{"id":45580,"date":"2023-02-25T01:10:38","date_gmt":"2023-02-25T01:10:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2023\/02\/25\/sometimes-open-systems-beat-those-who-try-to-lock-them-up-spotifys-podcast-colonization-flops\/"},"modified":"2023-02-25T01:11:51","modified_gmt":"2023-02-25T01:11:51","slug":"sometimes-open-systems-beat-those-who-try-to-lock-them-up-spotifys-podcast-colonization-flops","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2023\/02\/25\/sometimes-open-systems-beat-those-who-try-to-lock-them-up-spotifys-podcast-colonization-flops\/","title":{"rendered":"Sometimes Open Systems Beat Those Who Try To Lock Them Up: Spotify\u2019s Podcast Colonization Flops"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a>\n
<\/p>\n

\n

from the protocols-over-proprietary-platforms<\/i> dept<\/h3>\n

We wrote a number of instances concerning the issues of Spotify\u2019s try and colonize the podcast market. Whereas it was, maybe, an comprehensible transfer driven by the economics<\/a> of our completely damaged copyright methods which made it unattainable to be really worthwhile with simply music, Spotify\u2019s resolution to go after the podcast market, shelling out large {dollars} for podcast-focused corporations like Gimlet Media and the Ringer, was all about taking a system based mostly on open protocols \u2014 primarily mp3s and RSS \u2014 and attempting to lock it up behind a proprietary moat.<\/p>\n

We frightened about this again when Spotify purchased Gimlet<\/a>, fearing that it was a warning signal of an try and wall off the open podcast market. It\u2019s why we stored noting that each time Spotify paid some well-known podcaster to solely launch their audio by Spotify that we should always stop calling them podcasts<\/a>, since they have been now proprietary audio. And, we highlighted that the open web stood to lose a lot<\/a> if we allowed this sort of colonization of the open protocol podcasts into locked silos of proprietary audio.<\/p>\n

In fact, there\u2019s a fairly lengthy historical past of corporations attempting to do that, and typically succeeding, however (fortunately) it feels like Spotify\u2019s big bet has been an even bigger bust.<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

\u201cIn hindsight, I most likely bought a bit carried away and overinvested relative to the uncertainty we noticed shaping up out there,\u201d Ek\u00a0said on an earnings call in January<\/a>. \u201cSo we’re shifting to concentrate on tightening our spend and turning into extra environment friendly.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Spotify was a one-company podcast bubble. Its drastic cuts have triggered a podcast winter, because the small studios it helped assist consolidate and lavish narrative productions wane. However rivals from tech giants Amazon and Apple to the radio firm iHeart have discovered higher returns on extra cautious bets. Spotify\u2019s pivot has extra in frequent with the current cuts to Hollywood\u2019s spending on streaming tv.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Notably, the bets by these different corporations have (largely) been on retaining extra open podcasts, although a few of them (Amazon for one) supply early entry to podcasts for Prime subscribers.<\/p>\n

Spotify has nonetheless constructed up an enormous viewers that now listens to podcasts (together with precise podcasts alongside Spotify\u2019s proprietary audio programing), but it surely\u2019s more and more trying like its plan to maneuver open podcasts right into a silo which you could solely get by Spotify and in a proprietary format are fizzling.<\/p>\n

There\u2019s a motive that I preserve pushing for protocol-based solutions<\/a> over proprietary platforms. These open methods stop lock-in, they stop silos, and (maybe most notably) they preserve the ecosystem extra open and free for everybody, so {that a} single firm can\u2019t are available and twist the system solely to their very own benefits.<\/p>\n

\nFiled Below: podcasts<\/a>, proprietary audio<\/a>, protocols<\/a>, silos<\/a>
\n
Corporations: gimlet media<\/a>, spotify<\/a>\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n