6 ms·

Spotify's problem is that they're a feature trying to be a product.

by toasterlovin 7y ago

ihuman 7y ago
Why can't a feature be a product if the implementation is good enough to stand on its own?
- themagician 7y ago
  Clearly, it can’t.
  - anoncake 7y ago
    That is not a valid answer to a question starting with "why".
- toasterlovin 7y ago
  Why weren't independent butchers and bakers able to compete with supermarkets? I'm not sure, exactly. I suspect the answer has a lot to do with people having limited bandwidth for vendors in their life and that they derive a lot of value from being able to make one buying decision that covers as many of their needs as possible.
anoncake 7y ago
Music streaming looks pretty producty to me. If anything, the issue is that too few things are considered independent products: In the case of Spotify, the client really should be a separate product from the service. No one would use that crap if it weren't tied to the service. The broader issue here is that if you tie bundle things together as features of a single product, a for-profit company has little incentive to improve them. We don't get the best product/feature possible but the worst one whose lack of quality can still be compensated by other features/products. Saying "they're a feature trying to be a product" instead of properly regulating the market does not result in a functioning market but in WeChat.
- toasterlovin 7y ago
  I think I pointed out a good corollary in another market: independent butchers and bakeries have largely been replaced in the U.S. by the meat and bakery departments of large super markets (and quality has probably stagnated or gone down as a result). Given that we don't seem to have any issues there, why do we have an issue with it here? And I disagree with the idea that music streaming is really a product. The streaming services don't own any content; they're basically just the packaging around other people's content. And, unlike cable TV providers, who also package other people's content, music streaming services do not own the last mile to the customer. The other natural comparison would be to Netflix, but Netflix has exclusive content (mainly because they were intelligent enough to realize early on that they would end up where Spotify is now if they didn't develop their own content). The only thing music streaming services really bring to the table is playlist curation and discovery. That doesn't seem very substantial to me and, in that light, it's not a surprise to me that an independent music streaming service would struggle to make money.
  - anoncake 7y ago
    > I think I pointed out a good corollary in another market: independent butchers and bakeries have largely been replaced in the U.S. by the meat and bakery departments of large super markets (and quality has probably stagnated or gone down as a result). Given that we don't seem to have any issues there, why do we have an issue with it here? I don't think meat and bakery departments are features under a definition useful for this discussion. For me, a product is something you can pay for separately, a feature is part of a product. That means meat and baked goods[1] are separate products. Supermarkets having meat and bakery departments is not much of an issue because it's perfectly reasonable to buy meat from a butcher and other groceries in a supermarket.[2] You cannot really mix Android and iOS apps. Also: "and quality has probably stagnated or gone down as a result" does sound like an issue. However in this case, I guess it's either because supermarkets are cheaper or because buying everything in one place is more convenient. The latter is a natural advantage of supermarkets. Putting all stores in one place would be good for the customer by lowering the cost of shopping at multiple stores but it's physically impossible.[3] Apple's advantage on its own platform, in contrast, is the result of anticompetitive behavior and could be avoided. > The only thing music streaming services really bring to the table is playlist curation and discovery. Size of the catalog? Different clients? Even if music streaming was purely a commodity, why can't a commodity be a product? Even electricity is. [1] I guess you could technically consider meat and bakery departments services. But in that case, does such a thing as a good even exist? [2] Geography aside. If the stores are too far apart, shopping at both is unreasonable. But I would be surprised if you didn't see any issues in such a case. [3] A supermarket that somehow actively stops competitors from opening near it would be acting competitively. Concentrating all stores in one place does have pose the issue of increasing customers' distance to the nearest store. But that's easy to solve when we're violating the laws of physics anyway.

Spotify's problem is that they're a feature trying to be a product.

ihuman 7y ago

Why can't a feature be a product if the implementation is good enough to stand on its own?

themagician 7y ago
Clearly, it can’t.
- anoncake 7y ago
  That is not a valid answer to a question starting with "why".
toasterlovin 7y ago
Why weren't independent butchers and bakers able to compete with supermarkets? I'm not sure, exactly. I suspect the answer has a lot to do with people having limited bandwidth for vendors in their life and that they derive a lot of value from being able to make one buying decision that covers as many of their needs as possible.

anoncake 7y ago

Music streaming looks pretty producty to me. If anything, the issue is that too few things are considered independent products: In the case of Spotify, the client really should be a separate product from the service. No one would use that crap if it weren't tied to the service. The broader issue here is that if you tie bundle things together as features of a single product, a for-profit company has little incentive to improve them. We don't get the best product/feature possible but the worst one whose lack of quality can still be compensated by other features/products. Saying "they're a feature trying to be a product" instead of properly regulating the market does not result in a functioning market but in WeChat.

toasterlovin 7y ago
I think I pointed out a good corollary in another market: independent butchers and bakeries have largely been replaced in the U.S. by the meat and bakery departments of large super markets (and quality has probably stagnated or gone down as a result). Given that we don't seem to have any issues there, why do we have an issue with it here? And I disagree with the idea that music streaming is really a product. The streaming services don't own any content; they're basically just the packaging around other people's content. And, unlike cable TV providers, who also package other people's content, music streaming services do not own the last mile to the customer. The other natural comparison would be to Netflix, but Netflix has exclusive content (mainly because they were intelligent enough to realize early on that they would end up where Spotify is now if they didn't develop their own content). The only thing music streaming services really bring to the table is playlist curation and discovery. That doesn't seem very substantial to me and, in that light, it's not a surprise to me that an independent music streaming service would struggle to make money.
- anoncake 7y ago
  > I think I pointed out a good corollary in another market: independent butchers and bakeries have largely been replaced in the U.S. by the meat and bakery departments of large super markets (and quality has probably stagnated or gone down as a result). Given that we don't seem to have any issues there, why do we have an issue with it here? I don't think meat and bakery departments are features under a definition useful for this discussion. For me, a product is something you can pay for separately, a feature is part of a product. That means meat and baked goods[1] are separate products. Supermarkets having meat and bakery departments is not much of an issue because it's perfectly reasonable to buy meat from a butcher and other groceries in a supermarket.[2] You cannot really mix Android and iOS apps. Also: "and quality has probably stagnated or gone down as a result" does sound like an issue. However in this case, I guess it's either because supermarkets are cheaper or because buying everything in one place is more convenient. The latter is a natural advantage of supermarkets. Putting all stores in one place would be good for the customer by lowering the cost of shopping at multiple stores but it's physically impossible.[3] Apple's advantage on its own platform, in contrast, is the result of anticompetitive behavior and could be avoided. > The only thing music streaming services really bring to the table is playlist curation and discovery. Size of the catalog? Different clients? Even if music streaming was purely a commodity, why can't a commodity be a product? Even electricity is. [1] I guess you could technically consider meat and bakery departments services. But in that case, does such a thing as a good even exist? [2] Geography aside. If the stores are too far apart, shopping at both is unreasonable. But I would be surprised if you didn't see any issues in such a case. [3] A supermarket that somehow actively stops competitors from opening near it would be acting competitively. Concentrating all stores in one place does have pose the issue of increasing customers' distance to the nearest store. But that's easy to solve when we're violating the laws of physics anyway.