3 ms·
It's a buffet that's just barely good enough for customers that it feels like it can replace a record collection with The Cloud, and all for a low low price! A
by wwweston 7y ago
It's a buffet that's just barely good enough for customers that it feels like it can replace a record collection with The Cloud, and all for a low low price!
As one might imagine, though, that low low price means something is getting squeezed. Some of the answer vs past models is in exchanging fixed acquisition and distribution costs for fractional marginal costs. But some of the answer is also in squeezing artists (and/or less powerful owners), both in the appalling fractional revenue compared to other models and in how it's distributed. The result shows up in either stuff getting pulled from the catalog, or never added, or.... never made because the artist that would have made it is doing something else in order to make up for the revenue that might have come from a system that actually assigns value to recordings.
But don't forget -- they'll also squeeze you too! Oh, sure, they know that price increases are a risk, but what risk is in there collecting as much of that sweet sweet data trail and harnessing it to sell you to others?