Twitter has not been responding well to Jay-Z’s relaunch of a music-streaming service (with a $20 monthly fee). Is this new service too artist-centric? It costs more than Netflix and does not provide the same 8 hour binge-distraction on Saturdays. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/31/business/media/jay-z-reveals-plans-for-tidal-a-streaming-music-service.html?_r=0
This seems like a good idea, but Jay-Z seems to be more focused on the needs of artists rather than what the consumer wants. Many consumers want the cheapest way to listen to their favorite music. Some may feel obligated to compensate artists, but looking at how successful Napster, Kazaa, and related programs were, I don’t think that is how most people feel. As we mentioned in class, tours have become the primary way for artists to make money these days. At the end of the day, it’s what the consumer wants, and other services like Spotify will provide that at a cheaper cost than Jay Z’s service. Jay-Z’s service seems to go off the assumption that people respect artists and actually want to pay to support the artists of music they like, even when their music is offered for free or at a cheaper rate. I wonder if he has tested that assumption.