Daniel Ek’s self-enrichment campaign continues with a perfect illustration for why we really need to reconsider the entire compulsory mechanism that helps make him richer than the songwriters who make him richer still.
We have to believe that Daniel Ek has done the math.
Cost cutting is not in the Spotify culture.
Some nasty reasons why Netflix is more susceptible to churn than Spotify the monopolist.
Because of Spotify’s monopoly power and voting stock, Daniel Ek and his partner control streaming music.
Spotify’s economic disparity is way worse than you thought when you value streams based on market capitalization.
Streaming royalties based on revenue are doomed to fall short until they include the value transfer in the share price.
Remember when Spotify bought Joe Rogan’s podcast and signed him to deliver futures? Big money, big press release. Big chuckles in some quarters, why? Welcome to the world of artist relations, Mr. Ek. Here’s a suggestion. When you sign an artist who you know is controversial going in, expect…you know…controversy. Is that really so hard […]
Sometimes the big money executives at corporations are referred to pejoratively as “corporate royalty.” The nauseating Daniel Ek caused Spotify to grant him supervoting stock and he used it to make himself President for Life. Vlad will love it.
Remember when we were all appalled that Pandora founder Tim Westergren was making $1,000,000 a month from selling Pandora stock while he was behind fighting songwriters in rate court for ASCAP and BMI royalties and stiffing artists with the Internet Radio Fairness Act and refusing to pay pre-72 artists? And then there was the 13 bathroom house in Marin. It was all a bit hard to stomach.
According to Jem Aswad in Variety, Daniel Ek is putting Westergren in the rear view mirror for sheer excess.
Music Technology Policy 
You must be logged in to post a comment.