OT - Future of SoundCloud is uncertain

[Mills Dude]

SoundClouds Investors May Terminate the Company In 24 Hours

 

Just a heads up, I know a number of fellow forumites are active on SoundCloud.

[ElmerJFudd]

Yeah, these guys aren't sure how to monetize. How do they earn $ after all the $ they've spent creating it and getting people to use soundcloud?

[Dave Ferris]

I might have to finally give in and get legit web site to host my stuff.

[Song80s]

I might have to finally give in and get legit web site to host my stuff.

 

the first idea or to have your own site is the best idea. I am willing to spend a few bucks to have it done with some style and structure.

 

 

[Song80s]

SoundClouds Investors May Terminate the Company In 24 Hours

 

Just a heads up, I know a number of fellow forumites are active on SoundCloud.

 

Sure, I have WAV files, original midi files for my uploaded Songs.

 

The streaming is actually for friends/acquanitences who prefer to stream a Song or 2.

 

A prior article talked about end of year as being the critical go or no go.

 

I suppose, as investors, if they feel its a falling duck, there is no reason to burn any more cash.

 

 

[ElmerJFudd]

On the other hand if there is conceivably any business model that will work for a cloud audio hosting/streaming site, soindcloud has already done all the development and acquired the user base. And other sites like Facebook for example can embed. But if they can't make it work, yeah... It's like throwing money at MySpace.

[Song80s]

On the other hand if there is conceivably any business model that will work for a cloud audio hosting/streaming site, soindcloud has already done all the development and acquired the user base. And other sites like Facebook for example can embed. But if they can't make it work, yeah... It's like throwing money at MySpace.

 

I think SC is well organized and the features are near perfect.

There should be some asset value with their approach/features.

 

If anything, I think they gave it away with too many free minutes. I think its 160 minutes free. I suppose they knew what they were doing but if I was an investor, I would have pushed for a strategy to get the monthly fees much sooner.

 

Not sure if SC was 'unique ' or if they had close competitors to match up with

[OrpheusNY]

Stay of execution:

 

https://techcrunch.com/2017/08/11/soundcloud-saved/

 

[ElmerJFudd]

"SoundCloud has just closed the necessary funding round to keep the struggling music service afloat. CEO Alex Ljung will step aside though remain chairman as former Vimeo CEO Kerry Trainor replaces him. Mike Weissman will become COO as SoundCloud co-founder and CTO Eric Wahlforss stays as chief product officer. New York investment bank Raine Group and Singapores sovereign wealth fund Temasek have stepped in to lead the new Series F funding round of $169.5 million.... SoundCloud laid off 40% of its staff last month, with 173 employees departing in an effort to cut costs."

 

OK, that's a start. I'm rooting for them. It's a pretty great service.

[Doerfler]

OK, that's a start.

 

this is important also.

 

"SoundCloud declined to share the valuation or quantity of the new funding round. Yesterday, Axios reported the company was raising $169.5 million at a $150 million pre-money valuation. Thats a steep decline in value from the $700 million it was valued at in previous funding rounds. The new Series F round supposedly gives Raine and Temasek liquidation preferences that override all previous investors, and the Series E investors are getting their preferences reduced by 40 percent."

 

Doesn't look good long term

[Lindaru]

What will this mean for the continuation of the free accounts for 180 minutes?

 

I actually tried the six hour limit for $55 a year and did not get any more listeners with having more content, so I went back to the free.

 

If they make it a pay service only, I will leave. I already pay plenty to other hosting such as Spreaker, so will not mind leaving.

 

 

[Markay]

Souncloud investors have to come to grips with fact the Soundcloud service is a niche, but valuable service that is never going to rival the likes of YouTube in its present form.

 

But then again YouTube is not generating rivers of gold for Alphabet so media sharing is not, as yet, a particularly profitable place to be.

[Song80s]

OK, that's a start.

 

this is important also.

 

"SoundCloud declined to share the valuation or quantity of the new funding round. Yesterday, Axios reported the company was raising $169.5 million at a $150 million pre-money valuation. Thats a steep decline in value from the $700 million it was valued at in previous funding rounds. The new Series F round supposedly gives Raine and Temasek liquidation preferences that override all previous investors, and the Series E investors are getting their preferences reduced by 40 percent."

