Monthly revenue about $1.7M, costs about $4M. Losses of around $25M
Left with $220M of debt.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: KingSparta on November 23, 2015, 09:01:26 pm
you can't take your music with you for the most part, and access it when you want to.
I prefer a physical, and digital file of some sort.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: RussellS on January 11, 2016, 03:26:19 pm
I must admit I'm with KingSparta on this issue. I far prefer the physical tracks whether they be on physical media or downloaded and stored in MC.
In fact I've even for the most part stopped digital downloads now because it is so difficult to legitimately download albums in flac format. I now generally buy the CD and rip it in MC and if it is an older album I buy the CD from second hand record shops or on ebay for just a couple of pounds.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: Castius on January 11, 2016, 07:51:23 pm
I use Google Music because i can listen to anything they have. AND buy what i like from the same service. If i like it, I can buy it then download to my library.
I'm in the middle of the road consumers though. i don't need flac files.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: KingSparta on January 12, 2016, 08:36:36 pm
"Why Streaming Struggles"
As far as I can tell Amazon does not have an issue, and they make money.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: fooze on January 13, 2016, 01:55:25 am
I usually try to buy my downloads direct from the artist whenever possible.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: blgentry on January 13, 2016, 09:33:59 am
Almost everyone I know uses some kind of streaming service: Netflix is the most popular, followed by Pandora and Spotify. Oh and of course Amazon.
I've written before about why streaming seems like an awful idea to ME personally. But I think it's the future. Fewer and fewer people are interested in having media that they own. Most people just want instant gratification and that's it.
Brian.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: jmone on January 14, 2016, 05:37:40 pm
What I don't like is the current trend of disaggregation from streaming services. More and More of them are deliberately preventing aggregation progs like MC from being able to browse and play their content. I want one UI to provide a combined view of all my content regardless of if it is local or "cloud" based. We seem to be going down a path of MC for locally stored path an individual apps for each of the streaming services.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on January 15, 2016, 01:10:55 am
I'm guessing that the record labels are behind that. They don't want content they've licensed to one company to be used by another. The same is probably true for video services like Netflix. Both the record labels and the movie studios want to do as many deals as they can.
Eventually, this may change. Or not.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on January 16, 2016, 12:53:02 pm
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on January 28, 2016, 11:10:07 pm
Live365 is gone now: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/thomas-gladysz/live365-is-dead-long-live_b_9081668.html?utm_hp_ref=entertainment&ir=Entertainment§ion=us_entertainment
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: KingSparta on January 31, 2016, 05:58:25 pm
I'm surprised by that one.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on January 31, 2016, 06:53:45 pm
They're all a shock.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: glynor on February 03, 2016, 08:44:16 pm
I think some of what we are seeing is a normal market rush and then inevitable high failure rate. For every amazon.com, you're going to have a lot of pets.coms. Of course, Amazon isn't making any money, and never has, and Netflix (I agree probably the most popular one out there) isn't setting the financial world on fire either.
What I don't like is the current trend of disaggregation from streaming services. More and More of them are deliberately preventing aggregation progs like MC from being able to browse and play their content. I want one UI to provide a combined view of all my content regardless of if it is local or "cloud" based. We seem to be going down a path of MC for locally stored path an individual apps for each of the streaming services.
I think this (and an established content marketing and delivery industry fighting the future tooth and nail) is what is holding streaming services back.
The future of media is apps?
I don't know about that. With a typical, cheap consumer TV, you have to deal with a crappy, buggy, often poorly-thought-out UI design. But, you only really have one or three of them to deal with in your house. And the "cable box/DVR/whatever" (with its crappy UI) dis-intermediates a lot of the interface anyway. In any case, it is a single platform for delivery of all the television content you want. The UI may be crappy, but you only have to learn one or two of them, and just barely enough to get your job done. And that's now, we're coming from a place where the UI was a channel dial (and then an up/down arrow control).
But a future where HBO has its app, and Warner Brothers has its app, and Disney has its app, and ESPN, and some content is aggregated (and silo-ed) over in Hulu, and some in Netflix, but only sometimes and vanishes other times that don't fully make sense (and shift over time anyway)? And now you're learning and dealing with categorizing 30 apps and their idiosyncrasies? Some of them will be great, but most of them will be terrible, or at-best, mediocre.
That is... Well, it is their problem. :-\
I remain unconvinced. I think the Internet has a much bigger, and more fundamental, destiny as a content delivery platform. We don't really need these services with their walled gardens to middle-man between us and the people creating the actual content.
