|
Celeb News: TIME: Fact-checking Jay Z's Tidal Facts
Member Since: 7/23/2012
Posts: 17,269
|
Quote:
Originally posted by QueenBLadyG
I don't ever remember bringing up race for my argument. I simply named two artist who are just as powerful and respected in their respective music and are Jay's equals in term of awareness and wealth. Each also are "independent" in the way they work (Dave has always been like that and the user who posted the quote about him actually wanting to give away music and Garth has GhostTunes). But of course the whites and Uncle Toms of ATRL would get offended assuming I was trying to. Always playing the race card and having the nerve to criticize anyone else who dares to, and even isn't. Never change y'all. 
|
Girl you know damn well you brought those names up to insinuate the media being racist.
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/30/2011
Posts: 5,259
|
Quote:
Originally posted by trainsskyscrapers
As much as we want this to be swept under the rug.... This IS A RACE ISSUE. As somebody who has studied media and marketing for years, the media can't wait for Bey & Jay to fall/fail, so they create illusions of grandeur and constant buzz. The same could be said about Michael Jackson. (with the Molestation smear campaign) Did anybody find it suspicious that the story broke on the heels of MJ buying the Rolling Stones catalogue? The Cosby allegations broke on the heels of Cosby wanting to not only start a new sitcom, but to purchase a create a new channel similar to OWN. The media loves the rise and plummet of black moguls and pioneers, and I hope Jay has made a smart investment. They BETTER be paying their taxes with all of these purchases, because the IRS loves to wait until Black Artists aren't working anymore to release the news. (Toni Braxton, Dionne Warwick, Wesley Snipes, the list goes on...)
|
You're ****ing disgusting. You're undermining the sufferers of abuse to back up your (ridiculous, delusional) claim that Jay-Z's TRAINWRECK of a marketing campaign (guess what? Anyone with a brain saw this coming a mile off) only fell flat on its face because he's black. Get a grip.
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/30/2011
Posts: 5,259
|
OT: this flop will never stop being funny 
|
|
|
Member Since: 2/23/2012
Posts: 428
|
If I recall correctly, there were white artists, black artists and even some random Asian girl in that dramatic press conference + that pretentious video. Considering that the media is dragging them for being millionaires who are asking for money, I don't think this has anything to do with race. Yes, Jay owns the service, but it's clear that all of them are getting lashings from this, not just Jay.
As other users have mentioned, it's disturbing that some of you are implying that this is a race issue. Is the media not allowed to drag Jay just because he is black? Come on. It's clear that this was terrible marketing/business strategy, and no level of delusion is going to change that.
To be quite honest, Jay deserves to be dragged for his absolute arrogance and narcissism. His Twitter bio is literally just the word "Genius." I cannot understand how you delusional people can defend this.
|
|
|
Member Since: 2/25/2012
Posts: 2,497
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Thisisit
You're ****ing disgusting. You're undermining the sufferers of abuse to back up your (ridiculous, delusional) claim that Jay-Z's TRAINWRECK of a marketing campaign (guess what? Anyone with a brain saw this coming a mile off) only fell flat on its face because he's black. Get a grip.
|
Lol. You're certainly woke tonight, aren't you? Lol. Anybody with a brain would see that while I have highlighted why TIDAL is a failure (it is not finding an untapped niche market), I am simply saying that you wouldn't see this type of outpouring from time magazine (Who certainly has bigger fish to fry at the moment like Nepal, Everest Avalanche, Drone Strikes, Baltimore, 2016 Election) if this was another type of artist. Take a chill pill and please realize that this is a forum. I don't know you. You don't know me. But I'll still treat you with a bit of respect. How about you do the same? Peace my bro or sis. 
|
|
|
Member Since: 2/25/2012
Posts: 2,497
|
Quote:
Originally posted by risetoday
If I recall correctly, there were white artists, black artists and even some random Asian girl in that dramatic press conference + that pretentious video. Considering that the media is dragging them for being millionaires who are asking for money, I don't think this has anything to do with race. Yes, Jay owns the service, but it's clear that all of them are getting lashings from this, not just Jay.
As other users have mentioned, it's disturbing that some of you are implying that this is a race issue. Is the media not allowed to drag Jay just because he is black? Come on. It's clear that this was terrible marketing/business strategy, and no level of delusion is going to change that.
