4 ms·
Their customer bases aren't distinct streams. They want existing users to upgrade to a premium version. They're not going to be helped by banning those that are
by interestica 8y ago
Their customer bases aren't distinct streams. They want existing users to upgrade to a premium version. They're not going to be helped by banning those that are already in their system and a click away from an upgrade. Or, like myself, someone who tested out other similar systems and then decided to upgrade again. Does trying to use my account on a system with an adblocker (that I may not know about) warrant a ban?
- scarejunba 8y agoThis is just the “exposure” argument. Not every client converts to being a paid user. The kind that use free service and then block ads may not convert at a high enough rate to justify providing the service. Especially since it also cannibalizes the other product (paid streaming). The marketing team can then decide they’re not worth it.
- interestica 8y agoIt's much deeper than exposure. It's closer to an "ecosystem" model. You're likely to create playlists in a service. You will find channels that you like. You will find that some artists are not available in other services. You will find that an interface is better. You might find their "you-might-also-like" algorithm is better. I tried Google's music system for about a year before switching back to Spotify (the irony being that Google Play Music didn't play well with Google's Assistant if you have more than one Google account).
- isoskeles 8y agoIf you get banned because of an adblocker you didn't know about, assuming you care enough to contact their customer service, I'm guessing they'd unban you.
- reaperducer 8y agoThey want existing users to upgrade to a premium version IME, cheap people are cheap. Nagging them doesn't change their minds.