MQA is Vaporware

[Rt66indierock]

On 5/27/2017 at 7:31 PM, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

You are right, your sources aren't what they used to be. You're off by quite a bit. 

 

Sorry Chris, I like to have both accounting and music sources before post something but I posted when I did because Digital Music News reported the same subscriber number on May 26^th, less than a million.

 

In April 2016 TIDAL reported 850,000 paid subscribers to the labels.  Later in the year they reported 1.1 million paid subscribers to the labels. Former TIDAL employee Arthur Sund has alleged that 170,000 inactive accounts were turned on in October of 2016. That is a pretty good basis to say TIDAL has less than a million paid subscribers.

 

Other than press releases what supports any number higher than around a million paid subscribers?

[Rt66indierock]

On 5/27/2017 at 8:25 PM, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

You should research when Sony actually signed the deal with MQA. You may change your story. 

 

Actually it strengthens my story but then I’ve actually negotiated with them. See posts about rights holders being family partnerships. Some negotiations were with Sony and they never moved quickly.

 

Besides what economic reason would cause Sony to get MQA music to the market in the next few months?

[Rt66indierock]

1 hour ago, Jud said:

 

Later in the thread I clarified that I was talking specifically about a band making a business success of its own recording label.  The vast majority don't, and that includes the Beatles and Dead.

 

More generally speaking, the Dead were forerunners of the current business model that uses recordings as advertising for the tours that make the money.

 

I’ll get my shot at the Grateful Dead archive later this year. I wanted to write a fun type accounting article and get some information to spice up my tax presentations (they are a little dry). I’m getting some pressure to write a scholarly article so various professors can go to their Deans and say see CPA profession considers this important so you should too. One of the questions I hope to answer is did the Dead get out of the record business because it was unsuccessful or did they get out because it was messing up the chemistry of the band?

[crenca]

7 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

I’ll get my shot at the Grateful Dead archive later this year. I wanted to write a fun type accounting article and get some information to spice up my tax presentations (they are a little dry). I’m getting some pressure to write a scholarly article so various professors can go to their Deans and say see CPA profession considers this important so you should too. One of the questions I hope to answer is did the Dead get out of the record business because it was unsuccessful or did they get out because it was messing up the chemistry of the band?

 

 

I might be able to help.  I saw the Dead once in the early nineties in Chicago at Soldiers.  There defiantly was some "chemistry" involved.  Oh wait, that does not help...  

[The Computer Audiophile]

39 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Sorry Chris, I like to have both accounting and music sources before post something but I posted when I did because Digital Music News reported the same subscriber number on May 26^th, less than a million.

 

In April 2016 TIDAL reported 850,000 paid subscribers to the labels.  Later in the year they reported 1.1 million paid subscribers to the labels. Former TIDAL employee Arthur Sund has alleged that 170,000 inactive accounts were turned on in October of 2016. That is a pretty good basis to say TIDAL has less than a million paid subscribers.

 

Other than press releases what supports any number higher than around a million paid subscribers?

 

I highly recommend against using Digital Music News as a source for anything other than half true salacious headlines. 

[Rt66indierock]

6 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

 

I might be able to help.  I saw the Dead once in the early nineties in Chicago at Soldiers.  There defiantly was some "chemistry" involved.  Oh wait, that does not help...  

 

They didn't want to be Blind Faith or the Eagles. Can't blame them for that.

[The Computer Audiophile]

33 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Actually it strengthens my story but then I’ve actually negotiated with them. See posts about rights holders being family partnerships. Some negotiations were with Sony and they never moved quickly.

 

Besides what economic reason would cause Sony to get MQA music to the market in the next few months?

 

I disagree. You said Sony dragged its feet. That's far from true. 

[fung0]

1 hour ago, firedog said:

Unsuccessful is relative. Relative to some of the other rockers of their era 9.9 million is pocket change. Maybe the point is that wth the same music and a different business model a lot more money could have been made. 

 

The Grateful Dead's per-tour gross in the late 1980s hit $45 to $50 million. Total touring revenue in the 1990s was $285 million, second only to the Rolling Stones. Solo tours would be on top of that. They toured ever-larger venues for 30 years before Jerry Garcia died, and sold out 70,000-seat stadiums for five nights on their 50th anniversary.

 

That's pretty successful. Maybe Garcia and Co. found uses for the loot other than just piling it up for their heirs. They certainly reinvested a lot of it, in state-of-the-art gear, in their own record label, in numerous charities and side-projects. (They also charged a lot less for tickets than most mainstream bands.)

 

It is true that with a different business model, a lot more money undoubtedly could have been made - by the recording industry. The Dead proved there was a better way.

[Rt66indierock]

1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

I highly recommend against using Digital Music News as a source for anything other than half true salacious headlines. 

 

Digital Music News published the same information I have access to. I don't like to be the first write things.

