Browns dominate the Bengals 24-3!
November 6, 2014Video: Andrew Hawkins’ son comes home
November 7, 2014Happy Friday morning to you. I have no idea if the Browns won or lost, thanks for my pre-written WWW. So, if they lost, this will prove to be a somewhat distracting post. If they won, it will help pass the time until we have Winners and Losers.
I really look forward to Browns games on Sundays… kind of
I look forward to the Browns games, but the older I get the more and more I wish they didn’t play on Sundays. Maybe it’s just the dynamics of my life with the kids, but it feels like a treat to have the Browns play on Thursday night and free up my weekend.
It makes sense from that respect. My kids are too young to want to watch football. On Sunday afternoons at one, we get a nap from the youngest son, and then we have “quiet time” with the older one. That entails some legos, maybe some coloring or an hour of cartoons. O.K. I’m lying when I put the cartoons third. That’s the default, in all honesty. That’s the point. When I watch the Browns on Sundays anymore, I feel like I’m putting the kids to the side and while it’s not the end of the world, I don’t exactly feel great about it.
That’s why this weekend is so great. In some ways I’m annoyed that I don’t have the Browns on Sunday, but I’m also really happy the way the schedule worked out. My wife’s Colts have their bye week as well and now I can pretty much guarantee that unless I watch Sunday night football, I’m not going to watch the NFL.
Even beyond my own personal familial dynamics, I think there’s something else going on. I think as we move further and further into an on-demand kind of world, maybe there will be an inflection point where we’ll start to look at the forced schedule of sports as an imposition and an annoyance. Obviously we’re not there yet as sports programming continues to draw the biggest licensing fees and advertising revenues because it’s one of the last bastions of the truly “live” audience. But that’s just right now. Who knows if it will continue to be that way.
In the future can you imagine a scenario where only half the Browns audience watches the team on Sundays at 1 PM and a growing portion of fans watch Sunday night on DVR or even later when it’s more convenient for them? Obviously there’s a lot of built in culture around the NFL game, but it only takes about a decade for any entertainment property to be flipped around, right?
Taylor Swift flips the bird to Spotify…
I know Taylor Swift isn’t exactly in the WFNY wheel-house, but when she decides to rip all her music off of Spotify, it becomes a media story that jumps straight into my interests.
When talking about music and streaming, it’s so hard to talk about, because you kind of want to start at the beginning of the story with evil record companies ripping off artists and fans alike with each changing format. Folks who bought records, then bought tapes, then bought CDs – many times purchasing the same titles two times at least. But then the tide turns the other way with Napster, Kazaa, etc and the fans were clearly just stealing not only from the evil record companies, but also the artists they loved. In both scenarios the artists were getting ripped off when you think about it.
Not that artists getting ripped off is acceptable, because that’s antithetical for anyone who truly loves any art form, but that’s been the status quo for decades now. I’m also not here to tell Taylor Swift or any other artist how to run their business. I just find the Spotify backlash to be very frustrating. Here’s a legal streaming method, that I pay money for and that equates to a future without the blatant theft of music that occurred before. It’s the marriage of affordability and convenience that actually deters theft. And to think that even this solution or potential solution still isn’t good enough is very frustrating.
I’m still very confident we’ll figure it out though because a convenient, legal future is just too good of a thing for the culture around music to pass up. There are still a lot of details to be figured out, but if some of the new members of the old guard like Chris Cornell are on board to work through it, then I think we’re going to be alright.
“If there’s an end game with digital technology, I think streaming is kind of it for everything,” frontman Chris Cornell told Mashable, discussing Spotify’s impact on bands in general. “The thing that is going to change music … is that there won’t be any money to front a young band or young artists to make recordings in the way that we grew up doing it, which is in a recording studio with a big live room with real equipment and people. Spotify at some point, if they want to keep an audience interested and want to be playing new music that was actually professionally recorded where live musicians play it, [Spotify is] going to have to front it the money.”
In the end, Taylor Swift is the exception. She’s the one who can release an album in late 2014 and sell over a million copies before the first month is over. Her moves and opinions of Spotify are just a distraction, because she’s so phenomenally successful and well-known. It’s like trying to draw conclusions about “Pay What You Like” sales models involving Radiohead or Nine Inch Nails. It’s interesting conversation, but it’s totally not applicable to the music business at-large.
I love talking about it, but it all just seems so inevitable that something like Spotify has to work. Maybe that’s just wishful thinking on my part.
Your weekly moment of soccer zen is some goalie love!
Three of the prettiest songs that I know…
I got into one of those YouTube music loops the other night and just started finding live versions of songs that I wanted to listen to. I was in a wistful, sad music mood as I frequently am, and these three songs were just about perfect.
Bermuda Highway by My Morning Jacket
This version of The Sea and the Rhythm by Iron and Wine is absolutely incredible. I used to cover this song when I played open mic nights. I only wish I could harmonize this way.
And shoutout to Denny for really bringing this song to my attention. The album version is good, but damnit if the live version doesn’t nearly crush your soul and make you cry every single time. And despite what you might think, this version of the song with the camera at John Roderick’s back as he plays the piano truly is exceptional.
