3 ms·

As far as I remember it (it was something a STIM representative said in an interview, can't find it just now), it was about how the revenues from Spotify had in

by mzl 16y ago

As far as I remember it (it was something a STIM representative said in an interview, can't find it just now), it was about how the revenues from Spotify had increased significantly. Also, one should remember that, AFAIK, the initial idea was the free account type and Premium came later. It is all about competing with piracy, making something that is easier and more convenient for the user while still giving a revenue stream to the rightsholders.

Tycho 16y ago
I kinda thought they were always planning on Premium charges though, they just wanted to build some momentum first. My main problem with it is I can see 'the rights-holders' making a good new revenue stream, but only in the sense of people/companies that own massive publishing catalogs. The individual rights-holders, eg. the songwriters, I fear are being sold up the river.
- mzl 16y ago
  I was in the original beta-trials of Spotify (started second half of 2007), and the info then seemed to indicate that the intended model was ad-financed. A lot of people apparently asked about paying to get rid of the ads. As for smaller artists, compare it with the situation in commercial radio. A few radio-plays will not get you very much money, but the number of people that listened to your song is actually quite high.
  - Tycho 16y ago
    Comparing it to radio is where the trouble starts. A potential customer cannot rely upon radio to access your music/product. At best they'll hear a few of the artist's tracks, if they're patient and lucky. Therefore the radio is in no way a substitute for owning the LP, it's more like an advert/complement than a competing service. But Spotify DOES let the potential customer access your product in full, removing the main incentive to buy your LP. Furthermore, you're not only competing with a free version of your own product, your competing with a vast catalog of other music, millions of records that can be accessed effortlessly. "Should I spend £10 on this one album, or should I spend £10 for a month of unlimited access to endless high-quality music?" The economic position this puts individual artists in is dire. Also, another thing about the ads is sometimes they're hardly ads at all, they're just Spotify announcements. I can't believe they'd be wasting spots like that if they were really pulling in serious advertising money.

by mzl 16y ago

Tycho 16y ago

I kinda thought they were always planning on Premium charges though, they just wanted to build some momentum first. My main problem with it is I can see 'the rights-holders' making a good new revenue stream, but only in the sense of people/companies that own massive publishing catalogs. The individual rights-holders, eg. the songwriters, I fear are being sold up the river.

mzl 16y ago
I was in the original beta-trials of Spotify (started second half of 2007), and the info then seemed to indicate that the intended model was ad-financed. A lot of people apparently asked about paying to get rid of the ads. As for smaller artists, compare it with the situation in commercial radio. A few radio-plays will not get you very much money, but the number of people that listened to your song is actually quite high.
- Tycho 16y ago
  Comparing it to radio is where the trouble starts. A potential customer cannot rely upon radio to access your music/product. At best they'll hear a few of the artist's tracks, if they're patient and lucky. Therefore the radio is in no way a substitute for owning the LP, it's more like an advert/complement than a competing service. But Spotify DOES let the potential customer access your product in full, removing the main incentive to buy your LP. Furthermore, you're not only competing with a free version of your own product, your competing with a vast catalog of other music, millions of records that can be accessed effortlessly. "Should I spend £10 on this one album, or should I spend £10 for a month of unlimited access to endless high-quality music?" The economic position this puts individual artists in is dire. Also, another thing about the ads is sometimes they're hardly ads at all, they're just Spotify announcements. I can't believe they'd be wasting spots like that if they were really pulling in serious advertising money.