Comments on: On Spotify and what passes for journalism nowadays

By: Murat

Murat — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 19:15:47 +0000

And it’s not even launched in USA , in just a few countries.I want pay and use the service but I can’t use it from my country , so it has long to go get some power users who willing to pay for it

By: Murat

Murat — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 19:13:00 +0000

Of course they won’t get the money they expected , streaming isn’t like CD sales or else, users don’t own anything , they just rent music for listen for a day or week ,month etc.
But I think spotify like services is good for reach people , but bands, record labels should make money with gigs or something else

By: Kalle

Kalle — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:16:02 +0000

Well, if nothing else, they’ve found a new business model in beta testing. The traditional approach in software development has been to pay testers, not the other way around :)

By: vp

vp — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 20:42:10 +0000

How beta is Spotify’s beta?

By: Kalle

Kalle — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 16:23:47 +0000

Well fuck me, there it is. Then again, I can’t find a carton of milk in the fridge.

By: Herra Paalanen

Herra Paalanen — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 00:41:00 +0000

Thanks for the comments, guys.

There is a distinction to be made between on-demand and playlist radio, and the question of value added services is also interesting. My point was not that Spotify is above criticism, and I hope it didn’t come across as such.

I’m just worried about the continuing trend of the discussion to get progressively more simplistic. Bad journalism doesn’t help.

@Kalle: The front page, right under the logo? Beta.

By: Kalle

Kalle — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 00:21:09 +0000

How is Spotify in beta? I can’t see any mention of that on the Spotify front page or the client.

Also, JB, like you said, Spotify is on-demand, radio is not. Traditionally on-demand music has been charged a premium, surely that’s why labels expect to get more money?

By: vp

vp — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 20:48:39 +0000

One more aspect is that Spotify will also be sold to ISPs and operators, so they can offer their customers a value added or purchasable service. Will the artist see that money?

By: Hendrik M

Hendrik M — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 20:00:20 +0000

JB makes a good point, haven’t seen it from that angle yet. You also have a good argument, Spotify is still in Beta so given that Mokoma and other probably also don’t make lots of money with CDs they should welcome Spotify as a way to get more people to legally hear their music and then attend concerts, where bands make the real money.

Don’t get me started on journalism nowadays. People read Iltasanomat and Iltalehti instead of real newspapers, its a disgrace, really.

By: JB

JB — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 15:44:52 +0000

It’s all very simple. Many bands/labels fail to understand streaming. Spotify is on-demand radio. 118 119 plays should be compared to getting one song played on radio to an audience of 118 119 people. How much would the label get from one such play?

Significantly less for sure.

Also, with Spotify the band/label will continue to get money as long as they exist in the service. And as Spotify grow bigger and get a higher percentage of premium members, the payments to artists and labels will continue to grow as well.