4 ms·

If you read between the lines in that statement, they classify Spotify as "publicly traded equity" as though it were some random stock rather than "a music stre

If you read between the lines in that statement, they classify Spotify as "publicly traded equity" as though it were some random stock rather than "a music streaming service--a new class of company that will be essential to music distribution in the future and therefore a wise investment for us to hold indefinitely". They say "our view of Spotify's future" rather than "what we intend to do to Spotify". They say "We ... expect Spotify ... to play a major role" instead of "We intend to undermine Spotify among its competitors so that it cannot become the dominant player in their market and therefore lay claim on some of the revenue streams that we feel should go to us exclusively". I hope they shoot themselves in the foot with a diarrhea-dipped bullet, and then die from the infection. Old-school music publishing is full of assholes. It has been for a century. The major publishing groups are preparing to stab Spotify in the back. Or the gut. Wherever. They don't care. They just want a bigger piece of everyone else's pie. My first guess is that they read the financial statements as shareholders, figured out exactly how much they could charge for their catalogs without killing Spotify, and then pulled out, because their stock wouldn't be worth anything once they were taking all the money out on the operating expenses end rather than the dividend end. Every public statement they make is a misrepresentation, especially the ones that say they aren't misrepresentations. Spotify needs to go direct to the musicians, and get as many self-cover and faithful cover recordings as possible, as quickly as possible. They might lose the major performing artists, but if they can sub in a cover band or fresh recording under different copyright that sounds almost as good as the original, I certainly won't care, and I'm guessing a lot of other people feel the same. I like Weezer's "Africa" better than Toto's, and Cake's "War Pigs" better than Black Sabbath's. And there are a variety of "Ring of Fire" covers that I prefer to Johnny Cash. The publishers only control their recordings. If you can license the music and lyrics from their copyright holders, you can get new recordings that cut the previous publishers out entirely.

mywittyname 8y ago
Spotify would be taking a serious risk should they attempt to become a record label, that is, they may find themselves locked out of competing catalogs. I think you're spot on in your analysis. It's clear that the record labels intend to destroy Spotify, now that they've profited nicely from the arrangement. My thinking is, the record labels are colluding to decimate Spotify's profitability by strong-arming them into onerous licensing terms, then once the share price drops sufficiently, the labels will join together to take over Spotify entirely. I don't think Spotify can take the Netflix approach and win. Their only avenue for victory may be the legal system.
- logfromblammo 8y ago
  They're going to get locked out eventually. This is a scorpion-and-frog situation. It's in a major music publisher's nature to screw everyone else they do business with. So anywhere one could say "they might get locked out if they do this" could as easily read "they might get locked out sooner if they do this". Another advantage Spotify has over traditional music publishers is discoverability. The major publishers make most of their money on the most listened-to recordings of all time. Artists out on the long tail, with good product, but no hits, or in a narrower genre niche, get worse deals from the major publishing houses, and more to gain by bypassing them and going indie. If they can get a recommendations engine to introduce indie artists based on likes and dislikes from mainstream artists and pop tracks, and to occasionally sub in covers and style-shifted recordings, the consumer will likely accept it. I don't need the Rolling Stones, specifically, to paint it black. I don't need any boy band in particular, anywhen from the Monkees to BTS, to reassure me that I'm their girl, baby. I don't need exactly Whitney Houston to be the one to always love me. I might need Prince to be Prince, Beyonce to be Beyonce, and Bruce to be Bruce, but I can deal without, if I have to. With the media consolidation in TV and radio, I can no longer effectively discover anything new over the air. Everyone plays all the same songs, all the time. I can turn on my radio and spin the dial all the way around and never once hear even proven star Bob Marley, much less Peter Tosh, Jimmy Cliff, or Desmond Dekker. I can spin it again and never hear more than a sample of George Clinton, much less James Brown, Sly Stone, or post-NPG Prince. I can spin it again, and fail to hear anything as metal as Metallica, as punk as Rancid, as emo as My Chemical Romance, as polka as Weird Al, as march as JP Sousa, as southern as Lynyrd Skynyrd, as jazzy as Louis Armstrong, as bluesy as BB King... all the stations play only the released-for-radio recordings that sold the most copies. And a lot of the stations play only the current top 40 for pop. If Spotify can get people to listen to stuff they haven't listened to before, they will end up liking some of it, too, and wondering why they haven't ever heard it before.

mywittyname 8y ago

Spotify would be taking a serious risk should they attempt to become a record label, that is, they may find themselves locked out of competing catalogs. I think you're spot on in your analysis. It's clear that the record labels intend to destroy Spotify, now that they've profited nicely from the arrangement. My thinking is, the record labels are colluding to decimate Spotify's profitability by strong-arming them into onerous licensing terms, then once the share price drops sufficiently, the labels will join together to take over Spotify entirely. I don't think Spotify can take the Netflix approach and win. Their only avenue for victory may be the legal system.

logfromblammo 8y ago
They're going to get locked out eventually. This is a scorpion-and-frog situation. It's in a major music publisher's nature to screw everyone else they do business with. So anywhere one could say "they might get locked out if they do this" could as easily read "they might get locked out sooner if they do this". Another advantage Spotify has over traditional music publishers is discoverability. The major publishers make most of their money on the most listened-to recordings of all time. Artists out on the long tail, with good product, but no hits, or in a narrower genre niche, get worse deals from the major publishing houses, and more to gain by bypassing them and going indie. If they can get a recommendations engine to introduce indie artists based on likes and dislikes from mainstream artists and pop tracks, and to occasionally sub in covers and style-shifted recordings, the consumer will likely accept it. I don't need the Rolling Stones, specifically, to paint it black. I don't need any boy band in particular, anywhen from the Monkees to BTS, to reassure me that I'm their girl, baby. I don't need exactly Whitney Houston to be the one to always love me. I might need Prince to be Prince, Beyonce to be Beyonce, and Bruce to be Bruce, but I can deal without, if I have to. With the media consolidation in TV and radio, I can no longer effectively discover anything new over the air. Everyone plays all the same songs, all the time. I can turn on my radio and spin the dial all the way around and never once hear even proven star Bob Marley, much less Peter Tosh, Jimmy Cliff, or Desmond Dekker. I can spin it again and never hear more than a sample of George Clinton, much less James Brown, Sly Stone, or post-NPG Prince. I can spin it again, and fail to hear anything as metal as Metallica, as punk as Rancid, as emo as My Chemical Romance, as polka as Weird Al, as march as JP Sousa, as southern as Lynyrd Skynyrd, as jazzy as Louis Armstrong, as bluesy as BB King... all the stations play only the released-for-radio recordings that sold the most copies. And a lot of the stations play only the current top 40 for pop. If Spotify can get people to listen to stuff they haven't listened to before, they will end up liking some of it, too, and wondering why they haven't ever heard it before.