4 ms·

Just a quick sidenote: Joe’s friends have said that people who are throwing around numbers about how much he got from Spotify are estimating way lower than it r

Just a quick sidenote: Joe’s friends have said that people who are throwing around numbers about how much he got from Spotify are estimating way lower than it really is. The $100M is the most common number being thrown around. I can’t tell how much the writer knows Joe’s content, but he would probably have never went with a subscription model. The free access has always been one of the #1 things he attributes to his success. I say this as a listener from episode ~250 which is still not that long ago. It’s clear to a long-time fan that Spotify made some assurances that their app can be downloaded for free so all his listeners can join him.

abendy 6y ago
I saw the same video [0]. It would seem unlikely that Joe wouldn't have the proper business and legal advice to make a deal like this and not come out it "ripped off". He's a successful stand up, been in sitcoms and general show-biz for decades. [0] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Sq9r87jnRo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Sq9r87jnRo
- Non24Throw 6y ago
  Unrelated but I really struggle with this kind of double and triple negative wording. It WOULD seem UNLIKELY that he WOULD NOT have the proper advice to make a deal like this AND NOT be ripped off. “He probably has good advisors that made sure he wasn’t being ripped off.” It honestly took me 5 minutes to figure out what you were saying. I feel like I uniquely struggle with this, like I have some kind of undiscovered form of dyslexia. Maybe it’s just late.
  - perditus 6y ago
    It's bad writing but I think it's unusual to have that much trouble parsing it.
aj-4 6y ago
and that's just the money up front, there are certainly some performance bonus clauses in there as incentive, too.
vowelless 6y ago
Exactly. I’m pretty sure that people are significantly underestimating the value of his deal. It’s probably on the order of 3 or 4 times higher than the WSJ estimate.
jatesy 6y ago
Creating a subscription model for the top 5% wouldn't restrict free access. That's the big difference between the model proposed and Howard Stern's Sirius deal. Everyone else (95%) could still listen to the free (ad-funded) show, the same way they do today.
me_me_me 6y ago
Yeah, but he also always mentioned how he doesn't want to be controlled and regulated. He rants about youtube (for all right reasons). And now he is putting himself into a spotify box. Sure, he can most likely retain all of his freedoms (due to his seer size), but once spotify becomes youtube for podcasts, then he could be partially blamed for supporting the very mechanism he spend most of his podcast life criticizing.

abendy 6y ago

I saw the same video [0]. It would seem unlikely that Joe wouldn't have the proper business and legal advice to make a deal like this and not come out it "ripped off". He's a successful stand up, been in sitcoms and general show-biz for decades. [0] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Sq9r87jnRo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Sq9r87jnRo

Non24Throw 6y ago
Unrelated but I really struggle with this kind of double and triple negative wording. It WOULD seem UNLIKELY that he WOULD NOT have the proper advice to make a deal like this AND NOT be ripped off. “He probably has good advisors that made sure he wasn’t being ripped off.” It honestly took me 5 minutes to figure out what you were saying. I feel like I uniquely struggle with this, like I have some kind of undiscovered form of dyslexia. Maybe it’s just late.
- perditus 6y ago
  It's bad writing but I think it's unusual to have that much trouble parsing it.

aj-4 6y ago

and that's just the money up front, there are certainly some performance bonus clauses in there as incentive, too.

vowelless 6y ago

Exactly. I’m pretty sure that people are significantly underestimating the value of his deal. It’s probably on the order of 3 or 4 times higher than the WSJ estimate.

jatesy 6y ago

Creating a subscription model for the top 5% wouldn't restrict free access. That's the big difference between the model proposed and Howard Stern's Sirius deal. Everyone else (95%) could still listen to the free (ad-funded) show, the same way they do today.

me_me_me 6y ago

Yeah, but he also always mentioned how he doesn't want to be controlled and regulated. He rants about youtube (for all right reasons). And now he is putting himself into a spotify box. Sure, he can most likely retain all of his freedoms (due to his seer size), but once spotify becomes youtube for podcasts, then he could be partially blamed for supporting the very mechanism he spend most of his podcast life criticizing.