The problem is it needs a unified platform, search, and discovery. And, a way for the content makers to reliably generate revenue directly from the users. Then you don't need "Networks" (which become essentially banks fronting loans with marketing departments attached), because they can sell to us directly. The real "Content (App) Store", where you or I can submit something as easily as JJ Abrams.
But, I guess I want to believe, that the reason these things fail, is that content is, to consumers, fundamentally different from "software". An app only "goes" with a particular phone (or tablet, but only mostly), so it is one thing to tie the "thing you buy" to the device vendor in a walled garden. But it is entirely a different thing for a song, or a TV show. The consumer doesn't care about your excuses why it can't be all in one place on all of their devices that have a screen, or speakers, or bluetooth. They don't care. With that analogy, we're in the AOL and CompuServe "phase" of the evolution of the disruption of entertainment (and news) media by the Internet, with walled gardens everywhere.
So, the model I hope that evolves out of it, must be much closer to the model of the Open Web. Where you can pick your "web browser" but it is still the web, and anyone can put up a web server and serve some content. We need that, but for entertainment media content delivery, funding and/or purchase, and playback. I think it will happen, but it is going to be an interesting road.
The alternative is dour, because it almost certainly means we end up with a Facebook of media, and one company controls it all. And that, since this includes essentially our modern freedom of speech and of the press, is... Not the result I'm pulling for.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on February 15, 2016, 06:37:55 am
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on May 09, 2016, 12:40:23 pm
Omnifone in receivership: http://musically.com/2016/05/05/digital-music-firm-omnifone-placed-into-administration/
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: blgentry on May 09, 2016, 04:05:22 pm
I heard Tidal had a major outage recently and just *barely* got through it without a lot of visibility.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7uBph38kXo
(Just a little humor) :)
Brian.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: KingSparta on May 10, 2016, 07:42:35 pm
An Important Update on the Beatport Streaming Service Thank you for using the Beatport Streaming service over the past year. This note is to inform you that on May 13, we will discontinue the Streaming music service and mobile apps. In addition to our web and mobile streaming apps no longer being accessible, embedded audio players will no longer be available, and user playlists will be removed from our database. The Beatport Store will remain fully operational and functioning without interruption, where you will still have the ability to preview tracks and browse curated genres, find exclusive content, and access weekly updated DJ charts from our vast community. Please read our Company Blog Post to learn more about this change.
We'd like to thank you for using our Streaming service, and regret any inconvenience this may cause. -The Beatport Team
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on August 22, 2016, 06:55:51 am
Samsung is closing their Milk Music service on September 22.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on September 28, 2016, 06:05:09 pm
Consolidation doesn't help. They just lose more money.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: imugli on September 28, 2016, 06:54:30 pm
Less competition reduces pricing pressure, allowing the remaining players to raise prices / increase ads etc to increase revenue, without people having the option to shop around.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on September 28, 2016, 07:30:54 pm
Possible, but it hasn't happened yet. New companies pop up.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: DJLegba on September 28, 2016, 08:05:58 pm
Article says Spotify is valued at $8.5 billion. How does that compare with JRiver?
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on September 28, 2016, 09:16:53 pm
It's more.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on January 09, 2017, 02:24:42 am
Soundcloud's annual loss exceeds annual sales. Loses $52 million on $22 million in sales.
So much of the market rides on sentiment and if the lemmings start to run for the cliff, watch out. I still haven't signed up to streaming content. Broadband hasn't hit my street yet and when it does, it may not deliver enough up/download anyway. Probably not such a bad thing to be outside the impact zone.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: stewart_pk on July 31, 2017, 10:13:16 pm
"The digital onslaught is also continuing in the music market, with subscription revenues increasing by 65% to £418m, driven by services such as Spotify, Apple Music, Amazon Music and Deezer. Physical sales of CDs fell by 13%, a steep decline after a 3.7% fall in 2015. Downloads and streaming accounted for over 57% of the music market in 2016."
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: RoderickGI on August 01, 2017, 01:09:42 am
A spokeswoman for Netflix in Australia disputed the inclusion of the company’s content contracts with studios as debt. “Netflix has a total gross debt of $4.8 billion versus the company’s equity market value of about $75 billion,” she said.
While the report may not be wrong, essentially, it is using dodgy accounting to sensationalise the story.
Netflix is trying to get big enough to be able to tell the studios what they will pay, and what for, and to demand access to all content rather than negotiate a selected range, piece by piece. Once they have done that, we may actually get a streaming service that is worth paying for.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: Hendrik on August 01, 2017, 02:34:09 am
Once they have done that, we may actually get a streaming service that is worth paying for.
