Another reason to not stream

[aKnyght]

You may be correct, however I have a hard time believing that anyone would let it continue for almost 14 years (as Spotify has) if they loose money every single quarter, which is what is claimed by Spotify.

current investors (owners) and the market are well aware of the earnings history of spotify. they also have an educated opinion about future earnings. so, all this is reflected in the market price of spotify stock which is, essentially, the consensus view of the future prospects of the company.

also, investors receive a return on their investment from more than distributed profits such as dividends. capital appreciation is another way they earn money. in the case of spotify, management has decided to invest revenues as well as new capital in growing the business, thereby, generating losses but increasing franchise value which is reflected in a rising stock price.

i am sure investors, particularly the early ones, are quite happy with this strategy given their phenomenal capital gains. this is in fact the operating strategy of most growth companies. amazon, microsoft, apple, etc. are other good examples here... pets.com is a bad example. i guess we will see where on this spectrum spotify ends up!!

 

[Randy Myers]

current investors (owners) and the market are well aware of the earnings history of spotify. they also have an educated opinion about future earnings. so, all this is reflected in the market price of spotify stock which is, essentially, the consensus view of the future prospects of the company.

also, investors receive a return on their investment from more than distributed profits such as dividends. capital appreciation is another way they earn money. in the case of spotify, management has decided to invest revenues as well as new capital in growing the business, thereby, generating losses but increasing franchise value which is reflected in a rising stock price.

i am sure investors, particularly the early ones, are quite happy with this strategy given their phenomenal capital gains. this is in fact the operating strategy of most growth companies. amazon, microsoft, apple, etc. are other good examples here... pets.com is a bad example. i guess we will see where on this spectrum spotify ends up!!

This makes complete sense. The bottom line is they are actually making money/value for their business investment no matter what they have listed as their quarterly earnings.

 

[mep]

Why would they stay in business year after year if all they did was loose money.

You don't "loose" money, you lose money.

I personally believe it is accounting tricks, otherwise they are stupid business people. I assure you, they are not in business to loose money. They are making money, but probably not what the bean counters budgeted for... therefore they can claim a loose on the books even though they actually made serious profits.

Think about it, Spotify has only shown a profit in one of over 50 quarters.... no business person would continue 13-14 years if all they were doing is loosing money.

You don't know the difference between "loose," "loss," and "losing." Aside from that, what is the purpose of this thread besides your virtue signaling? Do you want everyone on AS to be like you and not stream music or do you want to make this a global campaign?

 

[RDSChicago]

Streaming is so convenient and where else does one gain access to virtually unlimited numbers of artists and songs? It’s here to stay.

 

[Randy Myers]

You don't "loose" money, you lose money.

No Mr. Grammar Professor.... by the way its called typing a quick reply getting a typo or two, big deal.

I want people to support Artist is the entire point... oh by the way, you once again prove you are a real jerk (something you seem to do over and over and over).

Don't bother replying because I will never again join in on any discussion that you get involved in because you very quickly start getting snarky and become an ass.

 

[Randy Myers]

Streaming is so convenient and where else does one gain access to virtually unlimited numbers of artists and songs? It’s here to stay.

I do not disagree... I just want to make sure people support the musicians also.

 

[joeinid]

I still purchase CDs from artists I discover from streaming. So I support my favorite artists.

 

[BlueFox]

Sort of like buying CDs from artists you heard on the radio.

 

[joeinid]

Sort of like buying CDs from artists you heard on the radio.

Exactly!

 

[Randy Myers]

Sort of like buying CDs from artists you heard on the radio.

Yup... or sometimes I have found some great stuff just by listening to samples on one of the high rez sites. A couple I grabbed just because they sounded interesting in the description. A great rock album just because it was the first rock album that I ever found that was recorded in DSD256. Excellent album! And a great SACD just because I noticed it was Harry Chapin's daughter...

 

[Randy Myers]

Yes! I love the Shazam App - as it helps me identify the artist and song - so I can go out and buy the CD.

Awesome!

 

[still-one]

Sort of like buying CDs from artists you heard on the radio.

Without the streaming services the only way I would hear new music would be on TV or at a concert. I can’t remember the last time I listened to a music station on the radio.

 

[Randy Myers]

I actually do listen to radio once in a while. I recently came across a good deal on an older McIntosh tuner and it actually sounds much better then a much newer model I had a while back. Surprising good sounding!

 

[kzhtoo]

Sounds like the tone has changed although the thread is still titled “another reason to not stream”.

About the streaming service, it is here to stay since too many people love it, audiophiles and non-audiophiles alike. The market will correct and dictate what survives and what doesn’t.

 

[mep]

I do not disagree... I just want to make sure people support the musicians also.

So you "just want to make sure people support the musicians also" eh? Who appointed you as the AS Virtue Signaler? i asked you this before; are you just going to try and guilt people on AS that PAY to stream music or are you going to take your campaign to the world?

 

[mep]

Sounds like the tone has changed although the thread is still titled “another reason to not stream”.

About the streaming service, it is here to stay since too many people love it, audiophiles and non-audiophiles alike. The market will correct and dictate what survives and what doesn’t.

Yeah, we never got the original reasons for why we shouldn't stream from Mr. Virtue Signaler. We just got the guilt trip.

 

[Mike]

Do artists have a gun to their heads to allow their music on streaming services? I know many artists who do not allow their music on streaming services: Garth Brooks as one example. Others are very selective on which albums can and cannot appear. The labels obviously have an influence, but if an artist truly was against streaming, they would simply not allow it. But they don’t.

Like I said earlier, if someone feels buying more music supports the artists, than get a turntable and buy records. Unlike CD’s and digital files which can be copied, vinyl is the surest way you are supporting the artists. And remember, your turntable will never require a USB reclocker.

 

[joeinid]

Vinyl, tubes and horns! Enough said. Right Mike?

 

[Oly]

If you really want to support an artist, just send them a check and stream away guilt-free.

 

[CPP]

Do artists have a gun to their heads to allow their music on streaming services? I know many artists who do not allow their music on streaming services: Garth Brooks as one example.
.

Not true anymore Mike, Garth is in agreement with Amazon to stream.

Garth Brooks has entered in an exclusive online streaming agreement with Amazon. A selection of Garth Brooks' music is finally available for streaming exclusively on Amazon Music Unlimited, the digital music service launched last week by the online retail giant.Oct 19, 2016

Buy the vinyl and the CD's is the only real way.