Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> the hardware you use to listen to the music is worth more than the music itself

Which still isn't a useful comparison.

One is an outright purchase, and the other a subscription service.



True. But $10 x 12 = $120 subscription per year. That's a decent buck and a fairly large market.


And on a long term, more profitable probably. We won’t see Spotify disappearing for a while.


Spotify rents music that it itself rents from 3 companies that own most of the music. Why would those 3 companies not just raise their rents if Spotify starts making a decent profit?

Spotify has been around since 2006 and just eked out a tiny profit last year. Unless they plan on owning music themselves, I don’t see why the music owners wouldn’t try to capture most of the profit.


Or. Flip that over. What happens to the music owners if one of their primary distributors goes under?


As long as Apple, Google, and Amazon are willing to forgo margins on music, not much.


I never said it would be Useful. I said it would be Interesting.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: