[089723645897236]

I personally have supported them since beta (when they charged more) so I will probably pick up a share or two. They are certainly worth NFLX money. Music is insanely easy to produce, it is certain they will start courting artists directly, and if they can find an acquisition that fills the DIY punk music scene that was Soundcloud they will be just fine. They need more DIY content to go along with the curated big label stuff. And by DIY I mean letting every small Bandcamp DJ and artist on there. Might as well swallow everything right?

The experience on the platform was always stellar and just keeps getting better the more data they collect. It's a good example where big data isn't creepy at all, it's amazing. They constantly filter my preferences and show me the key types of songs I like to listen to, impressive in itself but the song radio aping Pandora is also impressive and way more interactive than Pandora itself.

Basically I'm mega bullish Spotify and am not even going to front like I'm not. You don't need to buy it but I doubt it goes anywhere bad. /end-activist-investor-rant

[matwood]

I'm as bearish as you are bullish. Spotify is getting squeezed with record labels on one side and Google/Apple (now at 38M subs compared to Spotifys 71M subs) on the other.

I also do not think the Spotify situation is anything like Netflix. First, Netflix is an add-on service for most people that compliments other video services. OTOH, few people will have multiple music streaming services. This leads to a few issues for Spotify:

1) If Spotify starts its own label, and the other labels pull their music in retaliation, Spotify is done.

2) Back catalogs and current big name artists/content is a must in music streaming - a completely different situation than Netflix was ever in. DIY punk will not carry Spotify, neither will becoming a niche DIY label.

Given Spotify's current loses I just don't see how they turn profitable. Can Spotify turn the 90M non-paying users into subscriptions?

[089723645897236]

The old ways are going away.

Where is the relevance of the label system now that producers can master and release tracks directly digital with no pressing time at all? Gucci Mane is great example of a hugely popular artist who released track after track as fast as he could grind them out, for years (decades now! go count how many mixtapes the guy has made). This is the new normal, hyper creativity and high speed production. Pop cylces are like 100x as fast. You're telling me some old white dudes in suits can A&R faster than teenagers can hashtag and invent there way into new genres and music with their laptops. Yeah right. Dinosaurs.

It was dead with Mp3s and the internet and it's just still gasping along like all the old media giants. Smaller and smaller labels are able to survive these days, finding more and more niche audiences. Music has gotten more diverse in the last 17 years and you can tell. Genres launch and burn out in months now, or develop a cult fan base and continue on for years (ICP still tours this is like my perfect example of trash that still has fans).

I'm not saying Spotify is the king but people using "the labels" as a threat, come on, we all know what disruption means. Bandcamp and Soundcloud and even Youtube have runaround the label system.

The one thing I'll grant you is that maybe subscription fees aren't enough to keep the infrastructure going. This is possible. But the big pile of data is certainly worth something now and in the future, and the ability to scoop trends might be the sword that tames whats left of the big labels monopoly.

[matwood]

Labels control the back catalogs, other than that I agree with you that the old ways are changing. The problem is nothing you said gives Spotify some unique advantage over Apple on the streaming side or something like cdbaby on the publishing side. Spotify can't just be some 'small' label and survive, and I'm also not sure what artist only wants to be on Spotify.

Music streaming has been completely commoditized. It's an add on feature to both major phone software makers. What can Spotify uniquely bring to the table that will give it the money to survive?

[WhompingWindows]

You don't mention The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, and the 100's of other artists that Spotify streams millions of times. I feel DIY punk music and music that is "insanely easy to produce" is not going to make much of a dent in the massive demand for the classics/popular bands. Also, as a musician of 20 years having recorded multiple records, I don't agree good music insanely easy to make. The plethora of mediocre music out there is not good music, it takes a lot of skill and equipment to make something sound good in the studio. Sure, maybe some folks want a DIY underground sound that's not polished, but the average folks out there want a clean sound, that's what sells/drives listens. Just go on the Top 100 spotify playlist, there's basically no DIY stuff on there, its all the poppiest of the pop, heavily produced.

[bsder]

Do the young really care about the back catalog anymore?

I'm not just being snide. Think about Elvis. When was the last time you heard something from Elvis on the radio or in your stream?

[throwawayjava]

It's definitely a sliding window. Elvis is not so important but stuff from the 1970's to the 2000's remains popular with kids.

Heuristic: parents pass on their teenage music preferences to kids but don't pass on their own parent's teenage music preferences to their kids?

[charlesdm]

So, I'm part of a secondary market. I was looking at their valuation in November and considered picking up some shares, when insiders / investors were selling shares at a $15bn valuation. Now they opened at $30bn.

Where did the increase in share value come from? Just the liquidity of going public?