[Stark]

They better not remove their music from Spotify. I'm NOT going to pay 9.99$ to listen to them. Music piracy will probably come again if they do this.

And I have my Spotify's local files ready..

#SpotifyForALL

[Giorgoc]

Originally posted by Lights and Waves

I like how artists that are fighting for more money are the ones that don't need it. I would understand if indie artist came out and said something, but for people like Jay-Z and Beyonce to be this money hungry. It's just obnoxious.

Also that blue is hurting my eyes.

Bigger names will make more people likely to subscribe thus those greedy big shots are actually helping the struggling indie artists.

[Playa Playa]

The replies in this thread Fume, I guess.

[Tropez]

Originally posted by Bey'Knight

Far from it. I wanted to get back to the posts. I've only just caught up now. I had to make a blanket statement at that point just in case the conversation evolves to a more intelligent level. I don't know that it did but right from page 1 there's been legitimate arguements from both sides and of course in typical atrl fashion, you have the silly trolls and thread derailers.

From an economics perspective, there are aggressive antagonist approaches if one intended to "kill a business". Comparing what tidal's services vs spotify's, both sides can agree that's not the catch here. If they had it out for Spotify, the rollout would be completely different. For instance, likes of Jay, Bey etc might've pulled their music 6mths prior to launch

Another thing is premium exclusivity which is something someone else mentioned in the prev page. With nearly all products & services comes segregation by class/grade eg flights, hotels, clothing, property even everyday items like food & water.

Thirdly, I believe entrepreneurs are born not made! You may get to hone in your skills in an academic setting but those skills are innate! Nothing any of u have brought up would've missed in a simple feasibility study exercise because most of you are examining the present situation at eye level. I'm gonna hop off here cus it pretty much covers it all; backlash, celebrity affiliation, cost discrepancy etc.

At the end of the day, people are culturally change-averse and rightfully so.

But the price point doesn't make sense.

You can have Netflix, and stream high quality movies. Hulu you can also stream high quality tv shows. The main reasons these services caught on quick was the cheap price, the content, and the streaming quality. Also, these services do have their own exclusives. However, many people don't worry because they created it themselves and because they are the main venue for these products.

So tell me, why is the music industry being plenty more greedy? To offer high quality video is much more expensive, it takes much more bandwidth, and needs physical devices that can handle such a load. What's stopping Tidal from offering their service at $10 or even $12? But then on top of that, they seek to fracture the music streaming industry by having artists all over the place with their music. This doesn't benefit the consumer it actually hurts them. Its not even a good competition, because many artists that are not tagging along the big name artists are actually losing the most from this.

A good entrepreneur would make their service competitive. I'm sure you've heard of price elasticity. There's a certain point with music, that people are not willing to shell out more money for. $10 is that point, $7.99 would actually undermine the other services.

[sxmescudi]

Originally posted by Dani97

independent artists and their 10 fans are not going to get publicity for this, even if they protest and retire their music.
you can see hundreds of indie artists protesting through their instagram and twitter accounts showing 1 dollar checks, but nobody cares.


@Beyonce: the world is youre's. Go green for #TiDALforALL #ANewBegeninig"

isn't it blue??

the dress teas

[TeemoR]

Too expensive...

[Drowned_World]

This is going to flop tragically, I'm calling it.

[Giorgoc]

Originally posted by Blue Momo!

**** y'all Tidal supporters! This stupid ass **** won't come out in my country until 4 years from now probably! IT'S ONLY AVAILABLE IN THE USA & UK!

Um I'm from Greece and it works just fine.

[Lose My Breath]

Why is everyone SO mad?

[rebel]

[YR.]

Why people are fuming? If you don't want to, don't pay for it

I'll wait for the service to come to Brazil so I can try it. If it's good, I will subscribe it because I love hi-def audio

[Lose My Breath]

Originally posted by YR.

Why people are fuming? If you don't want to, don't pay for it

I'll wait for the service to come to Brazil so I can try it. If it's good, I will subscribe it because I love hi-def audio

Exactly, I mean don't download it if you don't want it

[rebel]

[Bey'Knight]

Originally posted by Tropez

But the price point doesn't make sense.

