Jay Z's "Reasonable Doubt" Album Pulled From Spotify

(AllHipHop News) Has the artist exodus from Spotify begun? According to Watch Loud, Jay Z’s classic debut album Reasonable Doubt is no longer available on the service, but his entire discography can be streamed on the new Tidal platform.

[ALSO READ: Jay Z Discusses Tidal’s Profit Sharing, $20 HiFi Cost, & Criticism The Streaming Service Is Elitist]

Jay explained that one of the reasons he and numerous other musicians joined together for Tidal was because other streaming services had an unbalanced profit-sharing system with the artists. He spoke about the payout structure during a Q&A at NYU.

“You guys may have seen some of the stats like, Aloe Blacc had a song that was streamed 168 million times and he got paid $4,000,” said Jay. “For us, it’s not us standing here saying we’re poor musicians. If you provide a service, you should be compensated for it. And not just artists — just think about the writers and the producers.”

Taylor Swift pulled all her music from Spotify in 2014. The country/pop superstar’s catalog is included on Tidal. The artist owned company is also separating itself from other streaming services by providing exclusive content such as new songs by Rihanna and Beyoncé.

Tidal users can also stream exclusive videos from The White Stripes and Madonna. Jeymes Samuel’s Black western They Die By Dawn starring Michael K. Williams, Rosario Dawson, and Erykah Badu is only available on the platform as well.

[ALSO READ: “They Die By Dawn” Starring Erykah Badu, Michael K. Williams & More Streaming Exclusively On Tidal]

Related Stories

138 Responses to “Jay Z's "Reasonable Doubt" Album Pulled From Spotify”

  1. ItGoesDownINtheDM

    so whats more fairly????????? why jayz aint get specific he going to be specifc with spotify only paying out $4k for 168 millions views which is crazy … so what will an artist get for 168 million streams on tidal ??? $5k LOL !!

    • Dark Matters

      Why would he tell you or I? We’re not the ones he’s trying to convince. It’s the artists and obviously if they like the terms, they’ll sign up. And if enough of them sign up, you and I will have no choice but to go to Tidal if we want to listen to the music we love.

      When you shop at Sams, Target, Walmart or any other retailer do you do it, because they told at what costs they get their goods? No. You do it, because you have to, to get what you want.

      • ItGoesDownINtheDM

        he was being a chatty patty telling us what spotify actually pays thier artist so i think its only right that he tells everyone what their service will offer artist … ijs

      • ItGoesDownINtheDM

        ijs as a consumer they are charging us a premium because the artist we support supposely gets a better share … with that price margin and him exposing spotifys pay scale i think its only right they he exposes the potential (doesnt have to be exact) earning one artist can earn with thier new streaming service ……………….. sn i dont know what spotify specifics are ….. but i know itunes does an 80/20 split with downloads and raphsody gives you something like less than $0.10 per stream cant really remember but i know it was in the pennies …. which is sort of understandable Cause you used to be able to stream there for free and only had to pay
        for downloads … not sure if that’s changed cause I haven’t really been up on
        that stuff

      • Dark Matters

        He didn’t expose spotify’s pay scale. It was made public in articles that were discussing the reasons why Taylor Swift pulled her catalogue from Spotify. Besides, artists become part owners when they join Tidal (credit union style), I think any artist who is weighing their options would take that into consideration.

        Us knowing is obviously not stopping artists from joining Tidal. The fact that he was able to get all of these high profile artists to stand behind the product for the launch broadcast already says a lot to up and coming artists about Tidal.

      • ItGoesDownINtheDM

        ill have a choice cause im not much into streaming services anyway i dont use google play, spotify, rhaposdy etc…. now and ive been on the technical curve … i rather have access to my stuff offline vs only being able to access it as long as i have access to the internet …….. ill stick to itunes downloads or buying physical copies if available

      • Dark Matters

        To each their own – I’m in your camp as well, in regards to music purchasing. If this had come out when I was in my teens, I would’ve definitely paid for it considering the amount of music I was buying then.

