261–270 of 1001 posts
This isn't about rising costs though, this is about the labels and shareholders being greedy and wanting an even bigger piece of the cake that is already massive. Meanwhile artists are getting paid next to nothing and now even workers are getting the short end of the stick.
Are you not aware how dire inflation and the very high interest rate make the current situation?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don’t listen to Joe Rogan to listen to Joe Rogan. You listen because he has the most interesting guests on.
And lets people spread fake news and stupid theories. Just because they are "interesting" they should not get a free promo.
Can someone explain to me why a company that is about streaming mp3s needs 9500 employees? That just sounds extremely inefficient to me. They don't even have native desktop apps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would love a tl;dw. How does he predict the fail will materialize?
Here's what Bard says: "The video starts by talking about how Spotify has become the dominant force in the music industry. In 2018, Spotify had over 200 million users and was paying out over $5 billion in royalties to artists. However, the video also points out that Spotify is not a very profitable company. In fact, Spotify has lost money every year since it was founded in 2006. So, how does Spotify make money? The a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see this response a lot on these threads. Why is it so hard to accept that two digit inflation over the past couple of years and interest rates well above 5% could be a major factor?
Well how about thinking stakeholders first and shareholders second? Firing your employees because you are incompetent leadership and management without good foresight should result in letting you go. Why the high compensation for leadership when it doesn‘t know what it does? Braun didn‘t get the design leader in the past because they threw out their team, they got there because they kept the team together. The more y…
Tech is disproportionately affected by rate changes (both inflation and loans/bonds), as it's the highest growth sector. High growth businesses are investing heavily in infrastructure and as such are also highly leveraged.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a heavy user of spotify. Almost everyone I know uses it daily. I don't understand why they are not able to turn this much engagement into profit.
> Almost everyone I know uses it daily. Counterpoint: almost no one I know uses it. It was fun at first but became boring fast, a bit like Netflix. If I want to listen to music I use youtube.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For what it's worth Spotify is the most popular podcast platform in the US, with 25% of the userbase: https://explodingtopics.com/blog/podcast-listeners#podcast-p... I'd say that gamble in particular worked. Not so sure others will though, audio books feels like it will be a dud.
25% market share is a bit lackluster, though? Podcasting has also been called the slowest growing new medium in the history of new media. I can't imagine it's earning its keep, relative to those big initial payouts. Meanwhile, the shows that are brought into subscription-only world systematically fail to attract new listeners; it is hard to use podcast exclusives to grow market share. Especially the talking head vari…
Will it pay off? Probably not. But is 25% a big share? Yes.
Can someone explain to me why a company that is about streaming mp3s needs 9500 employees? That just sounds extremely inefficient to me. They don't even have native desktop apps.
9500 is probably excessive, but think of it just this way:
1. Spotify has a worldwide presence, apparently 184 markets; that probably entails a legal presence in many of those jurisdictions, sales, marketing, support, localization, etc.; at a conservative 2 persons per market, just that's going to generate about 400 jobs; now, most of those markets will be grouped up but the big ones will probably have tens if not hundreds of people dedicated to that market (the US is likely to have hundreds of people supporting it, for example).
2. Spotify has to build, update, maintain, extend, etc a global infrastructure. Just the ops team for that has to cover 3x 8h shifts to make it 24/7. Each region should have at least 3 people in it, for high support availability. That's 9 people right there, and it would be crazy to support ~550 million active users with 9 people, they probably have 10 times that many people and teams supporting various components. So just an ops team of 100 is perfectly reasonable.
3. Then they need a dev team. They have... ads, various integrations, songs, audiobooks, podcasts, their apps or whatever are available on smart TVs, web, cars, bla bla bla, if it's 10 people for each client, that would probably mean at least 50 people. And 10 people per client is probably silly low, make that at least 100-200.
4. Then they have a bunch of backend services, probably a lot of them. Plop another 5-10 people for each service. That's going to be many more hundreds of people.
5. Then they have actual R&D, where they're exploring stuff. This depends on the company, but for a company that's still clarifying its business model, having 100 people researching stuff sounds reasonable.
That's ~1500 people just from me eyeballing their business. 9500 is maybe on the high side, but considering their scale, if we dig deep enough into their business model, probably 5000 is perfectly fine.
These services are crazy complex and "streaming mp3s" is a very reductive view.
Can someone explain to me why a company that is about streaming mp3s needs 9500 employees? That just sounds extremely inefficient to me. They don't even have native desktop apps.
They are doing a lot, including open source. Out of curiosity is anyone using Backstage at their place of work for developer portal? Is it providing value? Should Spotify double down on that?