Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Spotify files for its IPO

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 218 posts

Re: Spotify files for its IPO

#91

Post by richardknop »

amigoingtodie wrote: post #88
whiddershins wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PR and lots of logistical support. Much of that logistical support is also drawbridge over a moat that makes exposure on a large scale basically impossible without access and backing. The idea that a person can create and maintain a fan base of millions without all that is attractive but infeasible.

Like Louis CK?

Not sure it’s a good comparison. Comedy is a bit different animal than music. I’m not sure big stars like Rihanna, Taylor Swift etc would be able to become such big stars and maintain their fandom and deal with all the logistics of TV/radio promotion & deals, concerts, brand awareness and such alone without big studios doing that for them. I am not up to date on music but are there examples of big international pop stars who bootstrapped their superstar career without being promoted and pushed by one of the big three studios?

Re: Spotify files for its IPO

#92

Post by ericlewis »

jqbx_jason wrote: post #71
bhj wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I would like to see more social features that aren't tied to Facebook. I know it's not their core competency, but it's odd that the Friends feature requires FB even though they support "standard" non-FB user accounts. And a timeline-esque view of who's been listening to what at-a-glance would be neat.

Maybe this isn't exactly what you were thinking but I wanted to get some social listening features added to Spotify as well so I built JQBX: https://www.jqbx.fm . Maybe it'll scratch your itch, figured I'd share.

this reminds me of Fliptape, a project I built many moons ago. Looks great and is basically what our roadmap was. We went mobile first back in 2011 with the same concept. Would love to have kept it going.

Re: Spotify files for its IPO

#93

Post by Eridrus »

bogomipz wrote: post #45
supster wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An IPO provides 1) a fundraising opportunity 2) a liquidity event 3) an opportunity to fulfill contractual obligations One of the conditions of their recent debt financing was that they IPO within a certain time frame. If they believe that they don't need additional funding at the moment or can get better terms then they are simply fulfilling criteria #2 and #3 with their unique IPO. I imagine Spotify can get decent…

I'm aware of what an IPO provides. >" I imagine Spotify can get decent debt financing terms b/c they have such a steady and predictable source of revenue (though not necessarily profit)." Again if this true, why would they raise a billion dollars in convertible debt?

> Again if this true, why would they raise a billion dollars in convertible debt?

Because debt is often a better instrument?

Re: Spotify files for its IPO

#94

Post by bllguo »

bedhead wrote: post #66
mcintyre1994 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why wouldn't everyone just go to Apple/Google Music if Spotify raised their prices? None of them have exclusive content or features that rival Netflix's exclusive library, I don't see why Spotify have any meaningful pricing power. I'm one of those people who hit OK this year when Netflix raised their price, but I'll immediately leave Spotify if they raise their prices and the competition don't - they have nothing sti…

Same reason people don't move from Amazon to Wal-Mart, or Apple to Android, or Netflix to...I don't even know what. Spotify is objectively better as a service, people love it, and we are creatures of habit. There are other factors like social and all the playlists you've created. Besides, people derive value from things based on more than price alone. You might not see why they have pricing power but the fact is they…

I see much less differentiating spotify from its competitors, than in the case of amazon/anyone else or apple/android. Objectively better.. maybe? Don't really see it, personally. But say that's true - what's stopping Google or Apple from investing heavily in their offerings and crushing spotify in the process? Again - what's the moat here?

Can't help but feel that you're projecting your personal love for spotify onto others.

Re: Spotify files for its IPO

#95

Post by ikurei »

jnevelson wrote: post #70
bedhead wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this has a good chance of being a good long-term investment for one simple reason. Spotify has something that few companies have but all dream of: pricing power. The other week, my kids were watching TV and my wife and I were in the kitchen and one of them yelled out, "Mom, something popped up on Netflix saying the price is going up. What should I do?" My wife and I said the same thing instantly: "Just hit ok…

Ignorant question (I'm not very familiar with the music business): what do the labels provide to the artists - why do they need to sign with Time Warner/Sony/etc at all, rather than just releasing their music to all distribution channels (Spotify/Apple Music/etc) themselves? I understand for smaller artists the labels can help provide advertising to them, but the larger, well-known stars you mention seem like they sh…

You seem to assume the business of a musician is to publish music and distribute it.

Artists also make a lot of their money by licensing their music, or concerts, which are big logistical problems full of middle men. Big labels also give you a lot of PR and visibility.