27 Comments
Most Sundays I watch the game while my son plays. The worst part is that only the commercials draw his attention to the TV and let’s just say the intended audience isn’t 2 year olds. At halftime I put him down for his nap and then watch the rest of the game on DVR.
It’s funny – on the way home yesterday I was thinking about how as annoying in some ways it is to have a Thursday night game, it really frees up my Sundays. I like the idea of sitting down on a Sunday to watch a game (or go to one), but there’s something to be said for these night games.
I guess that’s what will be great about the Browns getting good – we’ll have a lot more primetime games to look forward to which simultaneously free up time on Sundays.
Personally, I hate the night games because they keep me up past my bedtime. And I love spending my Sundays watching football. But, I don’t have kids, so, you know.
Anyway, regarding Spotify, I found this article interesting: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/nov/06/adele-manager-jonathan-dickens-streaming-spotify
Adele’s manager has backed streaming services like Spotify as the future of music, but warned the company that it may need to change its policy of insisting all albums be made available on both its free and premium tiers.
“Personally, I think streaming’s the future, whether people like it or not, but I don’t believe one size necessarily fits all with streaming,” said Jonathan Dickins, speaking at the Web Summit conference in Dublin this afternoon.
“Spotify have always been pictured as the bad guys in this, but the biggest music streamer out there is YouTube, without a doubt,” he said, pointing out that when artists or labels remove music from Spotify, it is often still easy to find it on YouTube.
“If I make a search now for Taylor Swift on YouTube, give me 30 seconds and I can have the whole Taylor Swift album there streamed. Some of it’s ad-supported, so there is revenue, and some of it’s not,” he said.
“On the one hand, labels are trumpeting YouTube as a marketing tool: 10 million views on YouTube and it’s a marketing stroke of genius. But on the other hand they’re looking at 10 million streams on Spotify and saying that’s x amount of lost sales.”
____________________
I think allowing artists to make new albums only available to paying subscribers of Spotify would be an interesting place to start. Then, after a certain period of time, it can become available to people who only use the free Spotify service.
Because I’ve been a paid subscriber since the day Spotify became available in the US, I always forget that it’s a free service for most people. And that’s what artists have a problem with. I kept getting tripped up Taylor Swift saying music shouldn’t be free. I was like, it’s not free, you have to pay for Spotify. Somehow I forgot that you actually don’t if you don’t want to.
Not a fan of Swift, but I can respect what she does. Few musical personalities have the (well-earned) cache to turn down streaming services. She has the only platinum album of this year…and correct me if I’m wrong…nothing went platinum in 2013.
I’m cool with someone like her trying to maximize whatever value she has left. She’s the LeBron of teen-pop stuff. For the moment, she’s bulletproof. May as well squeeze every buck you can out of it before the force field inevitably begins to wane.
She’s so unique in music right now, I don’t think many could or would attempt the same.
I agree with a lot of this. We’ve also talked a lot about the fact that the business model might need to include a positive financial bias toward new music so that new releases are compensated on “release day” in a fair way. The idea is that the streaming of Dark Side of the Moon for the 12,347th time isn’t the same as streaming an album that was released last week and hasn’t even had a moment to recoup its costs.
Your last point is especially true. Taylor Swift, Katy Perry and a small handful of others can pretty much do whatever they want.
Great songs, by the way.
Thanks! As it turns out they’re the the celebratory tunes we might have wanted, but who knew?
I can honestly say I’ve never listened to a Taylor Swift song other than what I might’ve heard piped into a supermarket, and even if I have heard one, I couldn’t distinguish it from any of the other female new-pop artists out there.
Last night, after maybe one too many adult beverages, I decided to download Swift’s entire music catalog from a torrent website. I have no plan to listen to this music, ever. It’s not really my style.
I did it for two reasons: one, to be a jerk. More importantly is two, that since I pay $120/year for access to music that I can easily obtain through various other methods, I expect to be able to listen to whatever music I want. Maybe this makes me more of a jerk, or at least somewhat entitled, but it is two-thousand and fourteen Anno Domini, and this is the way the music world works now, like it or not. I did it mostly to prove a point, a point that will be all but lost on a multi-millionaire like Swift or the label that represents her. The point was that I can get this music, I can access it and download it and listen to it regardless of the moves Swift and her label make.
I was, and still am, willing to pay $10/mo for access to her music. I would never buy a Taylor Swift album, but maybe my wife or daughter would. Now they won’t, and I place that blame solely on Swift’s decision to pull her music from a legal streaming service.
Good point about paid vs free spotify. I have also being paying for the service since day one so mentally compartmentalize it separate from Pandora, which I have never paid for. Yet, they are basically the same.
That’s the real catch of this whole thing, isn’t it? I too would never buy one of her albums. But as someone who tries to listen to pretty much anything and everything at least once, I would have streamed her new album a couple times and she would have received whatever the equivalent percentage is. Now, she’s getting no money from me.
But then again, I’m not her target audience and neither are you. I do wonder how many of her real fans would have originally streamed the album, but now went out and bought it since they can’t stream it. It’s so hard to get accurate metrics on this stuff, so there’s a good amount of guesswork involved.
