Spotify doesn't make profit from music streaming, despite having over 400M monthly active users, because it pays two-thirds of all its revenue to the rights holders.

Comments

• themurphy@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Honestly, Spotify is only half bad compared to the real scumbags of this industry, and that’s the “rights holders”.

  It’s not the artists who created the music I’m talking about. It’s the record companies taking the largest piece for themselves.

  They are the ones earning on other people’s talent and success.

  source

  • residentmarchant@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    But…but…muh “discovery”

    source

    • jsh@sh.itjust.works ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      I’ll die on that hill. 90% of the artists I listen to, I found through spotify’s algorithms.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • can@sh.itjust.works ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Well, their CEO Daniel Ek’s investment company Prima Materia "invested €100 million ($114 million USD) in Helsing, an artificial intelligence company based out of Europe that assists in military technological ventures. "

    So I’m happy to take my steaming business elsewhere.

    source

    • blazeknave@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      After being the earliest adopter of free and paid that I know personally (and I work in tech), Joe Rogan was the nail in the coffin for me. I was already paying for YouTube premium (download for subway, and close screen while playing) and saw music was included so the decision was simple.

      source
  • Mango@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    What does a record company even do? Why do they have rights?

    source

    • lemann@lemmy.one ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      In the day and age of streaming sercices like Spotify, they should not exist IMO.

      Back when people purchased their music from brick and mortar stores on vinyls, cassettes, and CDs, they had a place to facilitate a relationship with distributors etc to get your music on the shelves. Nowadays, this stuff can be done digitally, independently.

      source
    • rigatti@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Basically they fund artists to record and then handle things like promotion.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• EnderMB@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Sometimes, I see some of the takes on here, and it’s hardly surprising that the fediverse isn’t particularly popular.

  Spotify are somewhat responsible for their current position. They hired too many people, extended into markets they didn’t need to enter, and have a CEO that has blown money in places that didn’t need it. Let’s not forget that Spotify spent $300m on sponsoring FC Barcelona, which could have allowed Spotify to employ ALL of the employees it laid off for 1-2 years. Spotify had no need to give $200m to Joe Rogan, either! That’s half a billion spunked up the wall on decisions that have done nothing for the company but cause grief. Instead, they could have focused their efforts on paying more out to smaller artists that provide the long tail for their service, while also making deals to promote merch and tour dates where possible.

  With that being said, if you think that Spotify didn’t play a huge part in making music streaming accessible you’re just being contrarian for no reason. They provided (at the time) a solid application, good connectivity with services like last.fm, and had the social connection sorted from the start. Once phones took off, Spotify removed the need for mp3’s for the majority of people, largely killing iTunes. Spotify was the winner of the music streaming wars.

  Frankly, a lot of people were praising Spotify for their “good” severance package, but IMO shareholders should be livid, and should be calling for a new person at the helm.

  source

  • postmateDumbass@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    removed the need for.mp3s

    Im not sure this was a win

    source

    • EngineerGaming@feddit.nl ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Also it hasn’t, because having your actual collection on a streaming service is leagues less convenient than a bunch of mp3s on a hard drive.

      source
  • deweydecibel@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Sometimes, I see some of the takes on here, and it’s hardly surprising that the fediverse isn’t particularly popular.

    You genuinely think the reason the fediverse isn’t popular is because people have negative opinions of Spotify? As if these opinions wouldn’t also be prevalent on Reddit? As if having to see opinions you didn’t agree with was ever holding reddit back to begin with?

    And yeah, Spotify made music streaming accessible, but the overall problem is they did what all tech companies at the time did: burned money to establish themselves hoping the profit would come later.

    You’re praising them for killing iTunes, but maybe iTunes didn’t need to be killed. Maybe breaking markets with a type of streaming that wasn’t profitable and fucked over artists has given us a few years of good streaming, but the honeymoon is coming to an end, and we’ll all be worse off when the stockholders start demanding profit.

    Same thing that happened with YouTube, basically. Company runs something at a loss for so long they’ve effectively broken the market and now that it’s time to make money, we’re all fucked over.

    source

    • Strykker@programming.dev ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      No it’s not because people here don’t like Spotify, but the stupid ass takes y’all have that lead to Spotify hate bleed through in half the other content on here that people don’t like either.