But if you don't do it before that, they might not get there. Its a conundrum.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: tyler69 on August 01, 2017, 05:27:59 am
is jriver of the impression that streaming is not becoming a major way of listening to music?
disclaimer: i do not use streaming services.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on August 01, 2017, 05:51:21 am
We have worked with streaming services for more than 10 years, but they keep falling on their faces and the rules keep changing. For example, we had a very nice implementation for Netflix once, but they then closed their system so it no longer worked.
This kind of thing happens but it is too risky to bet on who will survive.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: tyler69 on August 01, 2017, 06:00:12 am
i understand, but i did not ask about what companies will survive or who-will-have-what-market share. companies die for different reasons. in my opinion the market will consolidate and we will see very few big players eating the pie. smaller streaming vendors will either be bought or die.
my question was rather meant on the subject itself, since the topic implies to me that jriver does not think streaming itself has a future.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on August 01, 2017, 06:16:40 am
... the topic implies to me that jriver does not think streaming itself has a future.
I didn't ever say that. I think streaming is important. I thought that ten years ago. We were working with Musicnet, later Medianet, when they were sold by the record labels in 2005: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/13/labels_sell_musicnet/
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: tyler69 on August 01, 2017, 07:11:22 am
thanks for claryfing. what a real problem with streaming is, is the fragmentation of availability: some content is available with vendor a, some is with vendor b. people do not want to have several subscriptions in order to see all champions league soccer games or listen to all their favorite bands. combining the services and offer one touchpoint to the customer is the way to go i think.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: stewart_pk on August 01, 2017, 10:59:52 pm
I didn't ever say that. I think streaming is important. I thought that ten years ago.
Well that's good to hear. But I don't really understand the point of this thread. We know that streaming services will continue to replace discs and file downloads. It's happening day by day every day. Who cares if the big major players are cutting each others throat with pricing; you know when that happens it's the consumer who wins.
So that raises the question of where does that place MC in the future being predominantly a file player.
FWIW I don't really use streaming services. Physical discs and some legal downloads are how I consume my media.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: Hendrik on August 02, 2017, 03:37:35 am
So that raises the question of where does that place MC in the future being predominantly a file player.
We would generally be happy to have a place in playing streamed content (if the conditions are right), but the streaming providers are generally not interested in that, not in music and even much less so in video. I can only imagine that they view MC as giving you too much freedom and as such doesn't fit into their quite restrictive model on how they want to control your listening.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: imugli on August 02, 2017, 04:35:29 am
TBH I can understand them wanting to control the experience. I'd be happy if they just gave us decent web interfaces, like youtube.com/tv, that can be controlled by remote at 10ft.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: stewart_pk on August 02, 2017, 07:37:01 pm
We would generally be happy to have a place in playing streamed content (if the conditions are right), but the streaming providers are generally not interested in that, not in music and even much less so in video. I can only imagine that they view MC as giving you too much freedom and as such doesn't fit into their quite restrictive model on how they want to control your listening.
Yes I understand that; from memory Netflix shut their doors on you. The WDM driver, ASIO In and WASAPI Loopback are incredible features that allows us to use other software and hardware players. But it just makes the UX cumbersome and practically impossible for the other half, kids and visitors.
But here's just a bit of a rambling to come about the music and movie industry which the thread is somewhat about, I think. IMO PC software players have somewhat facilitated illegal consumption of media. Many of the "MP3 and MKV torrent generation" use them to play their torrents. If anything streaming services are to the rescue and at the same time providing a level of convenience unparalleled.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on August 02, 2017, 08:28:59 pm
I don't think it would be that difficult to capture and record streaming.
Software is just a tool. Like any other tool, it be used for good or bad purposes.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: stewart_pk on August 02, 2017, 10:24:17 pm
I don't think it would be that difficult to capture and record streaming.
Software is just a tool. Like any other tool, it be used for good or bad purposes.
Yeah, but ripping discs or sharing downloaded files can be done much faster and more conveniently then having to wait for each stream capture at real time. I've never heard of illegal movie or music downloads that have come from streaming services, have you? If they exist they're surely a drop in the ocean.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: Hendrik on August 03, 2017, 02:09:17 am
I've never heard of illegal movie or music downloads that have come from streaming services, have you?
