this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2024
374 points (97.9% liked)

Not The Onion

11642 readers
1150 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/30272690

When Spotify announced its largest-ever round of layoffs in December, CEO Daniel Ek hailed a new age of efficiency at the streaming giant. But four months on, it seems he and his executives weren’t prepared for how tough filling in for 1,500 axed workers would be.

The music streamer enjoyed record quarterly profits of €168 million ($179 million) in the first three months of 2024, enjoying double-digit revenue growth to €3.6 billion ($3.8 billion) in the process.

However, the company failed to hit its guidance on profitability and monthly active user growth.

Edit: Thanks to @[email protected] for the paywall-free link: https://archive.ph/wdyDS

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 13 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

Someday, a large corporation is going to finally figure out that firing the people who make their products work results in shitty products no one buys.

The problem is, this isn't true. The first part certainly is, though many companies are perfectly capable of making shitty products no matter how many employees they have.

The second part though? I would certainly like to believe that, but it's simply not what happens, especially when it comes to apps and services like Spotify. A huge part of why so much in the tech industry is just absolute ass now is because users are unwilling to try alternatives. Vendor lock in tactics have succeeded, but the average consumer is just lazy and complacent too.

The user experience of Spotify has been dropping dramatically for years. They haven't lost any users. They have boiled one of the most well cooked frogs in the entire tech industry. And even if you they have a significant portion of users who do actively complain about it, they probably can't even name an alternative streaming service besides maybe Apple music, and there's certainly not tech literate enough to understand that you can transfer your library and playlists to another streaming service really easily.

I've legitimately explained this to multiple people I know personally who are incredibly frustrated with spotify, and all of them reacted the same way: at the slightest suggestion of putting in a little bit of effort to move away from the platform that they despise, their resolved disappears.

And it's exactly that mentality, widespread, across so many industries, that allows CEOs to get away with shit like this. They are never punished when consumers are so unwilling to change their habits.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago

People get hung up on brand recognition and corporations definitely exploit this.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

you can transfer your library and playlists to another streaming service really easily.

Mind elaborating on this?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

They have boiled one of the most well cooked frogs in the entire tech industry

Plus, there isn't that much by way of an alternative for the same money. Edit: I've just done a little legwork, and Tidal might work for me... Even with the recent price hike, it's £4/user/month for a family plan, for access to 95% of the world's music.

For all its flaws, and really hit-and-miss algos, I struggled to find something better for around the same money.