4 ms·

70% was under the old deal and they admit they weren't profitable under that. The new deal is 25% of revenue or a song fee that increases each year (as you'd h

70% was under the old deal and they admit they weren't profitable under that. The new deal is 25% of revenue or a song fee that increases each year (as you'd have seen if you'd read the article's 4th paragraph) As for revolutionary, I don't care. It's a good service. I show it to normal, non-tech people and they almost universally start using it themselves. That says it all for me.

jpwagner 17y ago
The "new deal" meaning that historically it's been 70%. Base projections on past data. "They are going to be profitable" sounds great, but isn't great until it happens. (And spare everyone the attitude please.) The reason I bring up "revolutionary", is because without something that sticks, the investments are going towards a fad.
- abossy 17y ago
  How are you defining "fad" and "revolutionary?" These are strong words, not to be strewn lightly.
  - jpwagner 17y ago
    noun: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/FAD http://www.thefreedictionary.com/FAD adj, def2: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/revolutionary http://www.thefreedictionary.com/revolutionary
potatolicious 17y ago
> I show it to normal, non-tech people and they almost universally start using it themselves. I have to quote this. The non-revolutionary stuff that nobody has for some reason yet created is just as worthwhile as using the most newfangled tech for some crazy application. Hell, I think I know more Pandora users than Twitter users...
- jpwagner 17y ago
  That is an absurd comparison. Twitter series A: July, 2007 Pandora series A: March, 2000 (!) Everyone's thought of radio. Although, no one thought to brute force categorization. I'm a daily user today, I fully expect to look back on pandora in 4 years as an epic failure.
mikebo 17y ago
In Pandora's case it's almost certainly a fee per song, as it is the larger of those two values. Micahel Robertson (mp3.com) has a good write up of this http://michaelrobertson.com/ http://michaelrobertson.com/ (i can't find permalinks on his site, wtf?) I agree it's a great service. I use it frequently and have discovered lots of good music there. I'm still not optimistic it will be around long term, although $35 million should keep it around for a while. I wonder how close to profitability they are -- my guess is not very.

jpwagner 17y ago

The "new deal" meaning that historically it's been 70%. Base projections on past data. "They are going to be profitable" sounds great, but isn't great until it happens. (And spare everyone the attitude please.) The reason I bring up "revolutionary", is because without something that sticks, the investments are going towards a fad.

abossy 17y ago
How are you defining "fad" and "revolutionary?" These are strong words, not to be strewn lightly.
- jpwagner 17y ago
  noun: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/FAD http://www.thefreedictionary.com/FAD adj, def2: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/revolutionary http://www.thefreedictionary.com/revolutionary

potatolicious 17y ago

> I show it to normal, non-tech people and they almost universally start using it themselves. I have to quote this. The non-revolutionary stuff that nobody has for some reason yet created is just as worthwhile as using the most newfangled tech for some crazy application. Hell, I think I know more Pandora users than Twitter users...

jpwagner 17y ago
That is an absurd comparison. Twitter series A: July, 2007 Pandora series A: March, 2000 (!) Everyone's thought of radio. Although, no one thought to brute force categorization. I'm a daily user today, I fully expect to look back on pandora in 4 years as an epic failure.

mikebo 17y ago

In Pandora's case it's almost certainly a fee per song, as it is the larger of those two values. Micahel Robertson (mp3.com) has a good write up of this http://michaelrobertson.com/ http://michaelrobertson.com/ (i can't find permalinks on his site, wtf?) I agree it's a great service. I use it frequently and have discovered lots of good music there. I'm still not optimistic it will be around long term, although $35 million should keep it around for a while. I wonder how close to profitability they are -- my guess is not very.