Articulating a bit more in depth: Spotify it’s a multi sided marketplace where on the artist side will have a very big power law where the big labels (that has

Articulating a bit more in depth: Spotify it’s a multi sided marketplace where on the artist side will have a very big power law where the big labels (that has a catalog power) brings most of the users. What sustain the economics on the Spotify is its catalog that is a composition of the labels catalog + long tail artists and their podcasts also. When users goes to the Spotify, they are paying not to support their favourite artist but to be able to access the platform, that occasionally will have their long tail artists. > The whole point of spotify is ALL music, so ALL music is important, surely? Not necessarily. Catalog + Network effects + Marketplace is important. What you’re describing in your argument is that “since you’re in the platform due to the artist, it’s fair that this artist receives the 70% of your money”. The flaw here is that this artist is benefiting of a marketplace and all its infrastructure and distribution without paying and the whole point of the platform is to give access to its catalog. Think on the Spotify price as some kind of “optionality fee”.