 

Doesn't look good long term

 

I agree. The big money people ( investors) and the numbers are suggesting that the current business model is not financially viable. They have to figure out a way to attract significant revenue. I believe SC is ad free. Or the typical spammy ads are not invasive.

[Song80s]

What will this mean for the continuation of the free accounts for 180 minutes?

 

I actually tried the six hour limit for $55 a year and did not get any more listeners with having more content, so I went back to the free.

 

If they make it a pay service only, I will leave. I already pay plenty to other hosting such as Spreaker, so will not mind leaving.

 

 

Not surprising that paying for SC did not give you a bump in listeners. I believe the lure is that the stats are enhanced with more data , so musicians might get more insight into potential .

 

I have been on it since April. I don't rely solely on it for attracting a volume of actual loyal listeners. I equate it to " Facebook likes'.

 

I prefer more depth. My own promotion gives me the 'real life ' feedback and interaction that is useful. Anyway, I don't believe my 'product ' or material speaks to the 20 yr olds. That demographic is not on my radar, either.

 

 

[Song80s]

But then again YouTube is not generating rivers of gold for Alphabet so media sharing is not, as yet, a particularly profitable place to be.

 

I think heavy ad volume on SC might kill it. Free YT gets away with it .

I think YT Red is ad free. I like YT but not a heavy user.

 

So 1 potential life saver for SC is to mimic this model- free SC with lousy cheap ads .

Paid SC for Ad free.

 

But I think they need to expand and personalize their site for a Songwriter like myself. SC has it ' half right" IMO. If I get some type of web site option, I am onboard yesterday.

[AnotherScott]

Not surprising that paying for SC did not give you a bump in listeners. I believe the lure is that the stats are enhanced with more data , so musicians might get more insight into potential .

...and also, if you simply have more material that you'd like to share. Though I guess you could just do that for free elsewhere.

[Song80s]

Not surprising that paying for SC did not give you a bump in listeners. I believe the lure is that the stats are enhanced with more data , so musicians might get more insight into potential .

...and also, if you simply have more material that you'd like to share. Though I guess you could just do that for free elsewhere.

 

I have +20 songs on SC. And my song ' volume ' is growing. Thus I get more casual listeners, views, etc, etc, as a result. My priority isn't totally focused on the casual listener.

 

I like 1 online or cloud ' home ' for my material. I am not as excited with moving around, dealing with various sites. More sites= more work IMO. I would have to see some tangible return by using other site(s) . I don't mind the monthly fees. My time and value received are the keys.

[AnotherScott]

While Soundcloud probably has more reach, if I were trying to build a listener base, I might be more inclined to try to move people to Bandcamp to get the rest of it. But this is an area I don't have much experience in. I'd be curious to hear what people say about the two, and the virtues of using one or the other, or a combination of both.

[ElmerJFudd]

Maybe soundcloud needs to take its cue from the streaming video services and become a record label, streaming soundcloud exclusive artists in addition to what they provide for everyone else now.

[Song80s]

While Soundcloud probably has more reach, if I were trying to build a listener base, I might be more inclined to try to move people to Bandcamp to get the rest of it. But this is an area I don't have much experience in. I'd be curious to hear what people say about the two, and the virtues of using one or the other, or a combination of both.

 

I took a glance at 'band camp '. I am not in gig/band/make a commercial CD mode.

 

I consider myself a non profit song writer/musician promoting original material ( as a 1 man band-me) plus I do some interesting covers.

 

Currently, SC seems to be a more natural fit for that, FWIC .

 

But at some point, I will have 2 or more CD's filled with timeless material ( as I define it)

so I expect to revolve on the promotional side as my fan base grows.

 

 

 

[Lindaru]

One of my busy projects is working from the ground floor with a team of people on a new video sharing site that opened early June.

 

This is a You Tube alternative that is based on VidBit (if you have ever heard of that which closed in 2016) and is being developed by the previous VidBit owner.