      That fact that you thought ops comment was about disliking Spotify specifically reinforces it.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • 0xD@infosec.pub ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      YouTube is fucking you over because they’re trying to get rid of freeloaders? How entitled.

      source
  • abhibeckert@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    IMO shareholders should be livid

    Why? Shareholders gave Spotify billions of dollars - they expect the company to spend that money. Shareholders are quite capable of depositing their own money in a bank if they didn’t want it to be spent.

    My take is Spotify hired over 5,000 employees over 2020 and 2021 when the economy looked great. Then Russia Invaded Ukraine in 2022 screwing the global economy and particularly Europe which is Spotify’s biggest market. They’ve laid off about half the people they hired, which is unfortunate… but it’s understandable. The couldn’t have foreseen what happened.

    Spotify removed the need for mp3’s for the majority of people, largely killing iTunes

    Huh? Apple’s music service has about a hundred million users. Spotify has more than twice that, but iTunes is hardly dead.

    source

    • squidman64@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Apple Music the music subscription service is different from iTunes the music purchasing store. When’s the last time you heard of anyone buying an individual song / album on iTunes?

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • Darkhoof@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Completely agreed. If they focused on their core business they would’ve already been in much better shape.

    source
  • joel_feila@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Yeah spotify did wind up how most people listen to music, and podcasts. They had what people wanted and made it cheap. Then they also made a lot of decisions that wasted money. Dont know for certain but i doubt the exe there stopped geting big bonuses or pay cuts over those decisions

    source
  • small44@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    In it’s whole history, Spotify only made profits in two quarters and if I’m not wrong the other streaming services aren’t profitable either so it doesn’t looks to me that the problem is just over hiring but the nature of streaming business itself You also underestimate the power of sponsorship especially sponsoring sport. I’m sure a lot of people are using Spotify just for that. Investing in podcast make sense because it’s more profitable than music, Spotify need to diversify it’s revenues. You said that Spotify have good connectivity with lastfm but that’s not true. Most of issues lastfm users have with lastfm is related to Spotify.

    source
  • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Spotify has a lot of Blockbuster energy, but with a mixture of something far worse, since they did indeed stand by Rogen and profit off him.

    source
• donuts@kbin.social ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I call bullshit. Yeah I'm sure they spend 2/3 of their income on rights holders, mainly Joe Rogan, Ed Sheeran and Taylor Swift.

  The average musician isn't making shit, and yet the spotify execs are sipping champagne.

  source

  • Darkhoof@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    The rights holders are the record labels. As much as artists want to complain about Spotify they should direct their criticism to their record labels.

    source

    • Corgana@startrek.website ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Spotify is far from powerless in this arrangement too.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • small44@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      What about independent artists?

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • giggling_engine@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    “not making profits”

    Just massive salaries and equity

    source
  • StinkyRedMan@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    You know they don’t pay the artist directly? Like with physical the ones taking the biggest share are the labels… Also the average musician isn’t making shit cause compared to a very few bigger artists they represent an extremely low percentage of the overall streams on the platform.

    source
  • snek@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Taylor Swift somehow being a hallmark of the times makes me wish the whole world would end in a giant ball of fire.

    source

    • ___@lemm.ee ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      She’s not the worst role model we’ve ever seen, so at least the world isn’t completely mad. I think her music is mediocre, and don’t understand the fanfare, but to each their own.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • Candybar121@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      [deleted]

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• MossyFeathers@pawb.social ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Man, a lot of people here don’t understand how the music industry works. From the perspective of someone who’s been loosely following the music industry, what I’ve learned is that it doesn’t matter if Spotify gave up 2/3rds of their revenue, or 100% of it, the artists would still make fuck all.

  Why?

  The labels love taking their cuts and as a result, artists make very little. Instead of taking the blame for giving artists a <10% cut of the label’s revenue from their music (my understanding is that it’s pretty common for musicians to get <10%, sometimes <5% if you’re on a particularly shitty label), the labels are blaming platforms like Spotify.