To be quite honest, Jay deserves to be dragged for his absolute arrogance and narcissism. His Twitter bio is literally just the word "Genius." I cannot understand how you delusional people can defend this.
|
The media is certainly allowed to drag Jay, but how about they wait until everything is rolled out. That's like websites dragging the Apple Watch or other software before all of the initial bugs are fixed (as there are always bugs found by early users that require the first update to be fixed). Be patient. This has been out for less than a month in US Market under Jay's ownership. Let's be honest, in the rap game when the music stops it is all about the lyrics. To be a member of the upper crust of rap requires a lyrical/musical virtuosity one could call "lyrical genius". Currently, we have Jay, Eminem, Kanye, Kendrick, J Cole, Chance the Rapper, etc. Give him a break because ego is the rap game.
What's disturbing to me is this idea that everybody is WAITING for this to fail. People have scoffed at ROC Nation, ROC Nation Sports, the 40/40 Club, the Barclay Center Development, and all of those other deals, but they have shown success over the long run. It just seems to me that while certain people gain respect for their success, others will only be seen for their last work. I may be wrong, but that is my opinion.
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/23/2007
Posts: 6,845
|
Not Taylor Swiftt making Jay Z looking like a dumb in the bussiness community *or is he? actually?. I still remember when Jay and Bey hanging with Taylor, they were probably asking Taylor to join, too bad Taylor is a samrt ass b****, girl knew the bussiness will going nowhere. 
|
|
|
Member Since: 10/16/2005
Posts: 16,872
|
Quote:
Originally posted by trainsskyscrapers
The media is certainly allowed to drag Jay, but how about they wait until everything is rolled out. That's like websites dragging the Apple Watch or other software before all of the initial bugs are fixed (as there are always bugs found by early users that require the first update to be fixed). Be patient.
|
This is the media. Sensationalized articles have existed for over a century (in its most extreme form, it was called yellow journalism).
Especially now that online articles are trying to get the most viewers and maximize advertising opportunities, they're definitely not going to calmly wait around to cautiously gather information, see how everything is rolled out, and wait for updates.
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 3,237
|
Ofc certain fan base is trying to turn this into race thing
|
|
|
Member Since: 2/24/2012
Posts: 30,779
|
Quote:
Tidal pays 75% royalty rate to ALL artists, writers and producers - not just the founding members on stage.
|
Quote:
that would mean Tidal is doling out a larger portion of its total sales than Spotify, which pays 70% of its revenue to music rights holders.
|
Tidal keeps boasting how it will bring much more to the artists, but it's just a 5% increase from Spotify? 
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/10/2012
Posts: 1,392
|
I went to business school and let me tell you, we would crucify this deal on paper (from what I've read so far on it, anyway). It's not necessarily a bad deal, it's just very risky and their source of differentiation is weak. If it was a first mover it would do significantly better but that's not the case so...
There's too many huge sharks in the water. Spotify/iTunes/Youtube are just giggling quietly because they have the money and power to crucify Tidal. No board would let Tidal start chipping away at their subscriber base, they will adjust prices or compensation strategy the second it's necessary even if they need to absorb a big financial loss at the time. These companies are quietly starting to strategize and attempt to innovate to make sure their market share is secured and they will manage to block Tidal, mark my words. I already got a prompt to get Spotify Premium free for 2 years when switching my cellphone contract this weekend... I don't even need it but that's a smart idea to get people dependent on your service. Just an example.
Tidal's only source of differentiation is exclusives and then gimmicky crap like audio quality that the average listener won't even appreciate. I can almost picture them sitting down and saying "exhibit a: beyonce's surprise release" to interest people in signing exclusive deals. Now unless Tidal has them truly locked the **** down, this isn't going to work because the other companies will just readjust their compensation. Only 16? artists "signed" for equity in exchange for exclusives. They can sell their equity if necessary, you're not obligated or forced to hold onto equity. And if it starts losing money, their accountants may insist upon it depending on the valuation, it's a quick easy paycheck. This idea isn't patented, it's entirely easily copyable. These artists aren't signing exclusive deals for the rest of their careers. The exclusives will leak out on other channels eventually, officially and illegally. There is no contingency plan for this unless they start offering free subscriptions.
The artists like the equity deal, that's where this all comes from. The 3% or whatever it was. I don't know if they paid in or just pledged their exclusives for 3%. This is a pretty sick deal for the artists who got equity. But only for the artists that got equity. iTunes/Spotify/competitors can just offer some other really amazing compensation to the artists who didn't sign/increase the amount paid to artists if they start getting hit financially. The artists who got equity have a supreme interest in handing over exclusives to Tidal because it may directly influence how much they're "worth".
But everyone else... it may not be a good idea to dish out exclusives to Tidal. Sure, you get paid more in royalties. But you also will reach a significantly smaller portion of the market. Significantly. So chances are, you'll make less money (minus people holding equity). Less people hearing your stuff, less people buzzing about your music = recipe for disaster.
