3 ms·

You’re misunderstanding me. The contract is an exclusive contract. That may not be the case in perpetuity, but either way that contract today creates the “platf

You’re misunderstanding me. The contract is an exclusive contract. That may not be the case in perpetuity, but either way that contract today creates the “platform fragmentation” OP is talking about about.

s1artibartfast 5y ago
I don't see how an exclusive contract that could end tomorrow stands in the way of platform fragmentation. What am I missing?
- jakelazaroff 5y ago
  Quoting OP: > Whereas we currently have a half dozen or so music streaming services that all have roughly the same content, we’ll soon find content fragmented across 20 different platforms; each corresponding to a specific slice of consumer preferences. Many of us will have to subscribe to multiple services to get the content we seek and will not be able to mix content. E.g., many of my current playlists on Spotify would be split across several disjoint streaming platforms. Where else can you get Joe Rogan's podcast, today? Nowhere. That's fragmentation. Spotify literally signed the contract explicitly for this reason. So it doesn't make sense to start worrying about different content being available on different platforms now that people are removing their music in protest, rather than two years ago when they made his podcast exclusive in the first place.
  - s1artibartfast 5y ago
    Thank you for bearing with me. I guess I misunderstood your initial response. I thought you were arguing that fragmentation couldn't happen because services like Spotify have exclusivity contracts, not that it already happened! Sure things are fragmented today, but that doesn't mean it cant be much worse. Today, most of the big catalogs have a ton of overlap. Exclusivity isn't the norm. If artists and services start drawing up into political camps, this overlap could significantly decrease.

3 ms·

You’re misunderstanding me. The contract is an exclusive contract. That may not be the case in perpetuity, but either way that contract today creates the “platf

by jakelazaroff 5y ago

s1artibartfast 5y ago
I don't see how an exclusive contract that could end tomorrow stands in the way of platform fragmentation. What am I missing?
- jakelazaroff 5y ago
  Quoting OP: > Whereas we currently have a half dozen or so music streaming services that all have roughly the same content, we’ll soon find content fragmented across 20 different platforms; each corresponding to a specific slice of consumer preferences. Many of us will have to subscribe to multiple services to get the content we seek and will not be able to mix content. E.g., many of my current playlists on Spotify would be split across several disjoint streaming platforms. Where else can you get Joe Rogan's podcast, today? Nowhere. That's fragmentation. Spotify literally signed the contract explicitly for this reason. So it doesn't make sense to start worrying about different content being available on different platforms now that people are removing their music in protest, rather than two years ago when they made his podcast exclusive in the first place.
  - s1artibartfast 5y ago
    Thank you for bearing with me. I guess I misunderstood your initial response. I thought you were arguing that fragmentation couldn't happen because services like Spotify have exclusivity contracts, not that it already happened! Sure things are fragmented today, but that doesn't mean it cant be much worse. Today, most of the big catalogs have a ton of overlap. Exclusivity isn't the norm. If artists and services start drawing up into political camps, this overlap could significantly decrease.