 

I have taken some time to perk some of my old music up with some free for commercial use graphics and video clips, thus making them a unique style of music video. There seems to be some interest and support in my doing this and even though the VidLii community is still small, I think it could catch on being I am one of only a hand full of people even posting music videos and most of the other so called music channels are "music bots" (people up-loading copyrighted content they do not own).

 

At this time, Sound Cloud takes a back seat to my web site, my Spreaker and my video site, so quite honestly, if we have to pay to use Sound Cloud, I will probably pack up and leave. I have enough places to keep track of putting content on as it is.

 

Just my two and a half cents (inflation).

 

 

[Song80s]

One of my busy projects is working from the ground floor with a team of people on a new video sharing site that opened early June.

 

This is a You Tube alternative that is based on VidBit (if you have ever heard of that which closed in 2016) and is being developed by the previous VidBit owner.

 

I have taken some time to perk some of my old music up with some free for commercial use graphics and video clips, thus making them a unique style of music video. There seems to be some interest and support in my doing this and even though the VidLii community is still small, I think it could catch on being I am one of only a hand full of people even posting music videos and most of the other so called music channels are "music bots" (people up-loading copyrighted content they do not own).

 

 

 

sort of related. I don't currently have any video content to enhance my original material.

 

I see some folks doing simple iPhone recording with their tunes but I am not enthusiastic about that approach.

 

IOW, I am interested in collaborating with a talented person to add a cinematic quality to my original material. I create what I call ' message songs'- instrumentals that reflect real life experience.

[Joe Muscara]

While Soundcloud probably has more reach, if I were trying to build a listener base, I might be more inclined to try to move people to Bandcamp to get the rest of it. But this is an area I don't have much experience in. I'd be curious to hear what people say about the two, and the virtues of using one or the other, or a combination of both.

 

I took a glance at 'band camp '. I am not in gig/band/make a commercial CD mode.

 

I consider myself a non profit song writer/musician promoting original material ( as a 1 man band-me) plus I do some interesting covers.

 

Currently, SC seems to be a more natural fit for that, FWIC .

 

But at some point, I will have 2 or more CD's filled with timeless material ( as I define it)

so I expect to revolve on the promotional side as my fan base grows.

 

 

Doesn't bandcamp have a free/donation level you can use? I think you can let people pay what they want, and listen for free a number of times.

 

Here's my issue with SC. I can post my music for free, or pay for more. People can listen for free, or they can pay SC for more features. IOW, they pay SC to listen to my music. Um, I'm supposed to get paid for my music. SC is trying to make money on both creators and consumers. That doesn't smell right.

[Song80s]

[

 

I consider myself a non profit song writer/musician promoting original material ( as a 1 man band-me) plus I do some interesting covers.

 

Currently, SC seems to be a more natural fit for that, FWIC .

 

 

Doesn't bandcamp have a free/donation level you can use? I think you can let people pay what they want, and listen for free a number of times.

 

Here's my issue with SC. I can post my music for free, or pay for more. People can listen for free, or they can pay SC for more features. IOW, they pay SC to listen to my music. Um, I'm supposed to get paid for my music. SC is trying to make money on both creators and consumers. That doesn't smell right.

 

Its obvious, by the $#, the SC model is not working.

 

I noticed that online music is highly commoditized. IOW, online music is very inexpensive. We have several thousand musicians giving it away.

 

On SC , I follow a few talented musicians who have a solid album or 2, professionally recorded/mixed, with video. There approach is to upload several songs for free, and try to get you to go to their web site and hopefully you will make a $9 purchase.

 

So SC is used for free promotion. I use it for 95% cloud access and some sense(5%) if the SC listener base has some interest. Since April, I have 716 views, 131 likes. I guess thats ok, but I have no idea what to do with that data.

 

As I mentioned, I am currently non-profit, I am not in commercial mode. I am not hung up on any income expectation, for another year, maybe 2 years.

 

My take is I would not expect any income directly from SC. I would/should have my own site for sales, transactions, etc.

