Value exists on both sides of the equation. Spotify wants people on their platform and will pay handsomly for an exclusive deal. Joe instantly gets prominent placement inside every Spotify installation on the earth, rock solid distribution and a partner to help market his content.
He has rock solid distribution between YT and RSS. Anyone who has heard of podcasts has heard of JRE, it doesn’t need marketing. Joe’s reach is going to take a big hit from exclusivity.
Spotify is clearly paying him enough that none of this matters. It’s the correct trade to make if he thinks JRE has passed peak growth and it’s time to focus on monetization.
Isn't this the case because the Spotify podcast player... is a podcast player? It reads RSS feed like any other player, so it has "all" podcasts in a non-exclusive manner. This is exactly what people are lamenting in this thread
> To me it illustrates that there is a lot of value in Spotify as a delivery mechanism and that the existing channels are not working.
Spotify is pouring money into attracting exclusive talent in order become more sticky to consumers and to build a moat against alternatives. They want to erode other platforms (including the open web) so that they become the unichannel.
This is not a sign of existing channels not working. This is taking land from natives and taxing it. It's being done by a powerful player that doesn't want freedom of choice, so long as the only option is their own.
This is not good for anyone but Spotify and Joe Rogan's net worth.
Currently, Spotify doesn't have video (except album cover clips which occasionally show up). I prefer JRE's video format instead of audio. Think of Elon smoking weed on video vs on audio - very different.
Seems like Spotify might be adding video later in the year but until that happens, we don't know what we will be getting.
The main problem is Spotify isn't a podcast app. I don't listen to music like I do podcast, and I don't want my queue there because music would mix in, and it can easily reset.
Also, most "real" podcast app have better playback options. I want to be able to see chapters, and skip silence, but forcing to use Spotify for an open format is bad for everyone. Podcasts are great because they are open, and give you choices in playback apps.
This is exactly how I feel. I like having separate apps for separate types of content. If I reach the point of having to listen to my podcasts on Spotify, I'm going to start paying someone else for music instead.
I have a Spotify subscription but I still won't listen to podcasts on Spotify. If Spotify hosted the audio and offered an RSS feed this wouldn't be as bad.
This is sad because it is a harbinger of a future in which podcasting is like most other modern media. It is currently almost completely open. This openness flows in all directions. Anyone can start a podcast. Anyone can listen to a podcast. People can use any device or any piece of software to listen. Everything is up the the individuals involved and most of it is completely free. This is the future that people dreamed of for TV in the early days of cord cutting, but we are now in the era in which there are over a dozen legitimate TV streaming services and everyone seems to subscribe to multiple different ones. I don't want to have 8 separate podcast apps to listen to my favorite shows.
And for the record, this has nothing to do with compensation for content creators. I want everyone to get paid. I personally am probably in the top 0.1% of podcast consumers and spend roughly $50 per month directly supporting podcasts. There are numerous other revenue models for successful podcasts. Joe Rogan wasn't exactly poor before this exclusivity deal.
In addition to what's already been said, this is a loss for privacy. Spotify gathers information about you and sells it to whoever they want. An RSS feed simply does not allow anywhere near that level of privacy invasion. If a podcast app pulls that crap, I can always switch to another or make my own.
If anything it should inspire creative new solutions to the issue.
reply