I don't see it either for 108 USD/year. I get that they need to pay for servers, for developers and etc, but I pay less for Spotify and somehow they manage to license vast amount of content.
Don't know. I'd think they pay the original sources. Agreed that the cost seems out of alignment, but they're also working with a much smaller user base than Spotify. A small profit margin on tens of millions of users gets you a lot more money than a small profit margin on tens of thousands (numbers made up). So maybe it's actually a very fair price and Spotify's is not, which we know it's not.