I don't know about music, but for video thats quite common (called "WEB-DL" files typically), because its a better alternative to recording broadcast streams, which has the same "waiting for it to arrive" problem, on top of broadcast typically being lower quality. Its quite popular for TV shows, because those often get onto Netflix or Amazon only hours after airing, or in some cases even exclusively on streaming.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on September 03, 2017, 08:55:47 am
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on October 05, 2017, 01:03:54 pm
Split The Music Business (https://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php/topic,112545.msg778093.html#msg778093)
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: jachin99 on October 10, 2017, 09:47:26 am
What about USTVNow? They provide streaming options but they are also a content provider to small cable companies. I'm curious if JRiver could be considered a small cable company. Has anyone looked into them? Kodi has a plugin for USTV Now, and it seems like a good way to get cable onto jriver without forking out the big bucks for playready.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on January 02, 2018, 04:53:57 pm
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: tyler69 on January 18, 2018, 04:10:14 am
Maybe interesting to some: https://thetrichordist.com/2018/01/15/2017-streaming-price-bible-spotify-per-stream-rates-drop-9-apple-music-gains-marketshare-of-both-plays-and-overall-revenue/
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: DJLegba on January 24, 2018, 07:04:43 pm
Maybe interesting to some: https://thetrichordist.com/2018/01/15/2017-streaming-price-bible-spotify-per-stream-rates-drop-9-apple-music-gains-marketshare-of-both-plays-and-overall-revenue/
I like the comment from the songwriter who said streaming is legalized theft. If you enjoy listening to music then buy it so you support the people who create and perform.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on February 28, 2018, 05:39:28 pm
Spotify filed to go public and revealed just how big their losses are.
From The Verge:
"The filing gives us one of our best looks yet at Spotify’s finances, with the company posting revenue last year of €4,090 million (nearly $5 billion) and a net loss of -€1,235 million (or ~$1.5 billion) for the same period."
In other words, they lose about $30 for every $100 in business. You could do better by selling $100 bills for $80.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: imugli on March 01, 2018, 09:11:37 pm
And this from Sydney Morning Herald here in Oz...
Quote
Spotify claims 71 million subscribers - about double that of its biggest competitor, Apple Music. The difference is that Apple Music is merely a loss leader for Apple's juggernaut devices business. Apple, which is sitting on a veritable mountain of cash, doesn't need to make money from streaming - it's a service designed to keep people buying iPhones. Spotify has no such luxury. Yet there is an even more troubling flaw in Spotify's business model. It has almost no leverage with its key suppliers.
In the end, I still think we'll see Apple, Google, and a third option offered by the combined might of the studios. There was a fake story a couple of years back that Google bought Spotify. I still think that will play out to be the case and I think Tidal will be bought by Apple.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: stewart_pk on March 01, 2018, 10:06:19 pm
The most important thing is and it's seemingly lost in this thread is that current streaming services don't struggle to provide a good money for money service. It may be that the big players Apple, Google, Microsoft end up buying out all the major services. I'm just shrugging my shoulders right now.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: tyler69 on May 09, 2018, 11:35:21 am
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on May 09, 2018, 12:51:17 pm
Thanks for that. Sprint (Tidal investor) isn't going to like it.
Quote from the article:
"In March 2016, the firm claimed that Kanye West’s The Life Of Pablo, a six-week exclusive on its platform, had been streamed 250m times in just 10 days.
"At the same time, TIDAL claimed that its platform had surpassed 3m subscribers.
"These numbers meant that, on average, every single TIDAL subscriber would have had to be playing the Kanye album over eight times a day.
"Similar suspicions were triggered by the success of Beyonce’s record-breaking Lemonade a couple of months later.
"TIDAL claimed that Lemonade was streamed 306m times on its platform in its first 15 days post-release.
"Stats like this led Norwegian newspaper Dagens Næringsliv to investigate in January 2017 – and uncover documents which, it said, suggested that TIDAL had been deliberately inflating its subscriber figures.
"This report was lend credence by data from trusted music industry research firm Midia in the same month, which estimated that TIDAL’s subscriber base actually only included 1m people worldwide."
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: Awesome Donkey on May 17, 2018, 04:08:36 am
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: KingSparta on September 24, 2018, 04:47:39 pm
SiriusXM buys Pandora for $3.5 billion
Quote
SiriusXM is acquiring Pandora for $3.5 billion. The satellite radio company says it intends to maintain the Pandora service and brand, along with its roughly 70 million monthly active users (5.6 million of which are paying members), which stands at double that of SiriusXM’s existing 36 million subscribers.
how do you get 70 million customers, and only 5.6 million are paying?
