Nikkaz paid for them overpriced Dre headphones though. You probably one of them. Garbage product.
Beats By Dre suck but they were marketed well and also are a product people want. Whereas Tidal was marketed horribly and attempt to meet a demand (streaming) that is already being handled well. The issue isn't that Hov is rich. Dre is rich too, which undercuts Hov's argument. The problem is that Tidal was:
1) Tidal was/is marketed as a "revolution" that boiled down to paying more money to artists. This was later undermined by news that Tidal's royalties are only about 5% higher than Spotify's. Worse yet Tidal trotted out 20 top selling artists, none of whom have trouble selling music. The rollout felt more like a group of successful artists asking for more money than something that actually benefits fans.
2) The lack of a free tier. Spotify is successful largely because of the free tier, which eases people into the concept of paying money for streaming. The lack of a free tier further reinforces the impression that Tidal isn't consumer friendly and instead is all about giving more money to already rich artists.
Ultimately the failure is that Tidal is a premier service that wants to pose as a mainstream service. Beats charge ridiculous amounts for headphones and people buy them because they believe the sound quality is the best. And if your only exposure to headphones is shytty Apple headphones, of course you'll be blown away by Beats. Beats are also a product you can show off. Tidal is overcharging for something that people already get from Spotify. There is no "cool" factor here like with Beats. It's just streaming music, which is whatever to many people.