I’m not paying you a dollar for a song or $10 for a complete CD. Especially if it is the way it is with movies where you don’t really own it, just a license to play it.

I can’t think of a way in which I would pay for music outside of a Spotify like model. Even at that, I’m on my sisters family plan. If I was not, I wouldn’t subscribe.

Maybe I’m just not the target market, maybe I’m cheap. Maybe I’m just not that into music.

But look at the value. A CD is like 90 minutes long and costs $10-20. There are great computer games out there in that price range that also have a sound track. If I have a limited amount of money to spend, which I do, then I’m going to pay for stuff that maximizes my entertainment.

[–] setto@fed.dyne.org 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I think the modality of spotify is ok, but the model could be very different. In exemple, imagine if you payed 10$ month, but instead of those being distributed across all of spotify statistically, they where divided and distrubuted to the author YOU actually listened to, on a monthly basis.

Maybe one month you only listened to 10 songs, so 1$ for each song author that month.

Of course, there should be a cut for the platform from that monthly fee, after all they have maintenance and administrative costs. And perhaps it should also take into account how much of a song you listened to, down to the second.

This is not a new model, but it is not an interesting one for venture capitalist funds, because it is too egalitarian. It is up to us to create it.

"To have a fair music market, there needs to be a fair market".

load more comments (7 replies)