[Rt66indierock]

6 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

I disagree. You said Sony dragged its feet. That's far from true. 

 

Then were is the music?

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Then were is the music?

 

Ask your "sources."

[fung0]

24 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

I’ll get my shot at the Grateful Dead archive later this year. I wanted to write a fun type accounting article and get some information to spice up my tax presentations (they are a little dry). I’m getting some pressure to write a scholarly article so various professors can go to their Deans and say see CPA profession considers this important so you should too. One of the questions I hope to answer is did the Dead get out of the record business because it was unsuccessful or did they get out because it was messing up the chemistry of the band?

 

From biographical accounts, it seems certain that they got out of the business side simply because they didn't enjoy it, and had no talent for it. Grateful Dead Records was a worthwhile early experiment, but like the Wall of Sound, proved to be more trouble than it was worth. I suspect that by the late 1970s, with Arista and Ryko, among others, they finally found business partnerships that worked well enough to let them focus on just making music. They may also have gained enough clout by that point to get better terms.

 

One thing the Dead did do successfully was to run their own ticket agency. Driven not by profit, but by a desire to curb scalping. I'm not sure if other bands tried this at the time, or how many might do it today. (I did try interviewing Grateful Dead Productions once or twice, but they weren't overly communicative. Probably get badgered by fans...)

 

Should be an interesting article, anyway - I hope I get to see it. The Dead broke a lot of new ground on the business side of music. It would be great to see a scholarly analysis of what they accomplished, and what other acts may have learned from them.

[Rt66indierock]

7 hours ago, mav52 said:

 

"" Jeff Toig was fired partly because MQA was not bringing in enough new subscribers to cover the costs of streaming MQA."

 

Can you actually prove this was the cause. Provide us a link from Tidal noting he was fired because of MQA.  

 

 

 

Did you read the first sentence? In any case a CEO is generally fired for the following reasons: Can’t get along with ownership, isn’t meeting marketing goals, isn’t meeting revenue goals or isn’t containing costs.

 

So as I said let’s start with Jay Z is difficult to work with. Not hard to believe friction didn’t exist between the two. In February Tony Gervino and Elliot Wilson were hired to help fix the subscriber numbers so it isn’t a stretch to believe Jay Z felt he was falling behind the market leaders. There is only one good reason to stream MQA and that is to bring in more paying customers. It is not unreasonable to think there are costs to add MQA streaming.

 

If you’re with me so far then you have to ask why did Jeff leave in March and why was it kept quiet until now? If you remember budgeting then TIDAL would budget revenue for MQA. My speculation is amount MQA streaming was below the budgeted number. Probably because the number of available albums is small and MQA wasn’t a draw get people to either upgrade to a $20 a month plan or subscribe for $20 initially. Now if the costs exceed budget for MQA streaming then you may have to use other resources to pay these costs or not pay the bills. And software like the TIDAL app could go over budget pretty easily.

 

Pretty easy to speculate MQA was part of the reason Jeff is no longer with TIDAL. Unless there are reasons other than marketing, revenue and costs for his departure.

[Rt66indierock]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

Ask your "sources."

 

Let’s cut to the chase about TIDAL. What do think is going right with marketing and finance in the company?

[The Computer Audiophile]

54 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Did you read the first sentence? In any case a CEO is generally fired for the following reasons: Can’t get along with ownership, isn’t meeting marketing goals, isn’t meeting revenue goals or isn’t containing costs.

 

So as I said let’s start with Jay Z is difficult to work with. Not hard to believe friction didn’t exist between the two. In February Tony Gervino and Elliot Wilson were hired to help fix the subscriber numbers so it isn’t a stretch to believe Jay Z felt he was falling behind the market leaders. There is only one good reason to stream MQA and that is to bring in more paying customers. It is not unreasonable to think there are costs to add MQA streaming.

 

If you’re with me so far then you have to ask why did Jeff leave in March and why was it kept quiet until now? If you remember budgeting then TIDAL would budget revenue for MQA. My speculation is amount MQA streaming was below the budgeted number. Probably because the number of available albums is small and MQA wasn’t a draw get people to either upgrade to a $20 a month plan or subscribe for $20 initially. Now if the costs exceed budget for MQA streaming then you may have to use other resources to pay these costs or not pay the bills. And software like the TIDAL app could go over budget pretty easily.

 

Pretty easy to speculate MQA was part of the reason Jeff is no longer with TIDAL. Unless there are reasons other than marketing, revenue and costs for his departure.

 

I really encourage you to get a source inside the company. Or, you may not want one because almost everything you've said to this point would have to be retracted. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

25 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Let’s cut to the chase about TIDAL. What do think is going right with marketing and finance in the company?

 

Again, get a source inside the company to hear how they think about the business. Given your thoughts so far, I believe it would blow your mind. 