On that note, I do think Tidal would have hope if it dished out free subscriptions OR prices itself to be cheaper than competitors. Spotify developed their premium userbase that way. iTunes was a first mover and have people so invested in their service that their transition to streaming will be highly successful. If you pay attention, all tech companies are focusing on "ecosystems" right now in the tech world. You get invested into a certain system and it becomes too tedious to switch.
Tidal is going to significantly change within the next year, mark my words. They won't abandon it though. It has potential but they're late to the party and haven't worked out a strategy to truly deal with that yet.
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/5/2011
Posts: 15,413
|
Not the race card again. Get a grip on reality.
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 24,694
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Guernica
This is not a race thing, it's about a multimillionaire egomaniac trying to become even richer and masking it as "caring about artists" 
|
this
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/15/2013
Posts: 9,153
|
Quote:
Originally posted by QueenBLadyG
I wonder would TIDAL be in the news so much if Dave Grohl or Garth Brooks "owned" it?
Although this article is Jay's fault as they are responding to his statements. 
|
Doesn't matter.
Any company that was offering a similar service at a premium rate, while not building customer loyalty in the first place in order to pay that premium, and using Celebrities to promote it and endorse it, would be called out.
If Jay Z didn't own it, but still stood on that stage with people of different races, it would still be noted.
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/15/2013
Posts: 9,153
|
Quote:
Originally posted by missy
I went to business school and let me tell you, we would crucify this deal on paper (from what I've read so far on it, anyway). It's not necessarily a bad deal, it's just very risky and their source of differentiation is weak. If it was a first mover it would do significantly better but that's not the case so...
There's too many huge sharks in the water. Spotify/iTunes/Youtube are just giggling quietly because they have the money and power to crucify Tidal. No board would let Tidal start chipping away at their subscriber base, they will adjust prices or compensation strategy the second it's necessary even if they need to absorb a big financial loss at the time. These companies are quietly starting to strategize and attempt to innovate to make sure their market share is secured and they will manage to block Tidal, mark my words. I already got a prompt to get Spotify Premium free for 2 years when switching my cellphone contract this weekend... I don't even need it but that's a smart idea to get people dependent on your service. Just an example.
Tidal's only source of differentiation is exclusives and then gimmicky crap like audio quality that the average listener won't even appreciate. I can almost picture them sitting down and saying "exhibit a: beyonce's surprise release" to interest people in signing exclusive deals. Now unless Tidal has them truly locked the **** down, this isn't going to work because the other companies will just readjust their compensation. Only 16? artists "signed" for equity in exchange for exclusives. They can sell their equity if necessary, you're not obligated or forced to hold onto equity. And if it starts losing money, their accountants may insist upon it depending on the valuation, it's a quick easy paycheck. This idea isn't patented, it's entirely easily copyable. These artists aren't signing exclusive deals for the rest of their careers. The exclusives will leak out on other channels eventually, officially and illegally. There is no contingency plan for this unless they start offering free subscriptions.
The artists like the equity deal, that's where this all comes from. The 3% or whatever it was. I don't know if they paid in or just pledged their exclusives for 3%. This is a pretty sick deal for the artists who got equity. But only for the artists that got equity. iTunes/Spotify/competitors can just offer some other really amazing compensation to the artists who didn't sign/increase the amount paid to artists if they start getting hit financially. The artists who got equity have a supreme interest in handing over exclusives to Tidal because it may directly influence how much they're "worth".
But everyone else... it may not be a good idea to dish out exclusives to Tidal. Sure, you get paid more in royalties. But you also will reach a significantly smaller portion of the market. Significantly. So chances are, you'll make less money (minus people holding equity). Less people hearing your stuff, less people buzzing about your music = recipe for disaster.
On that note, I do think Tidal would have hope if it dished out free subscriptions OR prices itself to be cheaper than competitors. Spotify developed their premium userbase that way. iTunes was a first mover and have people so invested in their service that their transition to streaming will be highly successful. If you pay attention, all tech companies are focusing on "ecosystems" right now in the tech world. You get invested into a certain system and it becomes too tedious to switch.
Tidal is going to significantly change within the next year, mark my words. They won't abandon it though. It has potential but they're late to the party and haven't worked out a strategy to truly deal with that yet.
|
Tbh, I think anyone with Common Sense would come to this conclusion. Sadly for Jay Z, no one a Tidal did
You snooze, you lose. And that's what Jay Z did. He has no grip on Reality.
|
|
|
|
|