  Now, I’m not saying that Spotify is blameless, however I think there’s a lot of misdirection from the labels going on. I don’t remember anyone complaining about pre-spotify services like Pandora Radio for not paying out enough when they were largely ad-supported, which is another reason I’m not totally buying the, “it’s cause it’s free” argument either.

  Fuck, remember Pandora?

  source

  • spacebirb@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Labels are an outdated concept that needs to die. Now that you can find any music from just a quick search artists shouldn’t have to rely on them, at least not as heavily, for advertising.

    source

    • GamingChairModel@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      There was a very, very brief moment from about 2005 to 2011 or so where there was money to be made directly by artists on iTunes or the other music stores where the tracks were like 99 cents each.

      But people stopped buying as soon as Spotify became popular, and now any artist that wants to release on Spotify without a label still doesn’t make much money.

      source
    • TheFriar@lemm.ee ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Relatively “large” truly independent bands like KNOWER are starting to give true home recording a base of proof of functionality.

      Power to bandcamp.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Why isn’t there some kind of genre music search for all artists without a label, Foss of course. From what I understand, when you’re starting out in music, getting people to hear it is the hardest part.

      source
    • Alexstarfire@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Ehh, you’ve got a different but similar problem these days. Before, it was hard to get the word out so even finding new bands was difficult. Now, there are so many artists that you’ve got to find a way to stand out. Still need marketing. That’s what labels provide.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • abhibeckert@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Artists aren’t forced to sign a contract with a label. They do it because they want to.

      They do it because the label will often invest a million dollars in the artist upfront before the songs are even available for the public to stream.

      Good recording studios are expensive to hire. And if you want a video track to go with it… those are really expensive.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • echo64@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Indies are on sporify too. Spotify pays them shit too. Label or not.

    source

    • wolfshadowheart@slrpnk.net ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      They just changed the rules so that if smaller artists don’t get a certain number of plays they don’t even get a payout.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • raptir@lemdro.id ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Pandora didn’t replace buying music. They did not add the “on demand streaming” option until after Spotify was prevalent.

    source
  • Zerlyna@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    I still use pandora free daily!

    source
  • scottywh@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Lots of people still use, and even pay for, Pandora.

    source
  • Kuma@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Do you know how the merch shops works? Spotify seems to be a reseller of some kind. How many % of the money is going to the artist usually?

    source

    • MossyFeathers@pawb.social ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Not talking about Spotify merch, didn’t even know that was a thing. I was talking about buying merch from the artist themselves.

      source
• echo64@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Ugh, yes poor poor spotify, fuck that. Artists can’t even make a living making music anymore thanks to spotify. Fuck off blaming artists for trying to get paid. Fuck this article.

  source

  • Phlogiston@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Is Spotify the villain here or is the “big three”? Because it sounds like Spotify is delivering a service and deserves some profit from that.

    But what are the big three doing? Seems like they are just skimming because they hold the IP rights. Are they providing any service?

    source

    • 4realz@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Spotify is definitely not the villain here, they have created the best music streaming platform in the world. The big publishers also can’t be called the villains per say, but it wasn’t so nice of them to force a small startup (Spotify in it’s early days) to sign contracts that will permanently force it to payout about $0.66 out of every $1 it makes.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • echo64@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Spotify picks it’s price point. It’s picked a price point (free) that meams artists can’t get paid. And it’s price point (free) means that artists can’t compete either.

      So yeah fuck spotify, pay artists what they are worth and having servers to download mp3s on isn’t worth taking 1/3rd of the revenue. They should get less not more. Adjust their prices (maybe it shouldn’t be free so artists can fucking pay rent and spotify can pay employees)

      Blaming artists for wanting to pay rent and eat food is some bootlicking bullshit.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • Aatube@kbin.social ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Have you ever looked into the operating costs of having a server with music on it with over 400M monthly active users use?

    source

    • echo64@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      I actually work in cloud engineering and regularly price this kind of thing up.

      Their costs are salaries not aws bills.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • chameleon@kbin.social ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Not that high. Spotify uses some pretty tight compression (not good, just tight); most users get 96-128kbit/s AAC, premium can go a bit higher if opted in. That works out to about 16KB/s or 58MB/hour, assuming nothing's cached.

