More > Music, Movies, Politics, and Other Cheap Thrills
The Music Business
JimH:
--- Quote from: Hendrik on October 05, 2017, 01:57:52 am ---You don't purchase a company like that for its "value", especially if you already have a competing service of your own (like Google has, even two, technically) - you purchase it to inherit their users and exclusive music deals, and get more users and more music onto one platform, saving costs.
--- End quote ---
The purchaser doesn't automatically acquire the licensing deals. The record labels can require new licenses and additional payments.
I don't think there would be enough cost savings to make a business profitable. There is an advantage to gaining enough scale to become more attractive to a buyer. But these companies lose so much money that even at some size, they're not attractive. Pandora, for example.
jachin99:
lets say they all go belly up tomorrow. How would everyone consume music? I don't see rows of CDs being sold at big box stores like there used to be, and I don't hear much about online music stores anymore either. Someone would have to buy them i think because if not, the music industry will have destroyed all of the mechanisms it uses to distribute content.
--- Quote from: Awesome Donkey on October 04, 2017, 04:19:59 am ---If I had to guess, Microsoft might be the one to acquire Spotify, especially since they're replacing the Groove Music with Spotify.
--- End quote ---
That would be pretty cool to me, and it might be a huge selling point for MS in general. Or MS would try too hard to Tailor it to whatever business model kick they happen to be on at the time and destroy it.
drmimosa:
I have a feature request. Could JRiver buy Spotify and Pandora and route all revenue back to the musicians?
Just for a few months...
JimH:
:)
I guess we could make an offer.
blgentry:
--- Quote from: jachin99 on October 05, 2017, 07:51:00 am ---lets say they all go belly up tomorrow. How would everyone consume music? I don't see rows of CDs being sold at big box stores like there used to be, and I don't hear much about online music stores anymore either. Someone would have to buy them i think because if not, the music industry will have destroyed all of the mechanisms it uses to distribute content.
--- End quote ---
Your comment is very indicative of what a lot of consumers think I suppose. Consumer perception is the whole problem actually. There are at least 2 whole generations of people that think music should all be free and think that buying music to "own it" is ridiculous.
Until that changes (if ever) stealing and streaming are the only models that these people accept as valid. But both produce zero or near zero revenue for all involved. Which makes them unsustainable. Thus the whole point of this thread: Streaming companies all lose money.
Except youtube. Which is kind of a sideways musical theft company that has monster ad revenue and pays musicians a laughable commission on playing their music. It's no surprise that many consumers not willing to download pirated music go straight for youtube as their musical source of choice. Meanwhile it starves musicians of revenue and pumps up youtube's, and keeps the consumer blissfully listening to terrible quality music of any type they want "for free".
I personally do not think that the music industry "destroyed" it's distribution. They allowed it to happen by not reacting quickly enough. They did NOT create this problem. ...and by the way, you can still purchase CDs in many places, including the biggest consumer electronics retail store chain the US. Most stores that *only* sell music are gone of course. Where I live there are a few independent "record stores" that mostly survive because vinyl records are the new cool thing for people under 30. There are many online avenues for buying CDs. I still buy several per month from various places. But I don't expect that model to be the model of the future. The genie is out of the bottle and will never go back.
Brian.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version