You can have Netflix, and stream high quality movies. Hulu you can also stream high quality tv shows. The main reasons these services caught on quick was the cheap price, the content, and the streaming quality. Also, these services do have their own exclusives. However, many people don't worry because they created it themselves and because they are the main venue for these products.

So tell me, why is the music industry being plenty more greedy? To offer high quality video is much more expensive, it takes much more bandwidth, and needs physical devices that can handle such a load. What's stopping Tidal from offering their service at $10 or even $12? But then on top of that, they seek to fracture the music streaming industry by having artists all over the place with their music. This doesn't benefit the consumer it actually hurts them. Its not even a good competition, because many artists that are not tagging along the big name artists are actually losing the most from this.

A good entrepreneur would make their service competitive. I'm sure you've heard of price elasticity. There's a certain point with music, that people are not willing to shell out more money for. $10 is that point, $7.99 would actually undermine the other services.

If I'm right about the exclusivity inclination then it does make sense. Price difference has to be discernible otherwise it defeats the purpose of having one in the first place.$12/ month subscription fee over $10 doesn't really say anything but a $20 tag piques my curiosity.

Netflix is more comparable to Spotify than it is to Tidal though. I guess a notch up from that would be a streaming service that offers cinema quality movies whilst there are still raking in at the box office.

It's too early to tell who's losing and what not. The average person is way too myopic. I'm in an industry that endures between 15 to 20 years to break-even and that's for 1 in a 100 drug subtances that make it past the screening phase. I don't see any of it as greed, the music industry has been hit way harder with illegal consumption than the movie industry. There's the ceiling mindset that once u acquire a certain amount of wealth, venturing into new business opportunities is seen as greed which absolute crock! The world does not evolve by rich people sitting on their laurels. The crabs (in a barrel) complaining dont realise that it's the below the riches line that will have their coins truncated.

I'm not expecting Tidal to rival Spotify's subscriber numbers. I think that's clear to everyone involved. The costliness is relative cus its being compared to similar service but technically $20 is the equivalent of just 2 albums .. if that. Like someone said, there's an overwhelming sense of entitlement when it comes to music. I don't think people even think of it as an art form in the vein of paintings, drawings, carvings and all the other "artsy" decor we fawn over. People bringing up youtube like it's not part of the problem lol

[Hilly]

I just hope they won't pull out some artists catalogues of Spotify, 2 of my main faves are involved already
Is the Tidal standard quality as good as Spotify premium quality?

[Kayhan]

Spotify for 3.80$ slays I think Tidal will flop but good for audiophiles and ones who have a huge bandwidth and data plan.

[KeirGrey]

This is tragic

[Bey'Knight]

Imo, Jay should have been a silent CEO and this social media invasion should only happen after the service has been given a couple of months to permeate the streaming market organically.

[Lose My Breath]

Originally posted by Tropez

But the price point doesn't make sense.

You can have Netflix, and stream high quality movies. Hulu you can also stream high quality tv shows. The main reasons these services caught on quick was the cheap price, the content, and the streaming quality. Also, these services do have their own exclusives. However, many people don't worry because they created it themselves and because they are the main venue for these products.

So tell me, why is the music industry being plenty more greedy? To offer high quality video is much more expensive, it takes much more bandwidth, and needs physical devices that can handle such a load. What's stopping Tidal from offering their service at $10 or even $12? But then on top of that, they seek to fracture the music streaming industry by having artists all over the place with their music. This doesn't benefit the consumer it actually hurts them. Its not even a good competition, because many artists that are not tagging along the big name artists are actually losing the most from this.

A good entrepreneur would make their service competitive. I'm sure you've heard of price elasticity. There's a certain point with music, that people are not willing to shell out more money for. $10 is that point, $7.99 would actually undermine the other services.

FYI, Tidal is offering their service at $10 a month...

[Stark]

But why are they changing their profile pics like it's something innovative? It's just a streaming service.