TIDAL has a public opinion problem. Many fans don’t like it, and a lot of the owners’ fellow artists don’t like the service either.
So what’s next?
TIDAL is firing their staff and restructuring.
Over 25 employees have been fired, including CEO Andy Chen. Chen is being replaced by former CEO Peter Tonstad.
TIDAL says they’re just “streamlining” to ensure their growth.
Business Insider posted the following statement from TIDAL:
“TIDAL’s new interum [sic] CEO is Peter Tonstad – a former CEO of parent company Aspiro Group. He has a better understanding of the industry and a clear vision for how the company is looking to change the status quo. He’s streamlining resources to ensure talent is maximized to enhance the customer experience. We’ve eliminated a handful of positions and refocused our company-wide talent to address departments that need support and cut redundancies. TIDAL’s offices globally will remain and grow: we are already hirinig for several new positions now. We’re excited about our future and what’s in-store for fans who want the best listening experience.”
More information as it becomes available.
Nina Ulloa covers breaking news, tech, and more: @nine_u
Photo by Gage Skidmore on Flickr used with the Creative Commons License
How about they haven’t paid a dime in royalties since they started and operating in a bankrupt business structure? Sort of like Beats Music…
another Digital Music News “late April Fools?”
i have never written an April Fool’s article. not about to start on April 17th.
Good article and thank you for the quick come back. People are always voicing their trashy opinions. I hope the company “TIDEL” becomes better than any streaming service out there!!
Guess things are looking pretty stable over there. What better way to recruit top talent, then to clean house less than a month after launch.
Let’s be honest: whoever spearheaded that launch deserves to be fired.
Start fresh with old news. Brilliant.
I struggle to see how Tidal can survive after that launch fiasco.
Let’s face it, how can “we are a bunch of millionaire superstars – please pay twice as much as Spotify for our service – so we can get even richer” work, when the digital music scene is still wrestling with finding ways to combat free downloading.
How on earth can a service that is permanently branded as “rich artists wanting to get richer” going to survive?
Exclusives? You have exclusives? But they’re all on Youtube!!
Sorry, but I’m not sure you understand how this industry works. Well, you do to some degree – you seem to get the smoke and mirrors part. Why smoke and mirrors? Because most of these artists, while definitely comfortable, aren’t quite as rich as you might think / expect. Look into what these services pay the artist and tell me – who’s rich again?
Royalties and streaming are just part of the picture. Sure, Spotify only pays artists $0.006 to $0.0084 per stream, but successful artists charge upwards of $500,000 per live performance, and that’s not including VIP packages, merch, endorsements, product lines, etc. When you think about it in terms of world tours and festival appearances (which sometimes come with paid flights, hotel rooms, and backline) it’s hard to argue with the fact that the kind of artists who support Tidal are still making a stupid amount of money, even if only a small part of it is streaming revenue.
I can tell you that you pulled that half mil figure right out of your own ass, as that bears ZERO resemblance to reality. Go ahead, justify your pirate ways, just don’t bullshit yourself in the meantime…
Some of those artist can certainly get guarantees in the half million, and even above.
Yes I do know how the music industry works – extremely well in fact.
You, on the other hand, contradict yourself in your post and seem to have no understanding whatsoever.
Do you think Tidal is going to be a big success? And if you do, please tell us why…..
You seem to be the only one here branding them as “rich artists wanting to get richer,” since you don’t understand that Spotify is streaming LOSSY MP3-quality music (like Pandora, Rhapsody and Rdio), and Tidal is streaming LOSSLESS CD-quality music. Bandwidth alone costs considerably more.
Actually, not really. Bandwidth isn’t much of a concern in 2015. Lossless isn’t really that high of a bitrate either. It’s nothing compared to streaming video.
<ost streaming subscribers would not equate "lossless" as worth double the subscription fee. Do you pay double for a CD compared to an iTunes album?
Lossless is a buzzword. You can have a low bitrate lossless track.
“Lossless is a buzzword”
True, but you’re ignoring the fact that Tidal does stream in 16/44.1.
Good speakers or headphones are obviously way more important, but CD-quality doesn’t hurt.
True, but you’re ignoring the fact that Tidal does stream in 16/44.1
Yes but will this persuade subscribers to pay twice as much as Spotify? I think not…
And also, won’t 16/44.1 have a somewhat heavy effect on 3G or 4G mobile data allowances?
What a debacle!
They don’t have much staff. This is actually an evisceration.
There’s no business like show business
And this never happens when companies are acquired or merged…Digital Music News = TMZ
Typically they happen before you relaunch your service.
These guys are just starting out and there’s already a big shake up?
Weather they are rich or not, I really don’t care. All I care about is having a service that is as fair to the creators as it is to the consumer. Tidal may not be the answer, it may be short lived but it might be another stepping stone in the right direction. Only time will tell.
Guess now we know why Jay been manning the phones
If you see streaming platforms as nothing more than another distribution channel, and (in my experience) offline distributors are charging around 15%, I think this could be a sustainable rate for online distribution as well. But as streaming services still need a lot of investment, even keeping 30% is by far not sustainable (as you can see on the hefty deficit that probably all streaming platforms are still generating). But in a couple of years for an established service I think 15% would be a rate where the service is still earning enough for a reasonable profit.