        BTW, Tidal does offer offline usage – fyi.

      • ItGoesDownINtheDM

        def me too … i remember back in the napster days my drive was filled to capacity with music + i had shoe boxes full of singles lol … sadily most of that music from the file sharing days is in a proprietary format and cant be recognized by most players these days …. but i just had an idea i havent tried vlc yet 🙂 but so far most of those files are garbage lol those real player files from the 90s and windows media files which really are bad for me cause ive been team mac for sometime now lol ….

  2. ChinoX813

    If somebody is going to get paid off music I’d rather it be the creators of the content than the people who’s only contribution to the process is running the service. Without the music, there would be no service, so who really deserves the greater percentage??

    That said, I wont be signing up for Tidal based on the fact that there isn’t enough new music coming out that I like to make it worth it…..and I already own “Reasonable Doubt” lol

    • Dark Matters

      Personally, I disagree – kind of. I think technology has always been a huge part of art and the distribution of art. Without the technology artists wouldn’t be able to make art or distribute it as far as they have.

      You get what you can negotiate – that is capitalism unfortunately. That creates room for competition. The technophiles had the upper hand as there were fewer of them and there are plenty of artists. Just as, if there were few artists and many technophiles it would be the reverse. Tidal is just a case of market forces stepping in and giving artists more leverage.

      I agree, though that the folks at Spotify should have worked the costs of making music into their pricing and compensated the artists better, but at the same time it worked to their advantage, at the time. They have built up a sizable user base, generated significant revenue for themselves and are still in a position of advantage over any newcomers into the market.

      They can now decide to offer better rates to artists without dealing with as much difficulty as a new company attempting the same thing would.

      • ChinoX813

        I hear what your saying but at the end of the day, if there was no music all those Spotify people would be doing something else for a living. The music is the only reason people use that site, without it, the site has no purpose. They should be giving out better deals.

      • Dark Matters

        If there were no technology, you wouldn’t be able to consume music unless you were making it yourself. So, they’ve got a mutually beneficial existence. One isn’t intrinsically more valuable than the other. They are however, both subject to market forces. That’s just how it goes.

        I do agree though, for the sake of helping maintaining the quality of music/art, it would be wise to compensate artists for their art. Especially, when they’re making great art.

  3. Tyfromthechi

    So they gone force everybody to subscribe to tidal by pulling all they music off other streaming sites i got rhapsody for 9.99 a month tidal want 19.99 a month fir high quality im good

      • Dark Matters

        The facts hurt you so much? It’s garbage yet you haven’t tried it.

      • Malik

        You and @chosenxeno:disqus have said you piece but since you both choose to keep hammering on the same point, you have to understand some peeps might ‘think’ you are plugging the product.

      • ItGoesDownINtheDM

        wishfull thinking lol !! that would mean we are getting paid to do this ish !! lol !!

      • Dark Matters

        Come on fam. As if we haven’t been on this site for ages. It’s just rather weird to see people twist their necks (damn near dislodging vertebrae in the process) in order to down something, because THEY can’t afford it or because they see someone else making great moves. It becomes pitiful to watch.

        If we’re analyzing the business implications then that’s great. We can all learn, exchange perspectives and build. However, when dudes just go out of their way to say nonsense on the basis of knowingly stated half-truths. At that point they’re overtly downing something they haven’t tried. Hence, why it is quite revealing you would accuse someone of plugging the product because they’ve made a factual correction.

        It can only lead me to think people are knowingly spreading misinfo, for whatever reason. Why else would you accuse someone making a factual correction of “plugging the product”, when you’re already speaking about the product? Makes no sense.

      • Edward Mayes

        and likely wouldn’t information like art ideas thinking and music is free.

        you can pay for convenience
        you can pay to support the artist
        you can even gofund ideals and research but to denigrate an idea
        espouse that everybody should pay for something they don’t value that’s garbage

      • Dark Matters

        If they don’t value it, why are they consuming it smart guy? Stop while you’re ahead. You’re tripping all over yourself.

