Quote:
Originally posted by TayGod
I agree with you. I think that you will see the quality of music go up with TIDAL. I also happen to think that Spotify's free-tier is eventually going to come to an end. Why?
1. Taylor Swift set an example, and these other artists -- Jay Z, Rihanna, Madonna, Beyonce, etc. have jumped on her bandwagon. Other artists may follow. Well what will happen with Spotify, when all the major artists start leaving them. No one is going to be using Spotify if the Major Artists are not there.
2. It is the Major Labels that control Spotify and not the other way around. Universal Music Groups CEO: Lucien Grainge has stated that the current Music scene cannot be supported by Spotify's ad-sponsored free-tier. And they are up for renegotiation in the summer. What happens when Grainge decides to pull the plug.
3. You have been seeing references all over the internet, especially by Borschetta and TIDAL: 'The concept that music has value". They are trying to get that point across to users, perhaps, because something is going to happen to end the free-tier.
4. Of course, everyone wants things for free, but that is not possible. It could never be possible. I think a lot of people are upset with TIDAL, especially ATRL'rs because of the fact that the free-tier services may be coming to an end soon. But they need to reassess things from a music industry standpoint. Look at any product out there. Can you walk into a store and get a package of gum for free, not unless you steal it. Let us say that everyone decides to get gum for free, the gum company is going to say "To hell with it; we won't make any more gum". This is what they mean by value. You want value, then you have to pay for it.
5. One of Spotify's main arguments about the free-tier was that it prevents illegal downloading. But this is really a cop-out. It is the same as the gum example I provided. Well, I will let you have the gum so that you don't steal it. Same thing with music. They want to give it away so that no one steals it. But this does not make sense. Any form of stealing is illegal, so how about making the rules and penalties over illegal downloading stronger, instead. And I think there are experts on this who are working on a plan to do away with illegal downloading.
6. I think also that too many fans have it set in their mind that music is their right to have for free; They say I want you to give me free music. Well, then, what do you think happens: Artists will start cutting costs; especially artists that depend on other writers (they do have to pay them, although, this does not apply to Swift as she is her own writer. But just saying, there is production, publishing, marketing (and all these go into the quality of the music). If Artists do not receive any sort of payment for these items, then they may end up using a broken-string guitar and have their two-year old children create lyrics for them (I am just exaggerating), but you get the point. So, I really think that those who want free music should get over themselves and look at the reality instead. Sure, if advertising could pay for it all that would be great, but again, Grainge of Universal is saying that is not feasible.
Sorry for ranting on, but I like trying to get a point across.
|
Well said.
This Tidal venture clearly illustrates that many other artists are concerned about the low levels of streaming revenue given out by Spotify. It is not just Taylor disatisfied with it.
I expect the Major labels will force Spotify to change their business model. I wouldn't be surprised if Spotify did away with the free option due to label pressure, but I expect them to keep
it and impose limitations on it. They might limit the number of songs you can stream from an album, or put a time limit on the free option before you have to get a paid subscription. Spotify's bargaining position will weaken once Tidal, iTunes Beats and youtube MusicKey are all competing with it.
I imagine that Taylor did not want to take a stake in Tidal because AFAIK there are no music streaming companies that are currently profitable. If Tidal does make a profit, it is unlikely to be for a long while. Taylor's Dad can give her sound financial advice and he probably pointed this out to her. An investment in Tidal is potentially lucrative but it is risky.
What Tidal do offer is lossless streaming of music. I think this will become standard within ten years as broadband speeds continue to improve. Early adopters tend to pay more for these sort of things.
