Pitchfork on Drake's Spotify Deal

[Kimmo 81,159]

1 hour ago, Admin said:

Eh. People don't seem to realize that this is just as benificial for Spotify as it is for Drake. He's the biggest musician right now so naturally Spotify wants his fans to stream on their platform and not Apple, or Google, or Tidal. This really isn't different from how Gaga was everywhere during Born This Way.

Why are you bringing Gaga into this?

[Borislshere 53,086]

4 minutes ago, Kimmo said:

Why are you bringing Gaga into this?

Cause it’s a relevant comparison  

he wasn’t being negative about Gaga either. It’s just the truth. Gaga was plastered everywhere. 

[culturalbaptism 2,930]

1 hour ago, Admin said:

Eh. People don't seem to realize that this is just as benificial for Spotify as it is for Drake. He's the biggest musician right now so naturally Spotify wants his fans to stream on their platform and not Apple, or Google, or Tidal. This really isn't different from how Gaga was everywhere during Born This Way.

It may be in the short term. But Spotify is just showing how fraudulent their "recommendations" really is. And Drake is overexposing himself.

[Admin 24,441]

42 minutes ago, Borislshere said:

Cause it’s a relevant comparison  

he wasn’t being negative about Gaga either. It’s just the truth. Gaga was plastered everywhere. 

Thank you. I remember how back in 2011 everyone (well, stans, mostly) was accusing Gaga of using payola when in fact she was simply so big that eveyone wanted to have a piece of that success. Remember Farmville? I'm sure regular players didn't really want to see Gaga's face everywhere but that's just how it works.

[CannaeDrive 3,412]

At the end of the day, it is kinda bad PR. His image will suffer of this, whether it is good business or not.

[_Lam 597]

2 hours ago, Admin said:

Eh. People don't seem to realize that this is just as benificial for Spotify as it is for Drake. He's the biggest musician right now so naturally Spotify wants his fans to stream on their platform and not Apple, or Google, or Tidal. This really isn't different from how Gaga was everywhere during Born This Way.

That is not the point.
Of course it's good financially for both Spotify and Drake.
The point is that it's a bit too much intrusive. It violates the add-free benefits that you have when you pay for Spotify and it show that Spotify do not care about their customers, even in your Discovery Playlist, at the end of the day, it's promotion. I think it's a bad move for Spotify as it tarnish their image and a bad move for Drake, who will become overexposed. It makes you question the limit of your propriety. Exactly like what happen with U2 that was sent to everyone's iPhone even if you didn't wanted to. That hurt Apple image and I think this time it will hurt Spotify's one.

[Admin 24,441]

24 minutes ago, _Lam said:

The point is that it's a bit too much intrusive. It violates the add-free benefits that you have when you pay for Spotify and it show that Spotify do not care about their customers, even in your Discovery Playlist, at the end of the day, it's promotion

It would be intrusive if it were ads for a Bebe Rexha album or something. Scorpion would be the biggest release of the year regardless of any promotions, so it makes perfect sense that they recommend you the hottest album at the moment.

[Admin 24,441]

[Inferno 2,880]

On 7/3/2018 at 3:03 AM, Fable said:

I'll be honest I don't really care - but if Gaga's management/label decided to do this then I don't blame them. I doubt Drake is really shook by this article, he's breaking those records and getting those coins. It's the music business.

I don't think you'll see many in the industry thinking "You know what, this strategy has proven to be lucrative, it seems to minimize the risk of the project doing poorly and others have seen great success as a result - but we'll avoid doing this and instead take the route of unclear success with a higher risk attached". 

It's not that I'm a big supporter of this, it's not even that I don't see the problems - but as long as they are allowed to do this... It's going to happen  

Well imo its mindsets like this that make it lucrative. At some point you can't just be like "who cares". I don't buy into what streaming services claim to be, I may utilize apple music, but I do so on my own terms. The problem is most people do not. So the success of certain current artists is somewhat fraudulent, and thats something I have a problem with. We're allowing corporations to decide who is popular and who is not rather than the consumer.

[Bebe 17,106]

2 hours ago, Inferno said:

Well imo its mindsets like this that make it lucrative. At some point you can't just be like "who cares". I don't buy into what streaming services claim to be, I may utilize apple music, but I do so on my own terms. The problem is most people do not. So the success of certain current artists is somewhat fraudulent, and thats something I have a problem with. We're allowing corporations to decide who is popular and who is not rather than the consumer.

A mindset like what? I don't disagree with the points you are making, I'm just being realistic. Like I said:

"It's not that I'm a big supporter of this, it's not even that I don't see the problems - but as long as they are allowed to do this... It's going to happen"

I'd advocate for regulations to this practice, in the same way their are regulations when it comes to radio payola, but as long as it's legal - I'm not going to blame management and labels for taking advantage of it. They have no incentive not to.

It's worked for Drake, it will work for other artists, at a certain point if you're a label or management company that isn't doing this - you are putting your artist at a significant disadvantage.