41 ms·

This is not an entirely accurate analogy. You explicitly chose each of the songs you've purchased on iTunes. In contrast, song 'spins' on Pandora is not necess

by akavi 13y ago

This is not an entirely accurate analogy. You explicitly chose each of the songs you've purchased on iTunes. In contrast, song 'spins' on Pandora is not necessarily one you would've sought out on your own, nor chosen to pay money for given the option. I think it's only reasonable that the incidental-ish nature of these spins should be valued less than the intentive ones of your iTunes purchases, and yes, I think being valued several order of magnitude less is reasonable.

Samuel_Michon 13y ago
I see what you mean, and as for traditional radio, I agree. However, Pandora’s value lies in the fact that it learns your taste in music. Supposedly, after a while it shouldn’t play music you would hate. If Pandora’s service would provide several orders of magnitude less value than handpicked purchased tracks, then no-one would pay for it.
- socillion 13y ago
  I used Pandora continuously for several years, and I think it's fundamental value proposition is that it lets you discover new music. If you know what you want to listen to already, Pandora is an extraordinarily poor option because it gives you little latitude to listen to those specific tracks. I see it as entirely incomparable to purchasing an indefinite license to play a song or album. In many ways it is identical to radio, including solving the same problem - "give me a kind of music that I can enjoy". Instead of listening to something vague and poorly defined like a Metal channel on the radio, you're listening to a genre as defined by Pandora's much more nuanced song trait maps. Like radio, the service limits the amount that a single artist is played - you're unlikely to hear more than 1-3 songs by the same artist. You also have no ability to rewind and listen again. As a discovery tool like radio, Pandora also has positive externalities that are not demonstrated by simple royalty payments. Ff you enjoy an artist enough, you're likely to purchase their music (or just find it on Youtube) either because you want to hear more of their music, or simply because you want direct control over when you listen to that song.

by akavi 13y ago

Samuel_Michon 13y ago

I see what you mean, and as for traditional radio, I agree. However, Pandora’s value lies in the fact that it learns your taste in music. Supposedly, after a while it shouldn’t play music you would hate. If Pandora’s service would provide several orders of magnitude less value than handpicked purchased tracks, then no-one would pay for it.

socillion 13y ago
I used Pandora continuously for several years, and I think it's fundamental value proposition is that it lets you discover new music. If you know what you want to listen to already, Pandora is an extraordinarily poor option because it gives you little latitude to listen to those specific tracks. I see it as entirely incomparable to purchasing an indefinite license to play a song or album. In many ways it is identical to radio, including solving the same problem - "give me a kind of music that I can enjoy". Instead of listening to something vague and poorly defined like a Metal channel on the radio, you're listening to a genre as defined by Pandora's much more nuanced song trait maps. Like radio, the service limits the amount that a single artist is played - you're unlikely to hear more than 1-3 songs by the same artist. You also have no ability to rewind and listen again. As a discovery tool like radio, Pandora also has positive externalities that are not demonstrated by simple royalty payments. Ff you enjoy an artist enough, you're likely to purchase their music (or just find it on Youtube) either because you want to hear more of their music, or simply because you want direct control over when you listen to that song.