4 ms·

Spotify and the music publishers are mutually dependent. They could crush them but they'd be torpedoing their own revenue. >Even their current scale, the survi

by IBM 9y ago

Spotify and the music publishers are mutually dependent. They could crush them but they'd be torpedoing their own revenue. >Even their current scale, the surviving music industry oligopoly could probably still crush Spotify if it tried to do jumpstart a private label. Rather than pulling their catalogs from Spotify, it'd be smarter for them to cut better deals with Spotify's competitors so they can undercut Spotify. If the publishers have multiple, more or less equally sized number of buyers, that'd be the ideal scenario for them.

jamesshamenski 9y ago
The labels have ownership in Spotify [1]. If any disruption comes from the aggregation of their own content, the labels will profit. The labels will not pull the plug on Spotify as it represents too great a portion of future industry revenues. You are correct about dealing with Spotify's competitors. Tidal and other streaming services are the labels best shot at reducing the leverage of any one player (Spotify or Apple). [1] http://www.swedishwire.com/jobs/680-record-labels-part-owner-of-spotify http://www.swedishwire.com/jobs/680-record-labels-part-owner...
- IBM 9y ago
  I don't think having minority stakes in Spotify makes up for the alternative scenario where Spotify becomes the dominant music streamer and devalues their current music assets.
Stanleyc23 9y ago
I was originally commenting on your statement from spotify's POV > as they scale up they'll have more leverage with the rights holders My comment was making the point that simply scaling Spotify does not solve their publisher/supplier costs because the publisher scales with Spotify. Your response basically switched to the publisher's POV in talking about how publishers are incentivized to commoditize spotify's position in the market. (which is true, but not relevant here.) I was just casually trying to imagine a scenario from Spotify's POV regarding how would they might gain leverage against publishers. IMO anything that involves labels seems like a fail. Spotify's only path to success might be to offer some direct to consumer mechanism that eliminates the need of a label, even their own.

by IBM 9y ago

jamesshamenski 9y ago

The labels have ownership in Spotify [1]. If any disruption comes from the aggregation of their own content, the labels will profit. The labels will not pull the plug on Spotify as it represents too great a portion of future industry revenues. You are correct about dealing with Spotify's competitors. Tidal and other streaming services are the labels best shot at reducing the leverage of any one player (Spotify or Apple). [1] http://www.swedishwire.com/jobs/680-record-labels-part-owner-of-spotify http://www.swedishwire.com/jobs/680-record-labels-part-owner...

IBM 9y ago
I don't think having minority stakes in Spotify makes up for the alternative scenario where Spotify becomes the dominant music streamer and devalues their current music assets.

Stanleyc23 9y ago

I was originally commenting on your statement from spotify's POV > as they scale up they'll have more leverage with the rights holders My comment was making the point that simply scaling Spotify does not solve their publisher/supplier costs because the publisher scales with Spotify. Your response basically switched to the publisher's POV in talking about how publishers are incentivized to commoditize spotify's position in the market. (which is true, but not relevant here.) I was just casually trying to imagine a scenario from Spotify's POV regarding how would they might gain leverage against publishers. IMO anything that involves labels seems like a fail. Spotify's only path to success might be to offer some direct to consumer mechanism that eliminates the need of a label, even their own.