Interest In TIDAL Is Sinking Faster Than The Titanic [NEW STATS]
Haters gonna hate, but the critics have been particularly vocal about TIDAL. The streaming music that Jay Z bought and relaunched with the help of superstar partners was just enriching the already rich, they said. And besides, with no free tier, who would sign up?
Just a couple of weeks after relaunching, interest in Jay Z's TIDAL streaming music service has dropped substantially. In fact TIDAL's iOS app, which has peaked late last month at 24 on the overall download chart, had fallen to 872 yesterday, according to app analytics firm App Annie. Among iOS music apps, TIDAL had fallen from 4 to 51 in the same period.
click on image to enlarge
By comparison, as of yesterday:
- Pandora #1 Music / #17 Overall
- Spotify #3 Music / #19 Overall
- Rdio #37 Music / #572 Overall
It's still early stages for TIDAL; and the company has plans to launch many new features and exclusives. But clearly TIDAL is has a substantial salvage operation ahead.
A narrow and incomplete analysis based upon iOS downloads alone.
TIDAL is also a Web Player application and can be established with a Facebook or Twitter API login through an Internet Web browser like Apple Safari, Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox and Internet Explorer on Windows, OS/X and Linux platforms. That is the broader context of TIDAL usage in the past 21 days.
Plus TIDAL HiFi is available from Google Play and on Android devices, where is that data?
Doesn’t Spotify enrich the already rich too?
I’m not sure why we need to deconstruct capitalism now that Jay-Z has entered the streaming space with other music creators. Tim Cook, Steve Jobs and many other tech luminaries used music as a loss leader to sell hardware and advertising for years, enriching themselves and their shareholders.
Spotify, Pandora, Rdio etc. have all yet to turn a profit in their years of existence despite being the darlings of the media. How are we measuring “rough starts”? Are we looking at their 10K?
We are less than a month out from the announcement of the service. It can hardly be fair to say that they are not doing well. I would prefer the journalists and musicians who have spoken out about Tidal to just say they hope that it does not do well. That would be more credible.
The artists who have spoken out about the service should be more alarmed by the fact that the record labels profit from both ownership of their masters and the advertising revenues of the leading streaming service. They are less concerned about their record label double dipping than they are about fellow artists having ownership in a streaming service?
Go figure!