Quote:
Originally posted by JoeRobert
Not people in here now trying to bring race into this good lord they're reaching. Either ignore the threads or admit the performance, facts are facts.
|
This
Quote:
Originally posted by Jezang Looz
"Smear campaign"
"Race card"
"Only been a month"
|
It's a crying shame what people will do to NOT take accountability for a fail but with success you would have thought their own blood sweat and tears were a part of its origin
Quote:
Originally posted by Vin
FreeCreditReport.com vibes.
That's what the article said.
You basically just called Jay Z dumb and dense.
...Vin
|
VIN YOU ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE ME piss my pants. You know what
Quote:
Originally posted by GreasyBruce
Tidal would have succeeded with more white people in the room
There were no Latinos there at all so I can say this
|
Ok, STAHP IT
Quote:
Originally posted by Vin
Everyone did move on, and was letting it flop in peace, but then Jay Z had to
go ahead and have a Twitter meltdown about Tidal's failure and bring it all back up again.
...Vin
|
true
Quote:
Originally posted by Vin
Jay Z payed $54 million dollars for Tidal.
He is never making any of that money back. It's gone.
...Vin
|
More than that to be honst
Quote:
Originally posted by Bang Up
$54m for the service.
Plus payment for the artists to sign on.
Plus creating a website, paying for servers, paying for a catalog, creating an app...
This investment probably has him in the hole for about $100,000,000.
|
The tea...
this service was to make more money and look how much of the money was lost.
Big artist NOT KNOWING THEIR AUDIENCE and overestimating their power.
I don't see Adele's 11x platinum behind involved in this
Quote:
Originally posted by Rivington Reject
The backlash is deserved.
|
This.
The bottom line is the GP don't care about rich getting richer.
They don't care about artist who PLAYED THE GAME and turned into different people in order to have these labels invest in them only to take their experience and use it against the label/industry that made them successful.
We pay more than enough for outrageous concert tickets which include hotel/gas and merchandise expenses.
We pay more for shoes/clothes/fragrances/any celeb endorsed product than what we'd normally pay for lesser known behind the scenes creators of these things.
We spend so much time supporting our artist and we have one thing that not only helps up
(streaming very inexpensive) but as of 2013 helps the artist get higher ranks on a chart they use to measure success and this keeps people from pirating.
And these rich celebs want us to buy in...
Explain to me why I should stream artist that write their own material/produce their own work and are better artists than some of the owners yet they deserve a piece of the pie.
I love Rihanna/Nicki/Jay/Jcole/Madonna of 80s/90s but why should they get a piece of a Janelle Monae or Prince or Michael Jackson streaming if I did it on Tidal when all of them are at least worth 50M and will be promoting overpriced products in the future as they did in the past that I will have to make more of an effort to avoid the temptation (as it will be thrown in my face) than to consider supporting it.
It's just not a bright business idea...short story long