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on September 25, 2018, 06:26:09 am
Sirius's stock dropped 10% on the day they announced the Pandora acquisition. Investors don't like the deal.
That was two years ago now, and the word "cash" doesn't appear in the article. I think the financing was "creative" to make something of a splash.
Here's a more recent article: https://www.engadget.com/2017/12/13/tidal-jay-z-financial-trouble/
They can delay a collapse by not paying record labels, but they can't get around the fact that they don't earn a profit. Not even close. Their only hope is that someone will buy them, and I don't think it's likely or it would have happened by now.
When Jay-Z bought Tidal, it looked like he thought he could flip it, like Dr Dre did with Beats when he sold it to Apple.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beats_Electronics
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on January 29, 2019, 08:31:18 am
Watch AT&T buy them next week for $1 B.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: Awesome Donkey on January 29, 2019, 09:03:30 am
Wasted money, in my opinion. Honestly Apple should just buy them so they can use Tidal's infrastructure to offer lossless downloads and lossless streaming through the iTunes Store and Apple Music. That actually might come in useful because there's some iTunes-exclusive albums and EPs I'd like to get in lossless. :D
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: Hendrik on January 29, 2019, 04:44:02 pm
Honestly at this point one of the "big" streaming services should just go under, very publicly and terribly, to demonstrate the problem with that entire industry. If they keep being bought out and probably getting rich in the process, then its not going to help fix the streaming industry.
Unfortunately user accounts alone are valued so much more then anything else, that its probably easy to find someone to buy you.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: tyler69 on January 30, 2019, 12:57:06 am
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on March 18, 2019, 11:08:10 am
"Tidal, a subscription-based music and video streaming service owned by rapper Jay-Z, is being investigated in Norway over allegations of falsely inflating listening numbers."
mp3.com raised $370 million in 1999, and blew it all. Vivendi acquired the company in 2001 for 20% of their IPO value, then dismantled it in 2003, selling the carcass to CNET.
Heady days!
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: tij on June 19, 2019, 09:29:37 pm
Just curious ... why this works for video (like Netflix) and doesn’t for music?
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: Hendrik on June 20, 2019, 01:53:05 am
Netflix is also quite in debt, and it'll get worse for them as more and more streaming services jump onto their own platforms like Disney. The video streaming industry is currently killing itself by splintering into a multitude of services. People are not going to be happy to pay 5 streaming platforms instead of one or two which they had in the past.
Disney will of course also lose a lot of money on their Streaming Service, but they are a huge company and will just funnel the money from their other income.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on June 20, 2019, 06:32:34 am
Netflix is OK.
March 19 quarter profit was $344 miillion.
Cash on hand was $3.35 billion.
The services that I'm tracking here just don't turn a profit. That, as a business plan, has a limited life.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on July 14, 2019, 07:44:13 am
Somehow this 1984 Wendy's commercial symbolizes the difficulty of finding the money in the streaming haystack.
Where's the Beef?
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: drmimosa on September 17, 2019, 07:15:10 pm
Amazon can probably sell quarters for 10¢ and still come out ahead...
Would be interesting if Amazon would partner (or buy out) one of the lossless / high-def vendors like HDTracks?
Sadly, I'm still not convinced the "Average American" understands audio compression, lossless or even high definition audio at this point. Most of my peers can't hear the difference between a 320 MP3 file and a lossless flac file much less a standard 16 bit/44.1KHz CD versus a 88.2 kHz/24-bit recording. Then on the other hand, one of the guys I worked with would swear that his $300 USB cables sounded better than my $15.00 ones so it seems media quality is verrrrrrryyyyyyyy subjective
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: jmone on September 18, 2019, 03:27:29 am
I wonder if Amazon offers a 3rd party friendly API for the likes of JRiver?
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on September 18, 2019, 06:34:09 pm
We'll look at it if they do.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on September 18, 2019, 06:34:52 pm
I just found this year-old Billboard article about Tidal. Lots of information.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: jaynyc on December 13, 2019, 08:00:02 am
I am curious if the traditional, long standing JRiver PoV on streaming would be different for Amazon HD streaming since it is financed by a larger entity. It's already available via BlueOS, so presumably an integration API exists etc.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: Awesome Donkey on December 13, 2019, 08:04:58 am
It would help if there was a public API available or at the very least some sort of open-source project that supports it but it looks like Amazon has to approach and choose you (the company) to support it within an app.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on January 28, 2020, 05:44:50 pm
"The onset of streaming has poured new life into the music industry, with revenue hitting $5.4 billion earlier this year, $4.3 billion just from streaming services."
