4 ms·
I can’t imagine there are nearly enough subscribers who would drop to make this a factor.
by mattnewton 8y ago
I can’t imagine there are nearly enough subscribers who would drop to make this a factor.
- yontherubicon 8y agoThank you for at least saying why you disagree rather than simply reacting and hitting the downvote button.
- swang 8y agoquite honestly because your point doesn't make much sense. it is obvious some companies see the calculus of continuing to have him on their platform so they weighed that against any "backlash" and still decided to ban him. most people are going taking the path of least resistance to get what they want. if they want to listen to music and they don't want to pay, who else are they going to go to? almost every other supplier of streaming music and podcasts have banned him. people who support alex jones are going to look at this, shrug, and then continue using spotify while listening to their fill of alex jones on google+ or wherever else it'll show up and this point makes doesn't even consider the backlash that wmg would have faced if this was really their reasoning. and why would they only sell their stake in the company and not also pull their catalog if this was the reason? seems like a weird hedge.
- brian-armstrong 8y agoIf nothing else, it takes a long time to unwind a large stock position which means this has been a long time coming. The Infowars thing just happened. So right away we know you don't know much about businesses.
- AndrewUnmuted 8y agoI think you may be surprised to learn just how popular Alex Jones / InfoWars actually is. It has an enormous, global audience, like it or not.
- mattnewton 8y agoOh I know it’s hugely popular. But the people who use Spotify for inforwars, mutilplied by the percentage who would leave over it, I’m just not seeing that number registering in the scale of Warner Music Group