7 ms·

This seems like a wonderfully pointless gimmick. Plus, last I checked, Spotify is en route to implosion with so many people realizing it's hurting more than pi

by PLejeck 15y ago

This seems like a wonderfully pointless gimmick. Plus, last I checked, Spotify is en route to implosion with so many people realizing it's hurting more than piracy is. A very profitable collapse, by the looks of how much they pay out ;)

evjan 15y ago
Implosion? How did you check that? And how is it hurting?
- PLejeck 15y ago
  A few independent musicians have noted that they make so little from Spotify (and the users don't get guilted into buying anything on iTunes) that it actually isn't worth it. I think Spotify will slowly lose independent musicians and eventually lose market when they lose more artists (in fact, didn't a record label recently pull all tracks off Spotify?) I can see a collapse approaching GroupOn proportions (let's face the inevitable there ;)) if things don't change soon, and for similar reasons (screwing over small business vs. screwing over independent musicians)
  - DrCatbox 15y ago
    You are probably right, spotify does not solve anything. It has not removed the middleman between music producers and music consumers. Spotify is the recording-labels, middleman, own transformation into a digital world. But it is still a middleman. One beautiful day music will be free again like in the Napster and audiogalaxy days.
    - PLejeck 15y ago
      Or the days of Bittorre- oh wait, that's today :D
    - adyus 15y ago
      Music does not need to be free (as in beer). Artists need to make a living too. Mind you, a living shouldn't mean an episode on MTV Cribs, but still. The solution could be to sell music directly to the listener, without middlemen and labels. But then, who handles promotion? Public Relations? Placement? Concert booking? Marketing? When all of these will become individually offered services, like most other web-related services have become, we may see the music revolution begin.
- alex_c 15y ago
  There's been grumbling from some labels that don't feel Spotify is worth it. Hard to tell if it's a full-blown implosion, though. http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/permalink/2011/111110distributor http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/permalink/2011/111110distrib... http://digitalmusicnews.com/stories/081011spotifyresponds http://digitalmusicnews.com/stories/081011spotifyresponds http://digitalmusicnews.com/stories/091911spotifydefends http://digitalmusicnews.com/stories/091911spotifydefends etc.
rdouble 15y ago
Spotify has always operated at a loss. They lost 40 million dollars last year. If they implode it will be due to economics not sympathy for musicians.
- PLejeck 15y ago
  Ouch, their record label contracts must be AWFUL.
  - rdouble 15y ago
    Not sure why you were downvoted. They are awful, that is why they are losing money.
- mongol 15y ago
  With 2.5 million paying users, they should have revenues around 300 million USD per year. If they can not make money on this they should at least be close.
untog 15y ago
This seems like a wonderfully pointless gimmick. I'm sure people said the same about Facebook apps back when they first emerged. Being able to "music-ify" your app is pretty powerful- one of the reasons there are so few sites like turntable.fm out there is that each site has to license the music individually. If you could just tap into a user's Spotify account then you bypass all that.
- earbitscom 15y ago
  Facebook has hundreds of millions of users and no real barrier to entry. Spotify has 2.5M paying users. That's not enough to build a Turntable business off of.
  - untog 15y ago
    No, but it's enough to throw together a proof of concept, or a quick hack, maybe a small app. Over time, Spotify becomes known as the music account to have on the net, both parties benefit. I'm not saying it will definitely happen, but I can see it.
JonnieCache 15y ago
>This seems like a wonderfully pointless gimmick. Remember how cool it was when tony hawks and GTA first had licensed soundtracks? (It was really cool.) EDIT: Oh, apparently you can only build your apps into spotify, not build spotify into your apps. Boo! EDIT2: Or maybe you can. It's not very clear. But that would definitely be an excellent market for this, allowing indie browser or mobile game devs to license music easily through an intermediary. Or maybe that's already an easy process?
- rdouble 15y ago
  You could already build spotify into your apps with libspotify. Unfortunately it's a bit hamstrung from a business perspective as the TOS states you can't use it in an app that actually makes money. http://developer.spotify.com/en/libspotify/overview/ http://developer.spotify.com/en/libspotify/overview/
- WizKid 15y ago
  You must have missed libspotify which existed for a long time: http://developer.spotify.com/en/libspotify/overview/ http://developer.spotify.com/en/libspotify/overview/

by PLejeck 15y ago

evjan 15y ago

Implosion? How did you check that? And how is it hurting?