      • Edward Mayes

        the same reason you consume a big mac but i’m pretty sure you neither own a bakery a cow or a farm

        you can want something that has no intrinsic value… that doesn’t make it valuable
        that makes you a consumer. and consumers consume at the price most advantageous to them. the same as sellers want a price most advantageous to them – usually they’ll meet in the middle
        unless somebody else comes along and says look a shiny new object and then everybody goes and tries to follow the ball.

      • chosenxeno

        I’m not getting sh*T for it. People keep saying the same dumb thing over and over “Omg $20 dollars bla bla bla…”
        The real question is how much they are getting paid to spread misinformation. I’m not even paying for a streaming service. I usually just buy it from iTunes or convert YouTube files for hard to find old school mixtape cuts:P

      • Edward Mayes

        i was with you til misinformation… that’s what pr firms call a keyword
        the greatest most emotional attachment to a cause doesn’t elicit something as technical and robotic as misinformation

        you can support it. others can not support it. and the end of the day it lives or dies on it’s own merit

      • Dark Matters

        When people unknowingly spread false information that is misinformation. So, I agree with you because they’re knowingly stating partly false information. That would make it disinformation.

      • Dark Matters

        People love telling outlandish half-truths to support their interpretation of reality. Good of you to keep reminding them, though it probably won’t change them. Haters are configured to hate no matter what. Otherwise, they would self-destruct.

  4. Banksy

    You know whats so crazy about most of the criticism is that none of the people complaining would go to Land Rover and ask them why do they make Range Rover Vogues so expensive. We never question Nike about why they sells J’s for 5 times what it costs them to make but for some reason people are tripping that Jay is trying to make money. I swear if I was Jay I would’ve hired some old white actor to pretend to be the CEO. Launch the company and after it was successful I would’ve came out like surprise niggas!

    • ChinoX813

      It’s only because this generation doesn’t believe they should have to pay for music. If Jay was selling them a food product for 5 x’s more than it should cost nobody would be offended. Most of them would eat it just because it’s a status symbol. When it comes to music, however, this generation has a sense of entitlement about it. They get offended when you suggest the idea that it’s worth money and lash out at you over it.

      • Banksy

        You hit the nail square on the head. For some reason music and film are things people refuse to pay for as if those industries will continue to exist by giving their product away for free. I get that most of the music being made today is garbage but I would still be willing to pay for something that I felt was quality.

      • ChinoX813

        Have you heard these kids when they try to justify their thievery though?? They truly believe in their hearts that they aren’t doing anything wrong, it’s not even like their lying to anybody, they truly believe that they shouldn’t have to pay for the product.

        It reminds me of a show I watched years ago about this serial killer. They were interviewing him and he was like “I don’t know why I’m in jail, I just killed hookers” and you could tell that he honestly believed it, it wasn’t just an excuse, he had himself convinced that he was being incarcerated unfairly, that he had the right to kill hookers and nothing anybody told him was going to change his mind.

        That’s how these kids think. Nothing you can do about it.

      • Banksy

        The sense of entitlement is crazy though. But I also put place on the artists who give their mixtapes away for free. I understand want to be heard and get your music out there but the truth is when you start giving out free shit people come to expect more free shit. I mean giving out a track here and there is one thing but dudes are giving away whole bodies of work. I mean back in the day it was an event to wait for the big boys to drop in the 4th quarter dudes don’t even have release dates anymore because they don’t want to be embarrassed if no one cops it.


        The reviews says that their is no difference and independent artist want be compensated. The only way artists are compensated is on the 19.99 packages. So why should people spend their money helping people that don’t really cater to their taste. It’s always about the money. it was also stated that you still has to get permission from the label to make any move which involve your music.

