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

41–50 of 145 posts

Re: Joe Rogan got ripped off

#41

Post by aj-4 »

originalvichy wrote: post #21

Just a quick sidenote: Joe’s friends have said that people who are throwing around numbers about how much he got from Spotify are estimating way lower than it really is. The $100M is the most common number being thrown around. I can’t tell how much the writer knows Joe’s content, but he would probably have never went with a subscription model. The free access has always been one of the #1 things he attributes to his…

and that's just the money up front, there are certainly some performance bonus clauses in there as incentive, too.

Re: Joe Rogan got ripped off

#42

Post by School-Cotton »

deadbunny wrote: post #30
bmarquez wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> with respect to contrarian coverage of the pandemic How is contrarian coverage "pseudoscience"? An example of contrarian coverage is the suicide rate rising due to the Bay Area stay-at-home order: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23269396

How is a report from medical professionals on an abc affiliate contrarian?

Because by far the dominant narrative among urban, educated people is that continuing lockdowns are worth it because they prevent death from COVID-19. Arguments that the lockdowns are doing more harm than good are (wrongly, IMHO) associated with political conservatism, rejection of science, and so on.

Thus, evidence of the harm of lockdowns can be considered contrarian, regardless of whether it comes from medical professionals.

Re: Joe Rogan got ripped off

#43

Post by mulmen »

remir wrote: post #25

In September, I wrote a post about how Howard Stern is getting ripped off by Sirius. I made the case that Howard Stern is making $90 million a year when he could be making 2-3x by cutting out the middle-man and doing a subscription podcast. Sure, until subscription fatigue kicks in. People pay for Spotify or SiriousXM because of the overall value. I doubt many people would be interested in paying just for Stern or Ro…

This is where cable companies really screwed up.

They could have offered consumers a choice of channels instead of packages. It would have required changing their business model but most cable companies are local monopolies so they should be able to declare new economics.

With their position as ISPs for many they were well positioned to offer streaming services first. These could have subscriptions by show instead of network. I would happily pay for the handful of shows I actually watch rather than the pantheon of streaming services we have now.

Re: Joe Rogan got ripped off

#44

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

Re: Joe Rogan got ripped off

#45

Post by boomboomsubban »

bmarquez wrote: post #24
koiz wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

> with respect to contrarian coverage of the pandemic How is contrarian coverage "pseudoscience"? An example of contrarian coverage is the suicide rate rising due to the Bay Area stay-at-home order: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23269396

That is a perfect example of pseudoscience, the article linked is anecdotal interview with two people working in one hospital. It never mentions anything about the rate.

Re: Joe Rogan got ripped off

#46

Post by aksss »

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…

Bold statement (and I admire the act for its own sake). Let’s see how it ages, but it would be helpful to define how you measure his place in popular culture. Listeners per month?

Re: Joe Rogan got ripped off

#47

Post by jayd16 »

gotoeleven wrote: post #26
koiz wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

Someone who simply reads CDC recommendations with a 3 week lag would probably violate these policies.

Devils advocate here but If you extrapolate this argument to 1600s medical advice then surely you'd be correct and I think for good reason.

I'm not sure what exactly you're suggesting (if anything).

Re: Joe Rogan got ripped off

#50

Post by raydev »

Sure, Rogan gave up hypothetical 10s of millions for this. But those millions required work and marketing and sponsor management, and those 10s of millions weren't guaranteed.

With Spotify he just secured a guaranteed paycheck and a guarantee that he (and his team) don't need to work nearly as hard.

And what audience does he really lose? Non-paying customers via YouTube and podcast apps can be non-paying customers on Spotify and it makes no difference to him.

Post reply on HN