Re: Spotify files for its IPO

#96

Post by tzahola »

jon-wood wrote: post #77
nunez wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s really not though because music is a loss leader for amazon, apple and google, but it is spotify’s entire business. The only other major competitors out there are either in major cahoots with the big 3 (tidal, pandora) or gone (soundcloud, grooveshark, rdio). Netflix has this problem too but they “solved” it by making their own content. Amazon are Google are doing the same thing. That’s the direction I see Spoti…

It wouldn’t surprise me if Apple not being in that game yet is because of their long standing agreement with Apple Records (the Beatle’s label), who challenged their trademark a while back when they started selling music. I suspect getting into directly signing artists would breach whatever agreement was made and leave Apple open to a huge trademark suit.

"In 1978, Apple Records filed suit against Apple Computer (now Apple Inc.) for trademark infringement. The suit was settled in 1981 with the payment of $80,000 to Apple Corps. As a condition of the settlement, Apple Computer agreed to stay out of the music business. A dispute subsequently arose in 1989 when Apple Corps sued, alleging that Apple Computer's machines' ability to play back MIDI music was a violation of the 1981 settlement agreement. In 1991 another settlement, of around $26.5 million, was reached.[54][55] In September 2003, Apple Computer was again sued by Apple Corps, this time for introducing the iTunes Music Store and the iPod, which Apple Corps asserted was a violation of Apple's agreement not to distribute music. The trial opened on 29 March 2006 in the UK,[56] and in a judgement issued on 8 May 2006, Apple Corps lost the case."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps#Apple_Corps_v._App...

Re: Spotify files for its IPO

#97

Post by dragonwriter »

whiddershins wrote: post #80
jnevelson wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ignorant question (I'm not very familiar with the music business): what do the labels provide to the artists - why do they need to sign with Time Warner/Sony/etc at all, rather than just releasing their music to all distribution channels (Spotify/Apple Music/etc) themselves? I understand for smaller artists the labels can help provide advertising to them, but the larger, well-known stars you mention seem like they sh…

PR and lots of logistical support. Much of that logistical support is also drawbridge over a moat that makes exposure on a large scale basically impossible without access and backing. The idea that a person can create and maintain a fan base of millions without all that is attractive but infeasible.

> The idea that a person can create and maintain a fan base of millions without all that is attractive but infeasible.

Chance the Rapper might disagree (as, to a lesser extent, might Jonathan Coulton.)

Re: Spotify files for its IPO

#98

Post by geodel »

pembrook wrote: post #54
_whm1 wrote: post #46

I don't think this is a good long term investment. Disclaimer: I worked for a Spotify competitor in the past, so i have a pretty solid understanding of how the business works. I think it is a bad investment for one simple reason: Spotify purchases its main product (music) from a oligopoly. I'd estimate that 95%+ of the tracks streamed (by total playtime) are from one of the 3 major music labels: Universal, Sony or Wa…

This is the same problem Netflix & Amazon have been successful in combating. The answer is to become a content owner by competing with the big labels directly. All Spotify needs to push the big labels back on their heels is to sign a few top 40 artists of their own. I might be wrong but I remember reading something like 90%+ of streams on music services are of songs currently on the charts. Capture the popular cultur…

Netflix was/is competing with exclusive products like expensive cable channels or established studios' productions which are not available on vehicle radio, youtube and other free avenues. So Netflix is able to get comparable reach to cable TV. For music there are far more avenues to listen for free and unlimited times with some ads.

Re: Spotify files for its IPO

#99

Post by jqbx_jason »

ericlewis wrote: post #92
jqbx_jason wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe this isn't exactly what you were thinking but I wanted to get some social listening features added to Spotify as well so I built JQBX: https://www.jqbx.fm . Maybe it'll scratch your itch, figured I'd share.

this reminds me of Fliptape, a project I built many moons ago. Looks great and is basically what our roadmap was. We went mobile first back in 2011 with the same concept. Would love to have kept it going.

Thanks! Great minds think alike :)

Fingers crossed history doesn't repeat itself w/ 3rd party apps build on Spotify. If you have any feedback or ideas that have been simmering please hit me up (email is at the bottom of the website).

Re: Spotify files for its IPO

#100

Post by kingraoul3 »

nunez wrote: post #59
pembrook wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the same problem Netflix & Amazon have been successful in combating. The answer is to become a content owner by competing with the big labels directly. All Spotify needs to push the big labels back on their heels is to sign a few top 40 artists of their own. I might be wrong but I remember reading something like 90%+ of streams on music services are of songs currently on the charts. Capture the popular cultur…

It’s really not though because music is a loss leader for amazon, apple and google, but it is spotify’s entire business. The only other major competitors out there are either in major cahoots with the big 3 (tidal, pandora) or gone (soundcloud, grooveshark, rdio). Netflix has this problem too but they “solved” it by making their own content. Amazon are Google are doing the same thing. That’s the direction I see Spoti…

What about iHeart? They do own half the physical radio stations in the country which is still how people find new music, you know.
Post reply on HN