And even the ones who did have that power, like Jay-Z, eventually relented and put their stuff on competitive services because that’s where all the listeners were.įor a while, it seemed like a big tech company, likely Samsung, might pay a lot to own Tidal, even if it wasn’t working. The idea was that Jay-Z had recruited other artists - like his wife Beyonce as well as Madonna, Rihanna, Daft Punk, and Kanye West - as partial Tidal owners, and Tidal would distinguish itself from competitors like Spotify by offering exclusive music on the service.īut in most cases, the artists involved in Tidal didn’t own their own music - big music labels did - so they couldn’t make their music exclusive on Tidal. Instead, Square is paying $300 million for a failed music service that doesn’t help it accomplish any of those goals.Ī quick recap of the Tidal story: In 2015, Jay-Z bought an obscure Norwegian streaming service for $56 million, rebranded it, and launched it as an “artist-owned” streaming service. If Square wants to create new ways to help musicians sell real goods and digital goods, it could just do that. On the other hand: Even if you think the idea of Jay-Z selling five-second beatbox videos for millions of dollars and high-fiving Jack Dorsey is pretty awesome, none of this requires a $300 million deal to buy Jay-Z’s company. The most optimistic version of the NFT story is that it allows artists (or anyone) to capture more of the value of the stuff they create than selling it through middlemen, like record labels or streaming services. It’s also currently not available at all, due to the pandemic. ![]() It certainly allows musicians - famous ones as well as ones you’ve never heard of - a chance to make money in an industry that currently offers them few options: Streaming music generally only pays out for enormously successful acts, and touring is hard work in the best of times. Grimes sold $6 million worth of digital art as NFTs /rJ8gsYEdU1- The Verge March 1, 2021Īs long as you’re okay with the purely speculative hype around these kinds of sales and stories - and the understanding that some investors, including people who don’t fully understand what they’re doing, are going to make a lot of money, and some will get burned badly (see: GameStop, and also Cryptokitties, an early NFT gambit/gimmick that was kind of hot in 2018 and then cooled off but may be hot again) - then this all seems. If they get it out fast enough - while NFT mania booms - it’s easy to imagine many more headlines like these, except you’ll replace “Grimes” with “Beyonce” or whomever: So you can picture the Jay-Zs of the world selling songs, or snippets of songs, or the digital version of a lyric scribbled on a napkin, as NFTs, in deals that let Square and the artist get part of the deal. Even if none of this makes sense to you, you may have heard about people paying real money - a lot of money - for digital ephemera like cartoon cat GIFs or animated trading cards of NBA players dunking or blocking. anything that investors and speculators and collectors are hoovering up at a crazy rate. NFTs (non-fungible tokens) are blockchain-enabled digital pieces of. ![]() More intriguingly, given Dorsey’s love of All Things Blockchain, and the current mania over NFTs, it won’t be surprising to see Square + Tidal work on their own NFT scheme. ![]() It doesn’t take much imagination to come up with Square + Tidal rollouts in the future: A Square-enabled way for artists to sell T-shirts on tour, or even when they’re not on tour, for instance. He'll now help lead our entire company, including Seller and the Cash App, as soon as the deal closes. I knew TIDAL was something special as soon as I experienced it, and I’m inspired to work with him. I’m grateful for Jay’s vision, wisdom, and leadership.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |