3 ms·

Can you provide any reasoning or evidence for this beyond “No, you’re wrong?” Here’s mine: “ Unlike physical sales or downloads, which pay artists a fixed pri

Can you provide any reasoning or evidence for this beyond “No, you’re wrong?” Here’s mine: “ Unlike physical sales or downloads, which pay artists a fixed price per song or album sold, Spotify pays royalties based on the artist's "market share"—the number of streams for their songs as a proportion of total songs streamed on the service. Spotify distributes approximately 70% of its total revenue to rights holders, who then pay artists based on their individual agreements. ” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Spotify https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Spotify Spotify didn’t make a single cent less than they usually do because of this.

johnnyanmac 2y ago
Reasoning: this happened for 7 years. And I'd be shocked if no one was actually privy of this happening years prior. Like every other 2010's tech operation, bots can be used to attract real users, at which point the bots can be sunsetted a bit and then attract real investors. market capture was more important then profitability in the 2010's, so even if they lost money from this overall, they gained something much more important for a company: a brand. That brand is where you start to become "too big to fail". This is basically a 3rd party helping with the first step. If you want to look at raw revenue over 7 years, maybe Spotify made less. But they definitely profitted by time by allowing it to go on until it was not longer useful (especially now. As Spotify is using music to train their own AI models. Ai generated music will just mess up the model). ---------------- Do I have any hard evidence Spotify specifically does this? Not on hand, but I wouldn't be surprised if I can actually dig up Spotify dirt. This is documented for several other large scale tech companies. I'd honestly be surprised if Spotify was a special case. I hope that explanation suffices, or is at least more satifactory than what you interpreted as "no, you're wrong".
- zaptrem 2y ago
  While I expected you to try to explain how the scammers "mostly stole from Spotify," (which was the claim I disagreed with) you instead put forth a theory to how their scam instead benefited Spotify (which I never made any claims about, nor disputed your claims). Can you explain how they stole from Spotify if the revenue pool they stole from (70% royalty pool) would never have gone to Spotify in the first place?

johnnyanmac 2y ago

Reasoning: this happened for 7 years. And I'd be shocked if no one was actually privy of this happening years prior. Like every other 2010's tech operation, bots can be used to attract real users, at which point the bots can be sunsetted a bit and then attract real investors. market capture was more important then profitability in the 2010's, so even if they lost money from this overall, they gained something much more important for a company: a brand. That brand is where you start to become "too big to fail". This is basically a 3rd party helping with the first step. If you want to look at raw revenue over 7 years, maybe Spotify made less. But they definitely profitted by time by allowing it to go on until it was not longer useful (especially now. As Spotify is using music to train their own AI models. Ai generated music will just mess up the model). ---------------- Do I have any hard evidence Spotify specifically does this? Not on hand, but I wouldn't be surprised if I can actually dig up Spotify dirt. This is documented for several other large scale tech companies. I'd honestly be surprised if Spotify was a special case. I hope that explanation suffices, or is at least more satifactory than what you interpreted as "no, you're wrong".

zaptrem 2y ago
While I expected you to try to explain how the scammers "mostly stole from Spotify," (which was the claim I disagreed with) you instead put forth a theory to how their scam instead benefited Spotify (which I never made any claims about, nor disputed your claims). Can you explain how they stole from Spotify if the revenue pool they stole from (70% royalty pool) would never have gone to Spotify in the first place?