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

Joe Rogan got ripped off

supercast.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 145 posts

Re: Joe Rogan got ripped off

#31

Post by cableshaft »

aj-4 wrote: post #16
Barrin92 wrote: post #10

The general idea in the article I think is right but there's some caveats. I don't think his audience will suffer as much as the author thinks. Joe Rogan is pretty unique in the podcasting space, Spotify is already popular and I think people in general tend to overestimate the degree of backlash for these things. (the blizzard boycott comes to mind). Also we don't really know Rogan's plans. If he plans on keeping thi…

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I get clips through the YouTube algorithm and if I like them, watch the whole podcast. point being, I think the YouTube platform has played quite a large role where users don't have to "seek out" new episodes and I don't think that can be understated. ultimately, only the numbers will tell.

Supposedly they're still able to put clips on YouTube, you just have to go to Spotify to hear the rest of the podcast.

It definitely adds a layer of friction, though. Instead of just clicking and immediately watching the full video on YouTube, you have to shift apps, to something you might not be signed up for or want to pay for (I'm one of the latter, I used to pay for Spotify years ago but stopped and I don't want to go back to it).

Re: Joe Rogan got ripped off

#32

Post by aj-4 »

bmarquez wrote: post #15
aj-4 wrote: post #4

yea.. same thing that's happening in the live stream world with Ninja leaving Twitch and etc. Ultimately seems to be a lose-lose-lose for the platform (where they don't pull 1/4 of their prior numbers), fans (who generally just stop caring), and creator (who makes money short term but loses major brand equity, relevance, growth) Rogan didn't know how high he could've taken it. Now he does. Maybe he was ready to retir…

> Maybe he was ready to retire anyway? The article's revenue estimates are based on Rogan doing more work...setting up subscription programs, keeping up with YouTube's content policies to avoid getting kicked off the platform, and continuing to find podcast guests and creative material. Perhaps he wants to kick back, not work so hard (depending on the contract he actually signed), and collect a steady paycheck? The a…

those things you listed as "work" all still apply though, except now there's a contractual obligation

if his desire was to kick back it seems like the move would be to just relax his release schedule

wanting something steady in the chaos of creative work though, I can completely understand

Re: Joe Rogan got ripped off

#33

Post by BubRoss »

koiz wrote: post #19
krustyburger wrote: post #17

I have no idea if it’s true, but I’ve heard that a major factor was recent pushback he was getting from YouTube with respect to contrarian coverage of the pandemic. Apparently he wanted to have guests who would provide alternative public health narratives and was told that this was a no-go on YouTube. Much of his audience consumes the show as video on YouTube and Spotify is another major brand that will offer a simil…

>Apparently he wanted to have guests who would provide alternative public health narratives and was told that this was a no-go on YouTube. As it should be. >He is hoping that Spotify will give him more creative freedom Spreading pseudoscience isn't creative, its destructive.

Joe Rogan typically makes a point to say what he doesn't know and tries to get interesting experts in his show. Have you watched much of his show?

Re: Joe Rogan got ripped off

#34

Post by marcrosoft »

As an avid podcast listener and casual Joe Rogan listener I can tell you that I’m probably done listening after the transition. I’m not ever going to use Spotify to listen to podcasts. Podcasts were, and should continue to be, a free RSS feed which made them great. I’m not going to help destroy that great freedom.

Re: Joe Rogan got ripped off

#35

Post by School-Cotton »

koiz wrote: post #19
krustyburger wrote: post #17

I have no idea if it’s true, but I’ve heard that a major factor was recent pushback he was getting from YouTube with respect to contrarian coverage of the pandemic. Apparently he wanted to have guests who would provide alternative public health narratives and was told that this was a no-go on YouTube. Much of his audience consumes the show as video on YouTube and Spotify is another major brand that will offer a simil…

>Apparently he wanted to have guests who would provide alternative public health narratives and was told that this was a no-go on YouTube. As it should be. >He is hoping that Spotify will give him more creative freedom Spreading pseudoscience isn't creative, its destructive.

Can you point to any concrete example of Joe Rogan spreading pseudoscience?

Re: Joe Rogan got ripped off

#36

Post by raydev »

Traster wrote: post #29

I think that one thing this analysis is missing is why F1 drivers go to Ferrari. F1 drivers don't drive for Ferrari because they pay the best. They drive for Ferrari because of the dream. On Youtube Joe Rogan is just some guy. Spotify is offering Joe Rogan more than that. Personally, I think the real point in this analysis is that 90% of people just aren't going to sollow him to spotify. Which is fine for spotify, th…

Spotify already has a spot in popular culture, so I'm not sure he loses that much.

Rogan loses a portion of his existing audience to be sure, but he gains a more committed audience this way, and those hundreds of millions of people that are already listening to Spotify may have a new favorite show.

Re: Joe Rogan got ripped off

#37

Post by goatherders »

glass_of_water wrote: post #14
goatherders wrote: post #7

The math is certainly interesting. But it ignores the fact that not everyone is looking to maximize every revenue dollar. Joe Rogan has made an EXTRAORDINARY amount of money. From the outside looking in it seems silly to poo-poo a guy that's made 10s of millions because maybe he could have made 100's of millions.

They didn't ignore that fact, they explicitly mentioned it in the article. > Stern and Rogan are already super rich. The difference between $50mm/year of profit and $100mm means zero to their day-to-day lifestyle. What I imagine does matter to them is the size of their audience and their impact, and both made choices that will limit that forever.

Ok thanks. Point stands.

Re: Joe Rogan got ripped off

#38

Post by ardit33 »

Traster wrote: post #29

I think that one thing this analysis is missing is why F1 drivers go to Ferrari. F1 drivers don't drive for Ferrari because they pay the best. They drive for Ferrari because of the dream. On Youtube Joe Rogan is just some guy. Spotify is offering Joe Rogan more than that. Personally, I think the real point in this analysis is that 90% of people just aren't going to sollow him to spotify. Which is fine for spotify, th…

My guess Howard Stern is a good example from last decade. He is still around, but mostly irrelevant.

Re: Joe Rogan got ripped off

#39

Post by achillesheels »

Traster wrote: post #29

I think that one thing this analysis is missing is why F1 drivers go to Ferrari. F1 drivers don't drive for Ferrari because they pay the best. They drive for Ferrari because of the dream. On Youtube Joe Rogan is just some guy. Spotify is offering Joe Rogan more than that. Personally, I think the real point in this analysis is that 90% of people just aren't going to sollow him to spotify. Which is fine for spotify, th…

This raises a good point unless both Joe and Spotify see the rising market adoption of podcast content blowing in their direction. That being, Spotify is mainstream enough for Joe to compound his growth still. And Joe agrees, as I doubt he would compromise prestige for dollars.

Re: Joe Rogan got ripped off

#40

Post by MikeTheGreat »

tc313 wrote: post #12

Erm... Joe knows what he is making without Spotify and it isn’t enough to make the deal seem as obviously-bad as the article makes it out to be. Also, I doubt Joe negotiated a $100 million deal without expensive legal & financial advice. If anything, the deal’s closure is evidence that the article’s assumptions are wrong.

Whenever I see an article like this I always assume it ends with "...and that's why should have gone with me, instead. My services are very affordable and available for purchase now!"
Post reply on HN