[mav52]

1 hour ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Did you read the first sentence? In any case a CEO is generally fired for the following reasons: Can’t get along with ownership, isn’t meeting marketing goals, isn’t meeting revenue goals or isn’t containing costs.

 

So as I said let’s start with Jay Z is difficult to work with. Not hard to believe friction didn’t exist between the two. In February Tony Gervino and Elliot Wilson were hired to help fix the subscriber numbers so it isn’t a stretch to believe Jay Z felt he was falling behind the market leaders. There is only one good reason to stream MQA and that is to bring in more paying customers. It is not unreasonable to think there are costs to add MQA streaming.

 

If you’re with me so far then you have to ask why did Jeff leave in March and why was it kept quiet until now? If you remember budgeting then TIDAL would budget revenue for MQA. My speculation is amount MQA streaming was below the budgeted number. Probably because the number of available albums is small and MQA wasn’t a draw get people to either upgrade to a $20 a month plan or subscribe for $20 initially. Now if the costs exceed budget for MQA streaming then you may have to use other resources to pay these costs or not pay the bills. And software like the TIDAL app could go over budget pretty easily.

 

Pretty easy to speculate MQA was part of the reason Jeff is no longer with TIDAL. Unless there are reasons other than marketing, revenue and costs for his departure.

I can speculate as good as anyone but your speculating unless you are a insider at Tidal. Provide the facts that he was fired due to MQA.  The way you talk you must know Jeff or Jay Z.  But so far you're just speculating that you think you know what you think you want to know.

 

.

 

[mrvco]

I expect that Tidal's justification for its gratis MQA support is two-fold:

• MQA made Tidal an offer that they couldn't reasonably refuse.  Where would MQA be right now without Tidal... some sample files on 2l.no/hires?
• Spotify gearing up to launch a 'lossless' tier of service (allegedly).  MQA support 'might' be enough to keep some Hifi subscribers from switching to Spotify Lossless.  Personally, if Spotify's lossless library is => Tidal's lossless library, then the only reason I'm sticking with Tidal is for the tight Roon integration.

[Sal1950]

4 hours ago, Rt66indierock said:

So as I said let’s start with Jay Z is difficult to work with. Not hard to believe friction didn’t exist between the two.

Jeff should consider himself lucky to get fired, instead of just stabbed.  

4 hours ago, Rt66indierock said:

There is only one good reason to stream MQA and that is to bring in more paying customers. It is not unreasonable to think there are costs to add MQA streaming.

Yes, you just have to get a good marketing spin out to Joe Sixpack that MQA = Improved SQ. They've done a reasonably good job with the audiophool market, but Sixpack might be a bit harder. The plain HDA story spinners haven't had much success with Sixpack yet. At this point Tidal is giving away the HDA/MQA stream to the lossless level customers but I can only see that in the long term they are going to have to add a third more expensive level tier for this.

 

3 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Again, get a source inside the company to hear how they think about the business. Given your thoughts so far, I believe it would blow your mind. 

Well then come on Chris, enlighten us please.

[Sal1950]

2 hours ago, mrvco said:

Spotify gearing up to launch a 'lossless' tier of service (allegedly).  MQA support 'might' be enough to keep some Hifi subscribers from switching to Spotify Lossless.  Personally, if Spotify's lossless library is => Tidal's lossless library, then the only reason I'm sticking with Tidal is for the tight Roon integration.

If Spotify is smart,  (I hope they are),  they'll introduce a lossless stream sans HDA/MQA and it's costs, for $15 a month and put some nails in the Tidal coffin.

[lucretius]

41 minutes ago, Sal1950 said:

At this point Tidal is giving away the HDA/MQA stream to the lossless level customers but I can only see that in the long term they are going to have to add a third more expensive level tier for this.

 

My (limited) understanding is that the "MQA stream" will replace the CD quality stream, so there would be no need for 3 tiers; this seems to be the only thing that makes sense.

[lucretius]

On 2017-05-26 at 4:10 PM, Jud said:

 

Yup.  Now think about this: You can easily have a melody that shares many more of the same notes than do melody "A" and melody "A" in a different key, but your impression is that it's a *different* melody.  Agreed?

 

If by "*different*" you mean that it doesn't 'sound' like a derivative, then agreed; sometimes it takes a computer analysis to demonstrate it is a derivative.

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 hour ago, Sal1950 said:

If Spotify is smart,  (I hope they are),  they'll introduce a lossless stream sans HDA/MQA and it's costs, for $15 a month and put some nails in the Tidal coffin.

 

I'd love to see cheaper lossless, but the labels set the price, so I don't envision it happening anytime soon. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 hour ago, Sal1950 said:

Well then come on Chris, enlighten us please.

 

I'd love to, but then I'd burn my sources and methods :~)

[rickca]

38 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

I'd love to, but then I'd burn my sources and methods :~)

I get my stuff straight from the NSA, don't you?