
Sadly, Pandora Is Still Going Bankrupt - peter123
http://www.michaelrobertson.com/archive.php?minute_id=298
======
jasonlbaptiste
Let's get this logic straight: I promote your songs 1 billion times to people,
and I'm willing to give you 25% of what I make. Yet, you want more to the
point that I go out of business and you get 0% revenue and promote your songs
0 billion times.

They wonder why we pirate songs and they're losing money.

~~~
tptacek
Let me get this straight: you think the terms under which I'm willing to
provide a service for are egregious, and I'm unwilling to negotiate, so you're
simply going to take what you want.

Your critique of the industry would be more trenchant if it wasn't tipped with
rationalization. Books are pretty expensive too. Authors --- publishers, even
--- make virtually no money on most titles. And yet! They won't make them
available for free download! Let's take the books, too!

~~~
gruseom
The music industry can stand on "principle" (that's what they call their
sclerotic conception of their own self-interest) all they want. It couldn't be
clearer that reality is speaking otherwise. They seem to me like an angry guy
standing on a rock, shaking his fist at the tide rising around him. Pretty
soon they'll be washed away. It reminds me of what Martin Amis said to Salman
Rushdie after the fatwa: "It could have happened to a nicer guy."

The spectacle of the music industry portraying itself as "good" and music fans
as "evil" is a great comic irony of our time.

~~~
tptacek
I agree with you. But I can agree with what you're saying and still be
repelled by the logic of stealing nonessential goods that are being sold on
what we think are unreasonable terms.

~~~
jacquesm
The real losers of the battle are the artists, not the labels (they still make
plenty) or the freeloaders.

~~~
tptacek
That this is obviously true has, I'm sure you can see, no bearing on the
original argument.

------
mr_eel
Well, that's what happens when you pin your business model on content you
don't own.

It sucks, because labels and consequently artists will be missing out on the
revenue and promotion that might come from wider web broadcasting.

~~~
rubinelli
Good observation. I was listening to Chris Anderson's Free on the commute
home, and an interesting case he mentions is how, back in the XIX century,
radios created their own label, BMI, so they didn't have to pay royalties that
would render their business model completely inviable.

I think that whoever succeeds in this area will do something very similar,
working with indie artists from the very beginning, maybe even producing their
albums.

~~~
decode
Lawrence Lessig also talks about that case in this great TED talk:
[http://www.ted.com/talks/larry_lessig_says_the_law_is_strang...](http://www.ted.com/talks/larry_lessig_says_the_law_is_strangling_creativity.html)

------
pchristensen
Pandora is charging $0.99 for premium accounts that let you listen to over 40
hours/month. That's $.025 per hour (less if you listen more). People pay $3
for a 10 second ring tone.

Charge more!!!!! People love and highly value your service. There are many,
many people who would rather pay $5, $10, $20 or more per month to ensure that
Pandora stays alive. How about limiting the number of songs you can listen to
on the free iPhone client and selling a premium client for $9.99? They have
200K iPhone users.

I love Pandora, but they're not trying very hard to monetize.

