keccers
@keccers.eth
Spotify seeds in-house produced music in playlists created for “passive consumption” so they can pay themselves for your streams https://www.honest-broker.com/p/the-ugly-truth-about-spotify-is-finally
4 replies
2 recasts
14 reactions
ted (not lasso)
@ted
i read a study about spotify’s revenue (i think this may be first year the broke even?) and came to my own conclusion that spotify is net positive for indie music that otherwise wouldn’t have had distribution bc 3 music labels dominate the space will read this article and see if it changes my POV
4 replies
0 recast
11 reactions
keccers
@keccers.eth
I’m fairly indifferent on Spotify. It’s not my hill to die on, honestly. But I do wish they would be more transparent about when they are making the music like documented here, I probably wouldn’t even care about this if it felt more honest
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Chris Carlson
@chrislarsc.eth
It’s the majors that basically force them to scheme in these ways. So Much of revenue must be paid to majors. They also try to get you to listen to more podcasts instead of music for same reason. Any true music lover uses Apple Music
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Jason
@jachian
Can you link? My gut says they’re a net positive, but far from perfect. I have nothing more to base that off of other than guessing
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
MM
@listen2mm.eth
Hard to quantify that “net positive” At a high level it’s obviously a massive game changer for distribution. Harder to make a calculation about what it’s done to the financial valuation of music.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
