Apple Is Reportedly ‘Close to Acquiring Shazam' [Updated]

Image: Gizmodo
Image: Gizmodo

Apple’s got more cash on hand than any other company on the planet, and some of that cash may go towards acquiring Shazam.

TechCrunch is reporting that Apple is “close to acquiring Shazam,” which is frustratingly vague. It could be a done deal or Apple could have called Shazam’s people up yesterday.

If you’re like me and haven’t used it since about 2007, than you might have forgotten that Shazam, is an app that figures out what song is playing in your current environment. The app has been around since 1999, when it launched in the UK and was used by texting a specific phone number.


Now, with over 1 billion downloads (as of September 2016), Shazam is one of the larger music apps available, and its current incarnation allows for a wide range of methods of music discovery—something Apple might be particularly keen on as it continues to bolster its own music service, Apple Music. Google already has its own version music discovery service available in Google Assistant-enabled phones, too. So this acquisition would give Apple’s Siri an easy services win.

According to TechCrunch’s anonymous sources Shazam could be acquired for less than the $1.02 billion valuation it received back in 2015.

We’ve reached out to Shazam for comment. Apple declined to comment.

UPDATE 12:21pm: Apple on Monday confirmed to BuzzFeed that it is buying Shazam. “We are thrilled that Shazam and its talented team will be joining Apple,” Tom Neumayr, an Apple spokesperson, told BuzzFeed News. Neumayr added that the two companies are “natural fit” due to their shared “passion for music discovery and delivering great music experiences to our users.”



Senior Consumer Tech Editor. Trained her dog to do fist bumps. Once wrote for Lifetime. Tips encouraged via Secure Drop, Proton Mail, or DM for Signal.

Share This Story

Get our newsletter



I’ve always used SoundHound because Shazam always seemed to be an advertising service (“Open Shazam now to find out more”). Is one significantly better than the other?