[UnusualBoy]

Well, she's an artisté and said what we all think

[I Am Music]

If Tidal was promoted differently half the complaints wouldn't even exist. It has nothing to do with personally disliking the artists who support Tidal.

Some stans of those who do don't care for how it was promoted. Those who do complain out of some weird stan war are just trolls anyway.

[Jezang Looz]

Originally posted by DuckaDucka12

I agree. I do think TIDAL may not be the best way to go about getting their fair share tho, they could just boycott Spotify or take it up with their labels

The labels aren't going to budge. They have more power than these artists, which is why these artists decided to go afterthe fans for more money instead of getting better payout rates with their label executives!

I feel for them - but they aren't getting my $$.

[Callum]

For once I actually agree with her completely

[Haus]

Originally posted by revel8

Nobody is obligated to do anything. Tidal is just another streaming site for music. If HQ music streaming appeals to you, now you have another means to get it. If you don't want it, or cannot afford it, then don't get it. It's like anything. Apple sells expensive smartphones. Can everyone afford these? No, but they just put out a product, market it, and those who want it for that price purchase it. And everyone else does without.

Tidal is just another option to stream music. It was marketed to great fanfare. If you don't like the marketing then fair enough. I fail to see how having another option for the consumer to choose from is a bad thing. More competition is more choice, and is a good thing.

People don't have an issue with TIDAL (well, the $20 option is sketchy, but somewhat understandable), they have an issue with the way they're marketing it. I don't know why people keep brushing everything off with these excuses. We are seeing these major artists with millions of fans (many of them on here) be transparently greedy and it's not a good look when the service is supposed to be about every artist and everyone involved in the song-making process. There are a million better ways that they could've marketed this and the backlash could've been avoided completely.

God knows what they were thinking publicizing that press conference that looked like a damn illuminati meeting...

[perfectly.ill]

Tidal is the perfect example of awful marketing.

[BadHabits]

Originally posted by Jezang Looz

The labels aren't going to budge. They have more power than these artists, which is why these artists decided to go afterthe fans for more money instead of getting better payout rates with their label executives!

I feel for them - but they aren't getting my $$.

Exactly!

Their labels are in-charge, they're trying a different method to get even more money than they already have, and that's by exploiting their fans claiming they care about the industry, etc.

They could've gotten some less commercially-successful artists on-board to help make what they're doing come across as genuine.

[Grown K]

You tell them,Marina!

[YaBoiJay18]

Not every single artist can sell out arena's and get contracted endorsement deals. So what about them? Their songs can reach top ten on billboard, but their albums can't sell over 300,000 copies. So how are they suppose to make money?

[mathekr]

Lily and Marina speaking nothing but the truth today.

[BadHabits]

Originally posted by Haus

People don't have an issue with TIDAL (well, the $20 option is sketchy, but somewhat understandable), they have an issue with the way they're marketing it. I don't know why people keep brushing everything off with these excuses. We are seeing these major artists with millions of fans (many of them on here) be transparently greedy and it's not a good look when the service is supposed to be about every artist and everyone involved in the song-making process. There are a million better ways that they could've marketed this and the backlash could've been avoided completely.

God knows what they were thinking publicizing that press conference that looked like a damn illuminati meeting...

The promo vid looked so pretentious and that's rich coming from someone who stans for the Queen of Pretentiousness.

Alicia came on stage to deliver a little speech then they signed a piece of paper, I mean, WTF...

[Azealia Banks]

Originally posted by Haus

People don't have an issue with TIDAL (well, the $20 option is sketchy, but somewhat understandable), they have an issue with the way they're marketing it. I don't know why people keep brushing everything off with these excuses. We are seeing these major artists with millions of fans (many of them on here) be transparently greedy and it's not a good look when the service is supposed to be about every artist and everyone involved in the song-making process. There are a million better ways that they could've marketed this and the backlash could've been avoided completely.

God knows what they were thinking publicizing that press conference that looked like a damn illuminati meeting...

true

[Jezang Looz]

When was the last time we've seen so many artists get together to make a stand for something?

Remember Just Stand Up To Cancer? A charity that helps save lives.

(idk why the picture is so big when I post it here changed it to link form)



To this:

[MaoMars]

[Jack!]

She's correct.

[FAME.]

Originally posted by YaBoiJay18

Not every single artist can sell out arena's and get contracted endorsement deals. So what about them? Their songs can reach top ten on billboard, but their albums can't sell over 300,000 copies. So how are they suppose to make money?

Marina, is one one of those people no? And Lily Allen?
And they clearly aren't here for it either. So let's stop trying to pretend this is to benefit anyone but the people who are already super rich. Smaller artists aren't making huge bank off streaming with our without Tidal because their music isn't nearly as popular anyway.

[Sinister]

I agree

These artists around Tidal are acting like theyre in a TLC situation circa 1990s when they aren't...thats how it looks like it was promoted

[Nicole]

Well said.

[revel8]

Originally posted by Haus

People don't have an issue with TIDAL (well, the $20 option is sketchy, but somewhat understandable), they have an issue with the way they're marketing it. I don't know why people keep brushing everything off with these excuses. We are seeing these major artists with millions of fans (many of them on here) be transparently greedy and it's not a good look when the service is supposed to be about every artist and everyone involved in the song-making process. There are a million better ways that they could've marketed this and the backlash could've been avoided completely.

God knows what they were thinking publicizing that press conference that looked like a damn illuminati meeting...

Who cares how rich the founders are? The only difference that makes is that the venture is less likely to go bankrupt.

Do people avoid buying iphones cos Apple is very wealthy? No, cos that would be silly. The wealth of the owners is a pretty stupid reason to bitch about it. Justin Bieber is worth about $200 million, and I don't see people saying that they are avoiding Spotify cos he owns a stake in that.

There is money to be made from streaming. Why is it a bad thing for artists to get that money instead of people like Daniel Ek, who have made their fortune from stealing from music creators?

[Vertigo Stick]

This reminds me of that episode of South Park where the record industry complains about illegal downloading to the children. The exec explains how [insert wealthy musician] won't be able to buy two private planes and had to settle for one, something like that.

I do believe that they have the wrong people representing Tidal. I of course have nothing against Jay Z, but I do wish there was someone less affluent representing this service. I am aware that Jay Z knows he can just go on tour, and that other people do not have that luxury to gain money, but the presentation just comes across as somewhat inappropriate.