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on January 28, 2020, 06:57:26 pm
"The onset of streaming has poured new life into the music industry, with revenue hitting $5.4 billion earlier this year, $4.3 billion just from streaming services."
We'll support this area when the services are profitable. Top line dollars are different from bottom line dollars.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: DJLegba on January 28, 2020, 07:28:58 pm
It never made sense that Google had two music services (Play Music and YouTube Music), so one shutting down in favor of the other is not unexpected.
No, but even with Google as the backend service, we'd have a 50 percent chance of choosing which one to support.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: Blooloo on September 22, 2020, 05:30:37 am
My experience is that it all depends on where you live.
At present in Australia Hi Rez streaming is only available via Tidal - problem with that for me (with a high end system) is that it sounds anemic, gutless, lacking punch and is bass-shy - can't figure that one out, it's weird. Hell even old 320 Spotify sounds more 'musical' even with it's horrible veil of sludge draped over everything. Also Tidal's algorithms would never suggest new music based on what I like to listen too. It would do so every now and then (electronica, ambient, IDM, glitch, experimental) but would always revert to things I detest - I always had rap and it's derivatives shoved at me. So bye bye Tidal.
We cannot as yet get Qobuz or Amazon hi rez down here, so that left Deezer, which while not hi rez does at least offer hi-fi, CD quality - better than Spotify and will have to do until something changes. It presents very well on my system - detailed, airy with great bass that is clean and well articulated (even in the car via Android to bluetooth). Sorry Tidal, you suck.
I have a huge digital collection of ripped and paid for downloaded Flacs at various resolutions which I listen to mostly, using the streamers to find what I like and then buy and download (if I can)..ha ha, that's Oz issue #2 - we cannot legally buy from US stores such as HD Tracks or Super HiRez, nor from European 2L without a VPN AND (in the case of US) a valid US address. All this can be spoofed if one is desperate enough, but while I have in the past, now I cannot be bothered - too many hoops. Don't they want to make ligit money? So, because I like a lot of experimental music I can search and buy via Bandcamp at Flac quality and do so most of the time, supporting artist more directly and being very happy to do so. Cloudplay is great, have uploaded a few playlists and downloaded many - thanks everyone!
Future of Streaming? Here to stay for quite a while I think BUT, and this for me is a big BUT - with video and music subs it's becoming way too expensive on a monthly basis. I've dropped Spotify, Tidal, Netflix, Stan and at present stay with Deezer, Disney+ and Prime Video. Those, along with my monthly ISP bill push me to the edge of my wallet - if I factor in buying from Bandcamp as well.
Sheeesh! - in the old days it was free am/fm radio, free to air tv and LPs at $5.99!
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on October 13, 2020, 07:31:16 am
Google Play Music Store has shut down: https://9to5google.com/2020/10/12/google-play-music-store-shutdown/
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on October 22, 2020, 09:54:15 am
That loss is like building a business by selling $100 bills for $67. Somebody is keeping them on life support. Possibly Sprint. Possibly the labels who may not be getting paid very promptly.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on March 04, 2021, 09:07:27 am
Square intends to purchase a majority interest in Tidal for $297 million. No mention of Sprint, who reportedly bought half of Tidal for $200 million a few years ago.
So why? If a company raised $50M a year ago, why are they raising $20M now? Either they are losing a lot of money or they feel compelled to spend heavily (acquisitions, for example).
Crunchbase says they've raise $81 million total. $70 million in the last year.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on March 20, 2023, 02:27:22 pm
Spotify lost $270 million on $3.2 billion in their last quarter ending December 22.
https://www.google.com/finance/quote/SPOT:NYSE (Financials are toward the bottom on the right side)
The loss is a little less than 10% of revenue. If the loss continued at this rate, they would run out of cash around the end of 2025.
But they hope to make it up on volume.
Title: Re: Why Streaming Struggles
Post by: JimH on January 19, 2024, 01:47:21 am
Billboard in-depth article about Tidal and Block's strategy: https://www.billboard.com/business/streaming/tidal-streaming-service-block-financial-services-1235544785/
It also covers streaming in general.
"And yet, the music streaming business model has yet to produce many profits for anyone, even a company as big and as synonymous with the space as Spotify, which reported a 2022 annual operating loss of 659 million euros (around $720 million) and recently slashed 17% of its work force, or some 1,500 jobs, in the pursuit of profits."