IBJOpinion

WEB REVIEW: Music site tries to crack U.S. with alleged exclusivity

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Jim Cota

Taking advantage of our basic desire to be part of the insider crowd, Spotify (www.spotify.com)—which has already had success in the European market—has launched here on an “invitation-only” basis.

The strategy has worked well in the past, essentially creating the mystique that something new is rare and therefore worth having. Google did this with GMail several years ago and again with its new social networking platform, Google +. The marketing folks at Spotify no doubt took note of this success and wondered how they might improve the strategy.

Which is where they missed the mark. 

Instead of rolling out slowly, Spotify seems to have struck deals with anyone who has a pulse to offer “exclusive” invitations to join the service. Coke, Klout, Chevrolet and Motorola all sent me offers for a free account. With all these invites floating around, Spotify seems to have lost some of its exclusive panache, but that hasn’t really stopped people from creating accounts and checking it out.

So, marketing snafu (or genius ploy) aside, what is Spotify, how is it different, and should you care?

The answer, as with most of these new services, varies a little depending on who you are and how you might use it.

The cool thing about Spotify is that your account will let you tune in and listen to “any song, anywhere, anytime.” The service claims to have access to 15 million songs, all available to listen to on your computer.

You can also import the MP3s you already own, but it seems like they should already be included in the 15 million, wouldn’t you say?

In the United Kingdom, the free account has some limitations: Ads play during your time streaming, and you’re limited to how much time you can spend on the service. Initially (to get you hooked, I presume), you get 20 hours of streaming for free and then it lowers to five hours a week. After six months, the weekly allocation drops again, to 2-1/2 hours.

Also, each song (unless you have the MP3 loaded from your own library) can be streamed only five times. Bump up against any of these barriers and the service prompts you to upgrade to one of the paid versions. It’s unclear whether these limitations also apply to the American service, but I would expect they would—if not initially, then at some point in the future.

In addition to the free account, the service offers two paid plans, Unlimited ($4.99/month) and Premium ($9.99/month). With both the paid versions, the advertising is eliminated. The Premium version takes things a step further by enabling you to move the music from your desktop computer to your mobile devices. It also provides an “offline” mode for both the mobile and desktop applications that allows you to play select playlists without an Internet connection. The offline mode is a nice touch, and could be a differentiator for the service. In a sense, it allows you to “own” as many songs as you like, as long as you’re a paid subscriber.

All accounts have social media integrated at the core. It’s simple to send a link or playlist to your friends (either individually or as a group through Facebook or Twitter) and they can listen instantly. Spotify claims this social integration is a great way to discover new music, but that claim falls a little short for me. The “discovery” process is really limited to finding things that my friends like or share, which doesn’t seem either as compatible or as powerful as Pandora’s use of the Human Genome Project, where each song I like helps the system automatically play other songs I’m likely to like.

The desktop version has a similar look and feel to Apple’s iTunes, so it’s instantly recognizable and easy to use. Overall, I think Spotify will make a big splash, if for no other reason than it will get to ride for a while on the “latest and greatest” train. There are other competitors already in the market, however, including Rhapsody (www.rhapsody.com), Grooveshark (www.grooveshark.com), and my continued favorite, Pandora (www.pandora.com), most of whom already have a loyal user base and similar features.•

__________

Cota is creative director of Rare Bird Inc., a full-service advertising agency specializing in the use of new technologies. His column appears monthly. He can be reached at jim@rarebirdinc.com.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Pandora?
    How do you say that Pandora is like this? Can you choose what song you want to hear on Pandora? I am a huge fan of Pandora, but lets not muddy the two together! Apples and Oranges....

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I am also a "vet" of several Cirque shows and this one left me flat. It didn't have the amount of acrobatic stunts as the others that I have seen. I am still glad that I went to it and look forward to the next one but I put Varekai as my least favorite.

  2. Looking at the two companies - in spite of their relative size to one another -- Ricker's image is (by all accounts) pretty solid and reputable. Their locations are clean, employees are friendly and the products they offer are reasonably priced. By contrast, BP locations are all over the place and their reputation is poor, especially when you consider this is the same "company" whose disastrous oil spill and their response was nothing short of irresponsible should tell you a lot. The fact you also have people who are experienced in franchising saying their system/strategy is flawed is a good indication that another "spill" has occurred and it's the AM-PM/Ricker's customers/company that are having to deal with it.

  3. Daniel Lilly - Glad to hear about your points and miles. Enjoy Wisconsin and Illinois. You don't care one whit about financial discipline, which is why you will blast the "GOP". Classic liberalism.

  4. Isn't the real reason the terrain? The planners under-estimated the undulating terrain, sink holes, karst features, etc. This portion of the route was flawed from the beginning.

  5. You thought no Indy was bad, how's no fans working out for you? THe IRl No direct competition and still no fans. Hey George Family, spend another billion dollars, that will fix it.

ADVERTISEMENT