[s_ngularity]

The difference here is that presumably fewer record companies have the money to fund the development of their own streaming service. The movie industry has much bigger players in the game.

Additionally I don't think anybody's cracked the code on how to make reliably well-received music yet. You can't distract the audience with good visuals and special effects if the plot is no good like in a movie.

[nopriorarrests]

>The difference here is that presumably fewer record companies have the money to fund the development of their own streaming service.

They don't need it. With Apple Music, Google Play and Spotify majors can afford to destroy Spotify with royalties as they please, and users will just migrate to other platforms and continue to pay.

It's kinda funny once you think about it. Back in early 00's, when Napster appeared, everybody was "dude, record labels are dead, new business models, bla-bla-bla".

And now we are 18 years later, and majors are quite fine. And they did literally nothing for 18 years. No investments, no development, nothing. They just milked different internet services with their royalties.

[thirdsun]

> 18 years later, and majors are quite fine. And they did literally nothing for 18 years. No investments, no development, nothing.

Well, except enabling you to buy your music from anywhere, DRM-free, playable with the software of your choice.

Is it really their fault that an all you can eat service for 10 bucks doesn't actually feed anyone, including the artists and the platform itself? It's simply too cheap.