• Gamers_Mate@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I think Wrapped is like youtube rewind for spotify.They are talking about how the layoffs happened just after they finished working on that?

    Though I think it is less the streaming model being a scam and more the way Spotify is taking all the profit and avoiding to properly pay out smaller creators.

    • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It doesn’t seem to me like Wrapped requires a terribly large amount of development work every year. There’s a new design each year, but they probably just reuse all the SQL queries with the year swapped out. After the first year, it probably only requires bugfixing and regular maintenance. I bet a few devs keep an eye on it as part of their other duties.

      Unlike YouTube Rewind, which requires a writing team, a production crew, talent, and music, on top of the analytics.

      • LifeInOregon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is how I understood the comment:

        Wrapped gets Spotify a lot of positive buzz. Layoffs while that buzz happens may get less notice, because people are on the “look at all the neat Spotify numbers” train and essentially advertising good vibes for the platform.

    • GenEcon@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Spotify made this quarter the first time a profit since it existence. So if you think artists aren’t paid enough, its either of these three:

      1. We pay too little for consuming music.

      2. The record labels take a too big share.

      3. Spotify is really inefficient and could pay out more if they work more efficiently.

      The only thing not possible is Spotify taking all the profit since they don’t make any.

      • Mahlzeit@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Very true. There’s another possibility, though: That pay for certain employees (ie executives) is too high. It may not be included in 3, if the pay is normal. However, that “normal” may be considered immoral, and/or straight market failure,