3 ms·

The music business isn't just about the musical content. Popularity is also driven by artists' branding. Promotion, etc. there's a strong fashion element to pop

The music business isn't just about the musical content. Popularity is also driven by artists' branding. Promotion, etc. there's a strong fashion element to popular music that is outside of the scope of Spotify's core competencies. They'd have to either acquire this or build it from scratch. That takes time.

dharmon 10y ago
I was thinking of that study where they basically showed that what was deemed popular was largely determined by availability. Spotify owns a powerful platform with tons of data about user preferences, they are not completely powerless to flip things on their head and have some say about what is popular.
adevine 10y ago
Agreed, but running a large production company was not originally Netflix's core competency either. It does seem like Netflix's playbook would be more difficult to copy for music, but still an interesting prospect to consider.
- geoka9 10y ago
  I think the point is that Spotify would need to have a promotion competency in addition to a production one. "Interesting music" is far more subjective than "interesting movies".
- azemetre 10y ago
  Netflix doesn't run a production company though, and they should if they want to remain competitive and have complete ownership over their products. All they do is buy shows/movies from other studios. It would be similar to when Kanye West having the Life of Pablo exclusively on Tidal for a period of time. Exclusivity is important and Spotify does have albums and live performances that are not sold anywhere currently. Maybe they should do a better job of showcasing this.
  - TheAceOfHearts 10y ago
    Platform exclusivity is a dark pattern. Content is what's important, the platform is largely irrelevant to users. I'm perfectly happy paying for media. But if something isn't readily available, I'll probably end up pirating it or never listen to it.
    - azemetre 10y ago
      Could you explain how platform exclusivity is a dark pattern? When I think of dark patterns I think of misleading ways to get a customers information where not applicable. I don't see how it's a dark pattern if I can't watch Game of Thrones on Showtime or Orange is the New Black on Hulu. Why is retaining rights over content creation a bad thing? Is it a dark pattern to have companies pay for licenses or copyright fees?
bdcravens 10y ago
I've noticed many artists re-recording their music, separate from the original label they recorded on. I presume this is to get more money than they'd otherwise get (where they own the song lyrics, but not the original recording). Obviously this isn't Top 40 acts; I've mostly seen with older rappers. They could also work with older bands that have long split to do a "reunion" exclusive to Spotify, ala Gilmore Girls. There are also sources of mostly independent music. I've listened to Digitally Imported for years. As much as it may not be good for listeners like me, I think they'd make a great acquisition play for Spotify.

dharmon 10y ago

I was thinking of that study where they basically showed that what was deemed popular was largely determined by availability. Spotify owns a powerful platform with tons of data about user preferences, they are not completely powerless to flip things on their head and have some say about what is popular.

adevine 10y ago

Agreed, but running a large production company was not originally Netflix's core competency either. It does seem like Netflix's playbook would be more difficult to copy for music, but still an interesting prospect to consider.

geoka9 10y ago
I think the point is that Spotify would need to have a promotion competency in addition to a production one. "Interesting music" is far more subjective than "interesting movies".
azemetre 10y ago
Netflix doesn't run a production company though, and they should if they want to remain competitive and have complete ownership over their products. All they do is buy shows/movies from other studios. It would be similar to when Kanye West having the Life of Pablo exclusively on Tidal for a period of time. Exclusivity is important and Spotify does have albums and live performances that are not sold anywhere currently. Maybe they should do a better job of showcasing this.
- TheAceOfHearts 10y ago
  Platform exclusivity is a dark pattern. Content is what's important, the platform is largely irrelevant to users. I'm perfectly happy paying for media. But if something isn't readily available, I'll probably end up pirating it or never listen to it.
  - azemetre 10y ago
    Could you explain how platform exclusivity is a dark pattern? When I think of dark patterns I think of misleading ways to get a customers information where not applicable. I don't see how it's a dark pattern if I can't watch Game of Thrones on Showtime or Orange is the New Black on Hulu. Why is retaining rights over content creation a bad thing? Is it a dark pattern to have companies pay for licenses or copyright fees?

bdcravens 10y ago

I've noticed many artists re-recording their music, separate from the original label they recorded on. I presume this is to get more money than they'd otherwise get (where they own the song lyrics, but not the original recording). Obviously this isn't Top 40 acts; I've mostly seen with older rappers. They could also work with older bands that have long split to do a "reunion" exclusive to Spotify, ala Gilmore Girls. There are also sources of mostly independent music. I've listened to Digitally Imported for years. As much as it may not be good for listeners like me, I think they'd make a great acquisition play for Spotify.