecosystem.
Going forward, each platform's revenue model and how it supports artists will be decisive variables.
What the surge of foreign platforms means for Korea's music industry
A brief status update.
Domestic services such as Melon and Genie Music saw user counts fall and market shares decline over the same period.
Spotify also grew rapidly, making the advance of foreign platforms a clear trend.
YouTube Music entered the Korean market in earnest in 2018 through bundling with YouTube Premium (bundling = combining services under one price).
Its MAU rose from roughly 3.34 million in 2021 to about 9.79 million in early 2025.
By contrast, Melon fell from roughly 8.69 million to 6.81 million, and Genie Music from 5.06 million to 3.04 million in the same period.
These shifts are more than numbers: they foreshadow changes in consumer experience and industry structure.
Crucially, YouTube Premium bundling, access to previously unreleased tracks, and a price point many users perceive as reasonable were engines of growth.
Meanwhile, local platforms have been preparing countermeasures focused on K-pop content and AI features.
On the whole, this clash affects platforms, artists, labels, and the live-performance ecosystem.
Why YouTube Music grew so fast.
Price and access are the key variables.
The expansion of YouTube Music began with the YouTube Premium bundle. For one monthly fee, users get ad-free videos plus music streaming, a compelling deal for cost-conscious consumers (the Korean Premium price was often quoted around 14,900 KRW, roughly $10–12 depending on exchange rates).
Also, the platform's vast content library, familiar recommendation algorithms, and access to unreleased tracks lengthened user engagement.
Spotify also posted strong gains: between 2021 and 2025 its MAU grew by roughly eightfold, showing that the momentum is not limited to one foreign player.
Conversely, declines at Melon and Genie point to limits in legacy pricing, partnership, and marketing models.
Ultimately, users weigh price, accessibility, content variety, and the overall user experience when they decide which app to use.
Arguments in favor of foreign platform growth.
First, growth among foreign platforms clearly improves consumer welfare.
Bundles like YouTube Premium give users ad-free video and music under a single subscription, letting them get more value for the same money.
Therefore, this model appeals especially to younger adults who prioritize convenience and perceived value.
Second, global competition pushes domestic services to innovate.
Competitive pressure can accelerate AI recommendation improvements, interface redesigns, and K-pop–focused curation strategies.
In the long run, these upgrades can raise content quality and diversify revenue models.
Third, foreign platforms can amplify K-pop's global reach.
As overseas streaming grows, export revenue for Korean music can increase and artists gain broader exposure through global playlists and data-driven marketing.
This can open doors for emerging acts and smaller labels that get playlisted internationally.
Fourth, from a consumer perspective, more options mean bargaining power.
Price competition lowers the cost of access and can increase the number of people who use paid music services regularly.
Consequently, open markets and competition tend to raise consumer welfare even if they cause short-term disruption.
Arguments against the foreign surge.
Local platforms' survival is a matter of industry sustainability.
First, a fall in domestic market share threatens the K-pop industry's virtuous cycle.
Local platforms have long contributed to artist development, discovering new talent and financing live shows and production.
If foreign platforms dominate, those revenue flows could weaken, making investment in new artists harder.
Second, switching costs and fairness deserve attention.
Large foreign players can tap deep capital, global partnerships, and telecom bundling to win users quickly.
Domestic firms often struggle to match those deals, which could lead to market concentration.
Third, imbalances in data and revenue sharing directly affect creators.
When platforms change, labels and artists face different streaming payouts, promotion channels, and concert-linked income.
Emerging artists and small labels are particularly vulnerable during transitions, which can reduce long-term cultural diversity.
Fourth, cultural stewardship is at stake.
Local services invest in Korean-language features and curate content tuned to domestic tastes.
A standardized global interface and global-first priorities risk reducing investment in region-specific content and fan experiences.
Analyzing the tension.
Proponents point to consumer gains and market efficiency as reasons to welcome foreign growth.
On the other hand, defenders of local platforms prioritize artist support, cultural diversity, and the sustainability of domestic investment.
Therefore, the conflict resists a simple cost-benefit verdict.
Economically, large global platforms can use scale to lower prices and increase user benefits.
However, from an industry and cultural standpoint, the weakening of local revenue loops raises serious concerns about long-term creative investment.
Thus policy and market solutions must aim to balance these two values.
Practical options include platform cooperation models, clearer rules for revenue sharing, and boosting the technical competitiveness of local services.
For example, AI-powered curation, K-pop–focused global marketing, and public funds to support creators could all be part of a multi-pronged response.
Meanwhile, observing consumer behavior and educating users about the trade-offs should continue in parallel.
A deeper look at causes.
YouTube Music's rapid rise stems from bundling and the platform's ecosystem linkages.
Coupling music with YouTube's dominant video platform changed listening habits and magnified network effects beyond straight price competition.
Access to unreleased tracks, global distribution, and automatic recommendations all helped build loyalty.
By contrast, local platforms show weaknesses in part because technology upgrades and pricing flexibility lagged behind shifting user demands.
Melon and Genie have long led the market, but rapid changes in user expectations required faster responses than some incumbents managed.
AI adoption and globalizing K-pop assets are sensible countermeasures, but their short-term impact is uncertain.
Policy context and telecom or membership partnerships also shape outcomes.
Carrier bundles and large-scale membership alliances reduce barriers and accelerate user migration.
Consequently, the competitive landscape reflects a mix of technology, partnerships, and regulation.
Outlook and policy recommendations.
It is likely that foreign platforms will keep a strong position in the near term.
Yet domestic services still have room to respond through AI-driven discovery, K-pop–centric content investments, and deeper global partnerships.
Above all, transparency in revenue sharing and stable support for artists must be priorities.
Policy measures could include a creator support fund, standardized streaming revenue data, and rules to ensure fair competition between platforms.
Governments might also consider tax incentives or R&D grants to boost domestic platforms' technical capabilities while minimizing short-term market disruption.
The goal should be to ease transitional pain while preserving long-term ecosystem health.
Summary and conclusion.
YouTube Music's rise to number one means both wider consumer choice and a rearrangement of industry structure.
Thanks to foreign platforms, users enjoy more benefits, but the weakening of local services raises questions about the long-term sustainability of the K-pop ecosystem (K-pop = Korean pop music).
Therefore, rather than treating this as a simple win-lose scenario, policymakers and platforms should seek paths for mutual accommodation.
In short, foreign platforms are likely to lead in the short term.
But in the medium and long term, a combination of domestic innovation and sensible policy support could restore a healthy balance for the industry.
Which platform strategies do you think best protect Korean music's sustainability while preserving consumer choice?
