So how can Tidal stay afloat given they pay so much more for music and have a significantly lower subscriber count? The numbers, at least from a distance, don’t appear to add up. Services like Apple Music, Rhapsody, SoundCloud, and Spotify all lose massive amounts of money each year. Tidal claims to be paying the vast majority of its revenue - and five times the amount per play as Spotify - back to artists and labels in the form of royalties. That sounds generous and progressive, until one realizes that larger music services don’t pay more because they simply can’t afford to. Tidal’s business model might be unsustainable Ironically, Tidal isn’t even the best streaming destination for the music of the 16 original artists who got three percent stakes in the company for endorsing it. But the reality is that already established musicians setting a higher price point for their own music probably doesn’t help struggling artists. They said that they, as big-name artists, deserve to set the price for their music. That’s because the argument Jay Z and his fellow stars made at the Tidal launch (including Nicki Minaj, Madonna, and Beyoncé) was fashioned from self-interest. In fact, many industry members would say that Tidal is actually fueling piracy. Sure, Tidal’s premium audio tier sounds better than its competition, but, as the LA Times notes, Tidal isn’t the poster child for artists’ rights it set out to be. In addition to better quality music, executives and its initial 18 musician-owners looked poised to deliver exciting exclusive content, with better pay and margins for artists - all of which appealed to enthusiastic music industry supporters like us. Those hopes and expectations haven’t been met, though.
The service had forged partnerships with Hi-Fi companies like Sonos, Denon, and Harman/Kardon, and promised that it would become an essential - if slightly higher-end - part of the streaming music world.
Tidal isn’t accomplishing what it set out to doĪs professional reviewers of music and audio equipment at a tech-centered media company, the editorial staff at Digital Trends was probably more excited for Tidal’s U.S. We take no joy in saying this, but it’s time we recognize Tidal is likely doomed. It’s a distraction from relevant services like Rhapsody - which still has three times the number of paid subscribers as Tidal - and SoundCloud and Bandcamp. Tidal headlines clog up the presses and bring undue attention to where music streaming is failing rather than where it succeeds.
That’s not a good reason to write about a company that hasn’t been, and will probably never be, a real contender for streaming supremacy. Let’s be frank: The reason Tidal makes headlines is because Jay-Z and a few other high profile artists own shares.
0 kommentar(er)
