Late pass: Spotify aint even profitable, why would Jay think Tidal could be?
- Thread starter Tony D'Amato
- Start date
Tony D'Amato
It's all about the inches
Why would he think people would pay those prices
Why would he think people would pay those prices
10 dollar is a crown and red. The price mark isn't where he fukked up at, it's the promotion.
SleezyBigSlim
Banned
BlackDiBiase
Superstar
times are changing there bout to rock shyt with new regulations and everythings much faster than before. i think jay-z made a sound investment his gone make real bank with tidal, the landscape is changing why you think apple got in on the gig its because its a powerful move. theres serious paper out there.
OnlyInCalifornia
Southern California/Vegas
Only in Hip Hop and on The Coli do people pretend to have bottle service at the club on the weekends, fukk only dimes, and drive the nicest of whips.....
But then get all bent out of shape for 9.99 a month or purchasing a rappers album on some 'THEY ARE CHARGING TOO MUCH'
Like muhfukka said, its ONE god damn mixed drink. Why do Coli ballers always balk at spending 10 bucks?
But then get all bent out of shape for 9.99 a month or purchasing a rappers album on some 'THEY ARE CHARGING TOO MUCH'
Like muhfukka said, its ONE god damn mixed drink. Why do Coli ballers always balk at spending 10 bucks?
Do you think Goldman Sachs invested half a billion in spotify cause they don't think it'll be profitable in the future? Or that Apple enters the market cause they suspect that it won't be profitable.
This is a future business like global social networks 10 years ago. Or computers 30 years ago. Or whatever the fukk.
This is a future business like global social networks 10 years ago. Or computers 30 years ago. Or whatever the fukk.
Last edited:
Tony D'Amato
It's all about the inches
U can get whats he's offering for free.
Free>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And 10bucks is more than Netflix
I thought they was chargin 19 bucks, so Im not up on tidal. I have no use streaming music.
Goldman Sachs does a lotta stupid sh1t. Just cuz they investes in something doesn't mean its destined to be profitable.
No it means that they believe that it will be profitable, I.e. people do not make investments based on the explicit results of today but on what the results/dynamics etc say about the future.U can get whats he's offering for free.
Free>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And 10bucks is more than Netflix
I thought they was chargin 19 bucks, so Im not up on tidal. I have no use streaming music.
Goldman Sachs does a lotta stupid sh1t. Just cuz they investes in something doesn't mean its destined to be profitable.
Spotify is getting "less" unprofitable per year, which mean that it if it continues in the exact same pace it'll be profitable.
OnlyInCalifornia
Southern California/Vegas
U can get whats he's offering for free.
Free>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And 10bucks is more than Netflix
I thought they was chargin 19 bucks, so Im not up on tidal. I have no use streaming music.
Goldman Sachs does a lotta stupid sh1t. Just cuz they investes in something doesn't mean its destined to be profitable.
Nothing is for free lil homey.
That's like saying fukk XM I can get FM radio for free. It's not the same.
You are right, just because people invest in things doesn't make them profitable. However the over all idea of paying for streaming music is already very large. You don't have the largest investment firm, the biggest company on earth, and the leading web company jumping on board for nothing.
That's an interesting point that I thought about but I don't know why anyone would buy it.
As far as challenging Apple and Spotify, I can't see anyone doing this except if one of the Asian cats want to box.
Samsung, Sony etc, but they are highly connected with Google in the phone business, so I don't know how that will go. Perhaps though, the business might blow up in a decade or so.
The real question is why the fukk the major labels didn't get together and start Tidal, It must be like Jay-z said after Def Jam. That it's a business full of lazy people who just want to be comfortable and collect checks for doing nothing but putting out hits.
Tony D'Amato
It's all about the inches
If anyone can do it, it would be apple. They at least have a strong foundation(itunes) to start from. But I just dont see the appeal of streaming music. And paying to do so. Maybe Im wrong, I woulda never thought facebook would amount to anything either. Sh1t is just Myspace redone imo
I hold twitter in high regard and they're nowhere near as profitable as facebook, so what do I know
Mike Otherz
All Star
good point. i think NBC did it with HULU with regard to tv content, and i dont know how succesful that was, but these companies could have just started their own shyt, 3 big music companies, 3 big streaming sites.