PLejeck 15y ago
A few independent musicians have noted that they make so little from Spotify (and the users don't get guilted into buying anything on iTunes) that it actually isn't worth it. I think Spotify will slowly lose independent musicians and eventually lose market when they lose more artists (in fact, didn't a record label recently pull all tracks off Spotify?) I can see a collapse approaching GroupOn proportions (let's face the inevitable there ;)) if things don't change soon, and for similar reasons (screwing over small business vs. screwing over independent musicians)
- DrCatbox 15y ago
  You are probably right, spotify does not solve anything. It has not removed the middleman between music producers and music consumers. Spotify is the recording-labels, middleman, own transformation into a digital world. But it is still a middleman. One beautiful day music will be free again like in the Napster and audiogalaxy days.
  - PLejeck 15y ago
    Or the days of Bittorre- oh wait, that's today :D
  - adyus 15y ago
    Music does not need to be free (as in beer). Artists need to make a living too. Mind you, a living shouldn't mean an episode on MTV Cribs, but still. The solution could be to sell music directly to the listener, without middlemen and labels. But then, who handles promotion? Public Relations? Placement? Concert booking? Marketing? When all of these will become individually offered services, like most other web-related services have become, we may see the music revolution begin.
alex_c 15y ago
There's been grumbling from some labels that don't feel Spotify is worth it. Hard to tell if it's a full-blown implosion, though. http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/permalink/2011/111110distributor http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/permalink/2011/111110distrib... http://digitalmusicnews.com/stories/081011spotifyresponds http://digitalmusicnews.com/stories/081011spotifyresponds http://digitalmusicnews.com/stories/091911spotifydefends http://digitalmusicnews.com/stories/091911spotifydefends etc.

rdouble 15y ago

Spotify has always operated at a loss. They lost 40 million dollars last year. If they implode it will be due to economics not sympathy for musicians.

PLejeck 15y ago
Ouch, their record label contracts must be AWFUL.
- rdouble 15y ago
  Not sure why you were downvoted. They are awful, that is why they are losing money.
mongol 15y ago
With 2.5 million paying users, they should have revenues around 300 million USD per year. If they can not make money on this they should at least be close.

untog 15y ago

This seems like a wonderfully pointless gimmick. I'm sure people said the same about Facebook apps back when they first emerged. Being able to "music-ify" your app is pretty powerful- one of the reasons there are so few sites like turntable.fm out there is that each site has to license the music individually. If you could just tap into a user's Spotify account then you bypass all that.

earbitscom 15y ago
Facebook has hundreds of millions of users and no real barrier to entry. Spotify has 2.5M paying users. That's not enough to build a Turntable business off of.
- untog 15y ago
  No, but it's enough to throw together a proof of concept, or a quick hack, maybe a small app. Over time, Spotify becomes known as the music account to have on the net, both parties benefit. I'm not saying it will definitely happen, but I can see it.

JonnieCache 15y ago

>This seems like a wonderfully pointless gimmick. Remember how cool it was when tony hawks and GTA first had licensed soundtracks? (It was really cool.) EDIT: Oh, apparently you can only build your apps into spotify, not build spotify into your apps. Boo! EDIT2: Or maybe you can. It's not very clear. But that would definitely be an excellent market for this, allowing indie browser or mobile game devs to license music easily through an intermediary. Or maybe that's already an easy process?

rdouble 15y ago
You could already build spotify into your apps with libspotify. Unfortunately it's a bit hamstrung from a business perspective as the TOS states you can't use it in an app that actually makes money. http://developer.spotify.com/en/libspotify/overview/ http://developer.spotify.com/en/libspotify/overview/
WizKid 15y ago
You must have missed libspotify which existed for a long time: http://developer.spotify.com/en/libspotify/overview/ http://developer.spotify.com/en/libspotify/overview/