[Mike91]

Keep digging that grave.

[RainDreamer]

The damage control that just continues to dig a bigger hole He should just sell it

Originally posted by GotSkill

If people bought stuff based on what employees got paid Walmart wouldn't exist and clothing and food would be 5 times more expensive. Does Jay Z not realize this isn't how the world works?

Exactly this though

[FreeBitch]

Originally posted by MikeFenty

They've discuss that in the article but I choose to post those excerpts cause we our a pop music forum and we should be supporting music and it's futur.

I love music as much as you but I don't suscribe that logic.

Supporting to me doesn't mean i'm going to waste my money by putting in someone else pockets and watch him getting richer while i'll probably stuck forever in the middle class. I need a REAL benefit from the product/service.

With Internet times have changed. So have economic models.

Jay Z and his partners are stuck in the 19th century capitalism model.

[slw84]

Originally posted by FreeBitch

This is so dumb argument from a businessman. Consumers dont care about that.
Nobody pay for items because the brand 1 pay better salaries than the brand 2.

People only care about what they will gain from a product or service.

This is a true statement.

[Aden]

There is still not as big of an emphasis on how this benefits the consumer so it's still going to flop.

And no consumer is going to be impressed that you are giving money to someone that already gathers their lost coins from streaming through touring, endorsements, etc.

[Music & Science]

[RobynYoBank]

Originally posted by FreeBitch

This is so dumb argument from a businessman. Consumers dont care about that.
Nobody pay for items because the brand 1 pay better salaries than the brand 2.

People only care about what they will gain from a product or service.

That's kind of the central problem that TIDAL and the industry claim to be trying to address. They've been stupid enough to set a precedent of music being virtually without value, that you can stream anything and everything for $10 a month, and they're trying alter that perception. Ironically, they still offer the $10 streaming service.

[Haunter]

Originally posted by Lucas32

I want exact numbers.
On top of, last year there was a TIME article that Spotify is still not making money because they pay 70% to the artists
So is Jay-Z etc. paying the extra money from their own pockets or are they always calculating in the 20$ subs which will probably be very minimal?
This whole thing is still not transparent at all.

This.

[Kworb]

If you provide a service, you should be compensated for it.

I think we'll lose a lot of great writers in the future because you have to do something else, because you can't sustain a lifestyle, and I think that's a shame. That someone has that talent and just isn't being compensated because someone needed a business to profit off of their work.

In the end it's a free market. If consumers don't value the art enough for artists to make a living, then that's perfectly fine. If you're not providing a service that's valuable to society, then you have to contribute differently. Music is always gonna be made anyway.

He already highlights the real issue: labels profiting off of their artists because they control all of the money. People listening to music for "free" (the ads still generate income) aren't the problem. I don't know why they think guilt-tripping potential consumers is the way to attract them.

[igor]

They should change #TidalForALL for #TidalForARTISTS, since they're the only people gaining something out of this ****. I'm gonna stick to Spotify, and so are everyone else, this is going nowhere.

[Body Talk]

I think y'all are missing the point.

Obviously consumers don't care. They just want the cheapest product on the market. (Keep in mind, though, that the $10 version of TIDAL is in line with Spotify's pricing... so it's not really more expensive.)

The point is to get artists to realize that there's value in what they're creating and they shouldn't be okay with giving it away for free. As more artists jump on board with TIDAL and leave other streaming services (as Taylor already has), TIDAL's value will increase.

[rac7d]

Originally posted by Goddess of Love.

Don't they only pay the higher royalties if you subscribe to the $20 one?

Basicly its like this once Jay 'z and his leage of mainstream making music freind remove thie content from other streaming sites( Like Taylor) like spotify Tidal will boom, People WILL come over and pay the fee.

Spotify will either become the indie streaming site or shut down.

His first moove needs to be getting Taylor support. But its gonna happen they have te power here

[Eternium]

Good for them. Still not here for Tidal, but maybe that's because I buy my music first and then stream on Spotify/VEVO to make sure artists I like get as much support as possible.

Originally posted by FreeBitch

This is so dumb argument from a businessman. Consumers dont care about that.
Nobody pay for items because the brand 1 pay better salaries than the brand 2.

People only care about what they will gain from a product or service.

Educate yourself on "Fair Trade," henny.
http://www.fairtradeusa.org/?gclid=C...uAAaAtYj8P8HAQ

[MikeFenty]

Originally posted by FreeBitch

I love music as much as you but I don't suscribe that logic.

Supporting to me doesn't mean i'm going to waste my money by putting in someone else pockets and watch him getting richer while i'll probably stuck forever in the middle class. I need a REAL benefit from the product/service.

With Internet times have changed. So have economic models.

Jay Z and his partners are stuck in the 19th century capitalism model.

but i'm talking about the indie artist like Jay-Z said they can get deals easily and be over it but not the smaller artist or songwriters. This is about the ecosystem and everyone involved behind making the album that can't get deals with Coca-Cola, Pepsi, PUMA and others.

They apparently have ideas in place and people are forgetting they just got this company a few weeks ago and they can't just implent all their ideas at once. Deadmau5, Win from Arcade Fire have all mentioned they have idea in development and Jay also and Im sure the others have idea but they should have gave us a vague idea of the ideas they had that would please us during the stream cause the introduction was messy but hopefully in coming months we will learn more and more... some company take time to start up and this is an investment for these 16 artist so if it does badly they lose money.

[rac7d]

Originally posted by igor

They should change #TidalForALL for #TidalForARTISTS, since they're the only people gaining something out of this ****. I'm gonna stick to Spotify, and so are everyone else, this is going nowhere.

until all l your faves take thier Music off spotify. Thats all their is too it. They can basicly destroy that company

[Doc]

That opinion came before we even explained what it was — "This thing is horrible! … What is it?" You know? You never hear Tim Cook's net worth whenever he tries to sell you something. Steve Jobs, God bless, he had to have been pretty rich — nobody's ever said, "Oh, the rich getting richer! I won't buy an iPhone!"

Tea, tho

[6_INCH_HEELS]

Oh now y'all don't care after bitching for days about how much the less famous musicians are going to make compared to the big wigs. Y'all have a complaint for everything. It's also addressing the backlash from certain artists who don't understand how the service is SUPPOSE to work for them, in theory.

But until they start implementing these changes, then who knows what the truth is going to be. They dropped the ball when they neglected to discuss all of this on their big press day.

[LadyDiana]

not him using a cleanings lady salary as an excuse

[MikeFenty]

Originally posted by igor

They should change #TidalForALL for #TidalForARTISTS, since they're the only people gaining something out of this ****. I'm gonna stick to Spotify, and so are everyone else, this is going nowhere.

They aren't tho considering Indie artist can get shares and such and they're developing stuff so they can control their uploads and contents.

[FreeBitch]

Originally posted by RobynYoBank

That's kind of the central problem that TIDAL and the industry claim to be trying to address. They've been stupid enough to set a precedent of music being virtually without value, that you can stream anything and everything for $10 a month, and they're trying alter that perception. Ironically, they still offer the $10 streaming service.

So they want to brainwashed us to make them rich ? We will run back to ZipShare.
Music is a form Art. Art does't have any value until capitalism jump in.

The buyers should be the ones giving the value not the company.