      Bandwidth pricing very much goes down with scale, not up. But even the non-committed AWS pricing at Spotify's scale is 2 to 3 cents/GB. You end up paying way less than that with any kind of commitment and AWS isn't the cheapest around to begin with.

      source
  • 4realz@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Wooh. 👀. This isn’t Spotify’s fault. They can’t pay artists if they don’t have money.

    source

    • czech@low.faux.moe ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      To be fair- Spotify priced the service that doesn’t make enough profit to pay artists adequately.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • Dio@lemy.lol ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Haha. Don’t be shocked by the reaction. We live in a world where a certain portion of ‘people’ Believe every thing should be free and corporations don’t need money at all and should just be willed in to existence and live off of the ether.

      Etc. Etc. Rich people bad

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • echo64@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Yes, it is. It’s entirely spotifies making. It’s the situation spotify has created. And the answer is absolutely not ‘starve artists even more than we do today’.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • SinningStromgald@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Is that your blog or whatever you keep posting?

      source
  • GlitterInfection@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Man, you weren’t alive before napster were you?

    source

    • echo64@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Yes, I was alive in the time when artists could barely scrape by. Now, I’m alive in the time when artists can’t even do that.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• Kraiden@kbin.social ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I'll take "Unethical accounting" for 500, Alex

  source
• scottywh@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  And the artists still don’t really make shit from it.

  source

  • negativeyoda@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    It was them or Joe Rogan

    source
• lolcatnip@reddthat.com ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  How is this news? The price you pay for media of any kind I can think of goes mostly to the rights holders, not the companies physically delivering it to you. You may object to the rights holders being shitty record labels, but that term also includes independent artists. And more to the point, rights holders are by definition the people who are entitled to profit from selling access to the media they own.

  If you want to get pissed at someone, get pissed at the record labels sharing a ridiculously small part of their licensing fees with the artists who make their product.

  source
• roofuskit@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  If you want to support an artist pirate their music and see them in concert.

  source

  • echo64@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    This is outdated and bad information. Most small artists lose money touring. Bigger artists might break even.

    If you can buy merch, do that, if you can buy physically do that. Spotify is gonna pay pennies for thousands of streams, so nothing you do on spotify is going to benefit an artist. But “pirate and see live” is probably gonna result in a negative bank balance for artists.

    source

    • essteeyou@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      I think Taylor Swift just about broke even, mostly thanks to my wife and her friends.

      source
    • Sharkwellington@lemmy.one ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Nothing short of handing them cash in person is truly a guarantee. Really depressing how it’s turned out.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Nice try ticket Master!

    source
  • small44@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Some artists that people like may never come to their city

    source
  • glitch1985@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Unless it’s a ticketmaster concert because fuck them.

    source
  • Copernican@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Lol. Yes, ticket service fees, venue fees, and reseller makers is totally the best way to support an artist, especially if you live no where near a tour location.

    source
  • AzureRT@reddthat.com ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    “Support”

    source
• Decoy321@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  From the article:

  The answer lies in the power imbalance between Spotify and its music suppliers, namely the major record labels that control most of the music streamed on Spotify.

  Spotify licenses most of the music it streams from three companies: Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment, and Warner Music Group, also known as The Big Three.

  Together, The Big Three hold a 70% share of the music recording industry and a 60% share of the music publishing industry, forming a sort of unholy monopoly over the music industry.

  …

  The difference between having or not having The Big Three’s music catalog is a life-or-death situation for Spotify.

  This gives The Big Three a lot of leverage over Spotify and forces it to pay them nearly 70 cents of every dollar it makes, leaving little room for profits.

  source
• Lutra@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Equity.

  In total, at the close of last year, SEC documents show that exactly 65 percent of Spotify was owned by just six parties: the firm’s co-founders, Daniel Ek and Martin Lorentzon (30.6 percent of ordinary shares between them); Tencent Holdings Ltd. (9.1 percent); and a run of three asset-management specialists: Baillie Gifford (11.8 percent), Morgan Stanley (7.3 percent), and T.Rowe Price Associates (6.2 percent). These three investment powerhouses owned more than 25 percent of Spotify between them — a fact worth remembering next time there’s an argument about whose interests Spotify is acting in when it makes controversial moves (for example, SPOT’s ongoing legal appeal against a royalty pay rise for songwriters in the United States).
  
