5 ms·

Advertisers may or may not care. Many are indeed both stupid and inept. Their clients should care, but may not be technically savvy or aware enough to care. Fra

Advertisers may or may not care. Many are indeed both stupid and inept. Their clients should care, but may not be technically savvy or aware enough to care. Fragmentation in advertising also makes accountability a lot harder. Spotify definitely has to care in the long run, but it may be better for their chances of making it through that IPO window to see no evil, hear no evil, and speak no evil until someone forces it upon them. If it worked for Facebook and Twitter, why wouldn't it work for Spotify? Honestly, this is one of the reasons why 'free' services provide such low value to advertisers unless there's world class fraud fighting capability at the company. If the service is paid, it's significantly more expensive to generate fake traffic. But that'd be bad for the loosey goosey user numbers (AKA 1990s era 'eyeballs') that so excite momentum investors.

ZoF 11y ago
Sure, maybe they could get to an IPO without addressing the issue, that doesn't in any way invalidate the legitimacy of the posted article. There is a vulnerability. It is exploitable. In the long run spotify _will_ be negatively affected if it isn't addressed. Honestly surprised that there is any arguement whatsoever to the contrary. If it was, 'well they can make it to IPO before addressing it' as you've stated, sure, that's valid. The parent was saying, 'it's not an issue, it's a matter of perception'.... Which is extremely naive and shortsighted. Perception is the very thing that drives advertisement cost.
- hagbardgroup 11y ago
  Nope, doesn't invalidate what he did. Everyone would be better off if this was either cleared up or if other streaming services with models less prone to fraud could pop up.
  - ZoF 11y ago
    Is it my tone then? Rereading my posts I do seem like a braggadocios douche, but I'm not incorrect at all I don't think; the comment I'm replying to is incorrect though. That I genuinely feel is true.
    - hagbardgroup 11y ago
      Yes the parent comment you were replying to was off base and you were right to correct him. You didn't seem rude to me. I was being a little bit sarcastic about Spotify riding a fraud-wave to a public offering based on inflated numbers.

ZoF 11y ago

Sure, maybe they could get to an IPO without addressing the issue, that doesn't in any way invalidate the legitimacy of the posted article. There is a vulnerability. It is exploitable. In the long run spotify _will_ be negatively affected if it isn't addressed. Honestly surprised that there is any arguement whatsoever to the contrary. If it was, 'well they can make it to IPO before addressing it' as you've stated, sure, that's valid. The parent was saying, 'it's not an issue, it's a matter of perception'.... Which is extremely naive and shortsighted. Perception is the very thing that drives advertisement cost.

hagbardgroup 11y ago
Nope, doesn't invalidate what he did. Everyone would be better off if this was either cleared up or if other streaming services with models less prone to fraud could pop up.
- ZoF 11y ago
  Is it my tone then? Rereading my posts I do seem like a braggadocios douche, but I'm not incorrect at all I don't think; the comment I'm replying to is incorrect though. That I genuinely feel is true.
  - hagbardgroup 11y ago
    Yes the parent comment you were replying to was off base and you were right to correct him. You didn't seem rude to me. I was being a little bit sarcastic about Spotify riding a fraud-wave to a public offering based on inflated numbers.