One of the great things about moving away from Cleveland and then being too much of a cheapskate to have DirecTv and pay for the NFL package is that it has broken the tether that the NFL used to have on me.
I’ll put a game on if I am at home, but it’s background stuff while playing with the wife/kids, doing chores, and everything else. My real watching happens with the condensed games throughout the week on NFL replay.
I always know if the Browns won and the outcome of the other games I watch, but it’s still really enjoyable to just break down the games and pay attention to specific aspects rather than just following the somewhat repetitive and generic score & ball following.
And, I do it “on-demand” whenever I feel like it, which is nice. As long as no other NFL game is being played (stupid NFL blackout rules on it).
“In the future can you imagine a scenario where only half the Browns audience watches the team on Sundays at 1 PM and a growing portion of fans watch Sunday night on DVR or even later when it’s more convenient for them?”
I think half is way high, especially in the information age where doing this would force one to also essentially turn off their cell phone and lose all connection to the world if they choose to do so without spoiling the outcome. Sports are the one main reason why most people don’t “cut the cord.” Plus, with the growth in items like League Pass and Sunday Ticket, the on-demand, live nature of sports viewing is as healthy as ever. The only real change is that people get to watch whatever game they want as opposed to those forced upon them by market and geography.
Personally, I’m pumped about the Thursday game only because it means the CLE market gets two 1p games in addition to NYG/SEA late.
me too. moved to Boston, used to drag gf/wife to backers bar every sunday. eventually moved the burbs, had a kid. yada yada browns suck for basically my whole life yada yada. Still a Browns fan all the way, but slowly shed the seriousness of fandom and actually pretty happy about it.
and yes, nfl replay is sooo clutch. why give up half of sunday to watch a nauseating parade of commercials
another good one is Songza. that’s my go to for free streaming music
Lets go Cavs get a win tonight against Denver come home 2-2 after a tough 4 game road trip!
Why does $10 a month entitle you to access to all her music though? If her and label don’t think it’s fair compensation for her work, then its perfectly within their right to not offer that. Just because you can steal something doesn’t mean the vendor has to go “oh well, might as well give in to the price the customer wants”.
It may be a bad business decision (as there may be a lot more people like Andrew than Swift and her producers think), but I’m guessing that when you make a bad business decision, you wouldn’t want it to to be an opening for people to rip you off.
The alternative to me paying $10/mo for access to her music is me paying $0/forever for access to her music. That is my only point. I’m not saying that I’m right, morally or otherwise, I’m just saying that I have other options as a consumer.
I’ll never buy a Taylor Swift album, but if it was on Spotify’s Top 100 or whatever, maybe it would come on and catch my ear, which would make me stream it more, which would put more money in her pocket. Much more money than the $0 she’s getting from me now.
Swift is in a position where she can do this, she’s the reigning regent of pop. I don’t like it, so I voice my opinion the only way I know how – by not purchasing her music. 1,200,000 or so other people already have. Taylor’s gonna be fine without me, which is cool because we are NEVER EVER EVER GETTING BA-
Sure, you’re allowed to make the economic decisions you want too. I’m still left scratching my head as to how that means you should be allowed to rip them off. This is how the whole supply and demand thing works. Business sell their products to maximize revenue, not to maximize the number of customers. I get why people want selective capitalism. I don’t get why they pout when they don’t get it.
Big MMJ fan here. I saw them at Red Rocks a couple summers ago, and Bermuda Highway was a real highlight. Their cover of Never Tear Us Apart was epic.
@WFNYCraig:disqus
I downloaded Tidal. It is AMAZING. CD quality audio. 1400+ KBPS. Spotify offers around 400 KBPS. The price is double, but if you care about hearing music the way the artist intended it to sound, you have to get it. They are offering 30-days free. If you don’t have a coupon code i can send you one.
I’m not sure that I can shed the seriousness of fandom tag.
That’s like offering a participation trophy. Why should someone whose music sucks have an attached incentive? It costs virtually nothing to record music nowadays. The barrier to entry is zilch. Learn how to play your instruments like the gods of yore, and people will stream your music.
THAT, my friend, is the ONLY business model that matters.
You are missing one key point: QUALITY. It is certainly a niche worth selling to. I love high quality audio (pretty much why i will NEVER put a pair of Beats headphones on my ears).
Free spotify has less than 400KBPS. Paid Spotify is higher. Pandora is even lower that that.
Tidal has 1,411 KBPS. the audio is lossless (CD Quality).
This should be included in any discussion of business models and target audiences.
This is very much true. The high quality stream on Spotify is SO MUCH better than the free version. I totally forgot about the differing qualities as well. The only thing I have to be careful with is using highest quality stream on my phone when not on WiFi. I’ve used up my monthly data pretty quickly from that before.
if you want a wonderful discourse on everything Spotify/streaming v purchase, just read Bob Lefsetz. His blog shines incredible light on the industry in general, and on this issue specifically. Based on what I read from Andrew, I assume he is already a reader.
Browns games at 1:00pm are what make Sundays in the fall for me. I’d be content to never have to deal with a primetime game or a 4:00pm start ever again, personally.