  Furthermore, according to MBW estimates, which my sources suggest are still solid, two major record companies — Sony Music Entertainment and Universal Music Group — continue to jointly own between six percent and seven percent of Spotify (Sony around 2.35 percent and Universal around 3.5). With Sony and UMG added into the mix, then, the names mentioned here comfortably own more than 70 percent of Spotify.
  

  rollingstone.com/…/who-really-owns-spotify-955388…

  source
• Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  And yet, they still aren’t even close to the highest paying service when it comes to musicians getting their cut.

  dittomusic.com/…/how-much-do-music-streaming-serv…

  It’s hilarious that Napster now tops the list. I use Tidal, myself, since it’s got great quality audio. Spotify is horrible quality for 2023.

  source
• chitak166@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Profit can be distorted based on how much you’re paying your employees.

  In this case royalties paid out to imaginary property holders means spotify is functioning exactly how it should. Those people are profiting, spotify’s employees are being paid. Everyone directly involved has more money than they need.

  source
• pacology@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  How much money would they want to skim to distribute the music? 33-66 split doesn’t sound so bad considered that they don’t produce the music, sign artist, promote them, etc

  They can always start their own label if they believe that vertical integration will be more profitable for them.

  They tried that with podcasts and it didn’t go as planned

  source
• Nighed@sffa.community ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  This is why I thought some of their recent actions that hurt the lowest played artists was strange, you want to encourage artists to NOT use the big publishers to help break their triopoly.

  I think the most recent changes are fine in practice, but the optics are not great.

  source
• jjjalljs@ttrpg.network ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I mostly listen to smaller bands and buy their stuff on Bandcamp. It sucks that Bandcamp was sold (twice now) and will probably go down the shitter, but that seemed like a more sustainable model. Also buying music is nicer than renting it for me.

  source
• nomecks@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  This is probably why you get a nearly endless stream of covers and remixes if you just let Amazon Music play random music.

  source
• Rosco@sh.itjust.works ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Still not paying for it.

  source
• LordWiggle@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Poor Spotify. Here’s a Link to a documentary about the dark side of Spotify, by Slightly Sociable. Their illegal business, extortion of artists and promotion of scamming.

  source
• Jay@sh.itjust.works ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I believe Spotify is largely responsible for its own financial struggles. Knowing that 2/3 of their revenue goes to the greedy labels, they should consider scaling back on operational costs and excessive investments in advertising and celebrity podcast deals.

  In a way, it serves them right. Spotify plays a significant role in transforming music into a product akin to fast food, prioritizing mass consumption over artistic value. This approach not only impacts their profitability but also contributes to a broader devaluation of music as an art form.

  So fuck Spotify.

  source
• onlinepersona@programming.dev ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  For a company that has revolutionized the music industry and changed the way we listen to music, one would expect Spotify to be making a lot of money.

  How has spotify “revolutionized” the music industry? Are thy doing anything new? Streaming isn’t new, yearly reviews aren’t new, freemium isn’t new, discovery isn’t new… Is the revolution that it’s now a standard target for artists?

  source
• NaoPb@eviltoast.org ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Yeah it’s all the fault of the rightsholders. Definitely not bad management.

  Not that I’m a fan of rightsholders but this is more like shifting the blame.

  source
• kebabslob@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  ok. they should get a job then. pull themselves up by their bootstraps

  source
• chemicalwonka@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  They just want your personal and behavioral data to sell to third parties for shady purposes

  source
• thesporkeffect@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  To determine if this company is actually a poor widdle guy or just trying to look like their hands are tied with respect to paying artists, look up how much Daniel Ek is worth, and then look up what he does with his money

  source
• Fake4000@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  And snoop dog complains after receiving a measley $45k from one billion streams.

  source
• Thcdenton@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  BLITZSCALE BABY

  source
• helenslunch@feddit.nl ⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  …they paid Joe Rogan $100M to be exclusive so they must be making profit somewhere…

  source