[humb]

servers eat up to 10% of all $ ceo's take 60% rest take 30%

 

so site cost max 40% of what they show

prolly less cause no new code for months on site

but if u kick all ceo's to under 1 mil soundcloud will be positive

but then no young blondes in tahiti or karibians

no flash blings for ceo ,,

[Song80s]

servers eat up to 10% of all $ ceo's take 60% rest take 30%

 

so site cost max 40% of what they show

prolly less cause no new code for months on site

but if u kick all ceo's to under 1 mil soundcloud will be positive

but then no young blondes in tahiti or karibians

no flash blings for ceo ,,

 

include me in the crowd that believes executive compensation is often excessive.

 

we would need to see facts about comp for SC execs. Facts that show they are a big drain on the operation. I prefer to ' not assume'.

 

Since this is a keyboard forum, i think its best to pm this.

[AnotherScott]

servers eat up to 10% of all $ ceo's take 60% rest take 30%

 

so site cost max 40% of what they show

prolly less cause no new code for months on site

but if u kick all ceo's to under 1 mil soundcloud will be positive

From the article, it sounds like possibly the single biggest place money could be going might be to service debt.

[humb]

yea but if u look in between lines ....

servers -they still need $ to pay them

but they call it services .

.that add server cost + workers in soundcloud

look how much ceo hold $ ,and how much execs in services dept

 

someone tell me soundcloud service was on 4 racks

4 racks cost 200k year all expenses + 10$ extra for alocation fee

so to add up 500mill u spend on 10 year where u "spend" 2-3mil to servers are cute way to run corp

gimme $, fup rest, kinda corp

[Joe Muscara]

Its obvious, by the $#, the SC model is not working.

 

I noticed that online music is highly commoditized. IOW, online music is very inexpensive. We have several thousand musicians giving it away.

 

On SC , I follow a few talented musicians who have a solid album or 2, professionally recorded/mixed, with video. There approach is to upload several songs for free, and try to get you to go to their web site and hopefully you will make a $9 purchase.

 

So SC is used for free promotion. I use it for 95% cloud access and some sense(5%) if the SC listener base has some interest. Since April, I have 716 views, 131 likes. I guess thats ok, but I have no idea what to do with that data.

 

As I mentioned, I am currently non-profit, I am not in commercial mode. I am not hung up on any income expectation, for another year, maybe 2 years.

 

My take is I would not expect any income directly from SC. I would/should have my own site for sales, transactions, etc.

I get all that. BUT SC is trying to make money from that. To a degree, I don't begrudge them that. When they first were on my radar, they were a cool place to post music like you describe. If you want/need more space, pay a fee. That's okay, too. But now they are a "streaming service" and want to compete with Pandora and Spotify and charge users. They want the major labels and indie labels on there. Are they getting paid, or is it just for "exposure"?

[Soot 29]

While Soundcloud probably has more reach, if I were trying to build a listener base, I might be more inclined to try to move people to Bandcamp to get the rest of it. But this is an area I don't have much experience in. I'd be curious to hear what people say about the two, and the virtues of using one or the other, or a combination of both.

 

I have been using Bandcamp and Soundcloud for 3-4 years now, and Bandcamp is VASTLY better than Soundcloud. It's not even close. Why?

 

On Soundcloud I've always encountered people who would follow me and then immediately un-follow me when I followed them back. I get spam "likes" on SC all the time. They could control that, but they don't. Granted, Bandcamp is set up differently, but I get none of that type of garbage on Bandcamp.

 

Bandcamp requires you to post your music using high quality no-loss file formats, which sound fantastic. But they allow buyers to download in multiple formats. Smart move.

 

I can completely customize my Bandcamp page in almost every way. SC requires you to use their totally limited and archaic layout. Why am I restricted to 5 slots in my spotlight. Why can't I have seven if I want?

 

Bandcamp allows me to post my music AND my You Tube videos on the same page. Much better promotion. SC does not.

 

Bandcamp allows you to allow, limit or not allow streaming and what you charge or not charge for downloads is totally up to you.

 

I'm getting much more traffic and plays on Bandcamp and that number seems to be going up.

 

SC is clearly losing money. Bandcamp is making money, even as Spotify struggles to achieve profitability.

 

I'm probably forgetting some other ways in which Bandcamp is better but this is what was top of mind for me. I just think there's no comparison between these two sites. Bandcamp is way better.