$87 M. News Corp. Backed Startup Shuts Down Before Launch
1–10 of 27 posts
Re: $87 M. News Corp. Backed Startup Shuts Down Before Launch
#2The most telling comment is this one:
"Beyond was always a tremendously grand ambition as the advances required by the record labels and music publishers were substantial"
.. because there were no tech advances required; the only 'grand ambition' was getting the record labels to listen to reason - which they apparently didn't
Re: $87 M. News Corp. Backed Startup Shuts Down Before Launch
#3The most telling comment is this one: "Beyond was always a tremendously grand ambition as the advances required by the record labels and music publishers were substantial" .. because there were no tech advances required; the only 'grand ambition' was getting the record labels to listen to reason - which they apparently didn't
It's actually a lot more complicated than that. The record labels listened -- there were multiple news reports of them signing deals with the labels... the labels were actually excited at the idea. The problem was that not only did they have to deal with the labels, but they had to deal with the publishers, each individually. And there's a lot of freaking publishers. To top it off, they also had to convince a carrier to purchase the product, which would mean either they lose revenue or pass the extra $60 on to the consumer, risking lost sales.
They had to change/convince multiple businesses to conform to this new business model, and that's why it was such a grand task -- each one had its own, different risks, and it was up to Beyond Oblivion to convince them the model would work (which it would). The labels themselves were just a small piece of that very large puzzle.
Michael Robertson (mp3.com guy) recently posted a great article (although I can't find it) about the challenges of an online streaming service which summarizes the above a lot better than I said it, plus goes into further detail.
EDIT: Found it. http://gigaom.com/2011/12/11/why-spotify-can-never-be-profit...
Re: $87 M. News Corp. Backed Startup Shuts Down Before Launch
#4How did it take $87 M for this idea to fail?
If the real challenge was getting everyone to agree why did it cost so much?
Re: $87 M. News Corp. Backed Startup Shuts Down Before Launch
#5Good, I hope all these failures lead to Murdoch's downfall and bankruptcy.
Re: $87 M. News Corp. Backed Startup Shuts Down Before Launch
#6I think this is less a story about a failed News Corp. ambition and more a story about how the music and telephone industries have developed first rate competencies at stifling innovation.
Hearing stuff like this makes me really sad for the future of the Internet if everything new & exciting will need a gatekeeper or two to sign off on it.
I don't know how viable the business model was, or why they needed $87m to prove it wasn't viable, but I can't help but think that we would have had services like this 10 years ago (okay, 5 maybe) if media and networks weren't so tightly controlled.
Thank god for the Open Internet 'cuz the closed one doesn't seem to be doing much...
Re: $87 M. News Corp. Backed Startup Shuts Down Before Launch
#7Considering they didn't even manage to seal the deals, where did all the money go?
Re: $87 M. News Corp. Backed Startup Shuts Down Before Launch
#8Considering they didn't even manage to seal the deals, where did all the money go?
Aeron chairs!
Re: $87 M. News Corp. Backed Startup Shuts Down Before Launch
#9This is a perfect example of why Avichal Garg's post was spot on:
http://avichal.wordpress.com/2011/11/14/build-something-peop...
This company was certainly building something that people might want, but failed to see if the roadblocks that had stopped similar efforts before them had been removed. They should have been able to find out how much work, money in the form of advances, and relationships they needed to even come close to pulling this off far before they ever raised so much money. The fact that they took $87M and anyone gave it to them without this analysis is just sad.
Re: $87 M. News Corp. Backed Startup Shuts Down Before Launch
#10How much of the $87M went toward legal fees? Lots of negotiation here. The technology is trivial by comparison.
Thinking out loud...
Has any publisher managed to control their content in the digital age?
Academic publishers still manage to keep their content under control. How?
The cost of a subscription is exorbitant. Only large entities can afford it.
The large entities, e.g. universities or large firms, pass on the cost to their customers, e.g. students or clients/customers.
There's also the small fact that the content is not marketed heavily and in high demand among the general population. Unlike music.
Perhaps music should only be marketed to customers who can afford it: large entities.
It wouldn't stop piracy by individuals but it would ensure the existence of some customers who were willing and able to pay, and to refrain from piracy.
Imagine a situation where working for a large firm or attending a university gives you a temporary subscription to a vast catalog of not only academic journals but also major label music. It would be a huge perk.
Yes there would be piracy, but the large firms would have an incentive to try to stop it. They know who their employees and students are and could no doubt do a better job preventing piracy than the RIAA lawyers have done. Whatever might happen, the labels would still make money from exorbitantly-priced subscriptions.
Nah, it would never work.