      • Banksy

        Is there any real difference between samsung and apple phones? They both virtually do the same thing and people still hand their money over. What’s funny about that is a friend of mine who has worked for Apple told me that he believes Apple only spends anywhere from 60-70 per iphone. They turn around and sell it for 5 times that and they know the moment the customer leaves the store and opens the box the phone is now worth a fraction of the retail price the customer paid but does that stop niggas for lining up like zombies every year? Nope. What I’m saying is I believe all corporation should be held to the same scrutiny as we’re hold Jay. If you’re not feeling what he’s selling that’s cool but if it’s based on “The rich get richer” well that some b.s because the rich continue to sell you shit daily and you still buy it. Also the other point is if Tidal is successful it may cause companies like Spotify to change the way they pay independent artists, which will ultimately benefit independent artists.


        Doesn’t really matter just stating what i read of several articles, but all those people together and the best thing they could come up is that. This is a money venture and that’s it. Do your really think Record labels gonna sit back and do nothing. it’s just starting so they’re just gonna monitor it for now. It was also stated that it would not benefit independent artists.

      • Edward Mayes

        have you seen how much furious 7 made this weekend?

        it’s not that people don’t want to pay. people don’t want to pay for garbge azz noise

      • Banksy

        Stop it bruh. Furious has a loyal fan base that will go see them regardless also value is increased through scarcity, so most of those sales came on the back of Paul Walkers Death. The same way Big and Pac’s album sales went up when they died. The people feel like they’re never going to see him again so they went out in droves. Sure the movie is probably dope but Paul death is the icing on the cake for the Studio. Not trying to disrespect the dead but it’s the truth.

      • Edward Mayes

        you made the point… build your base make your money
        how do you build your base by not putting out hot garbage and calling it a classic

        and fanbase or not
        none of the previous six movies did anywhere near 100 on the first weekend let alone over the first week 300 worldwide even with movie piracy
        put out good product and people will buy it ask tyler perry how he blew up

      • Banksy

        And you missed my point. I said that Pauls death is what I believe took them over the edge in terms of sales. We’ll see what Fast and Furious 8 does numbers wise. But the point remains, most people are looking at Jay as “a rich nigga trying to get richer” and I’m saying that he is not the only one yet people, (specially black people) never question them. Like I’ve never heard a single black person complain what Louie V charges close to a g for a belt, knowing good and well that Louis Vuitton’s money is straight. We never trip on Tom Ford selling soap for $200.00. Most people just buy it just to say they’re washing their ass with Tom Ford soap. What does his soap do that Dove’s doesn’t? Or better yet how does it benefit the customer who bought it? If we’re going to be critical of rich niggas getting money then we need to be critical of every rich nigga getting money, not just Jay.

      • Edward Mayes

        and you’re ignoring the entire setup and model – number 7 means 1-6 made enough to warrant a seventh and if it so be an eight

        some people complain about jay so be it
        the problem with your comparison

        a physical consumable has a longer shelf life in the mind of consumers than digital information
        people are willing to pay 200 dollars for headphones and complain about 20 for music primarily because
        a – it’s not 20 and i own it or 9.99 (thank you wwe network) and for something i never own
        the price is a legacy cost and what does it benefit the consumer?
        or b- the music is not that great and tends to turn off the consumer

        you might take it personal because it’s jay
        I assure you he or his company ain’t the only one.

      • Banksy

        You’re either missing my point entirely or on purpose. I know Fast and Furious is one of (if not the most) the most successful film franchises in history. But I also know that Paul’s death helped them break the record they just did. The same way when Big dropped Ready to Die it sold 3 million when he was alive and the moment he died, Life After Death sold 10 million. Nothing sells better than a dead artist, or in this case actor. All that aside I truly believe if Tidal was launched by an unknown it wouldn’t of been met with all the resistance and scrutiny it has. Because most people know the artists behind it. We know how successful they all are and specially how much money they all have and who wants to give money to a rich person? Be real is you ran in Warren Buffett or Bill Gates and they asked you to loan $20 you wouldn’t look at them funny? Of course you would. That’s how people are looking at this.

      • Edward Mayes

        what resistance?
        goodnight obvious generational gap
        five people or a hundred people on a message board complain
        and that’s suppose to represent an entire populous

        bottom line
        amazon sells music .99 cent a pop nobody cries (maybe some artist but they should be fairly compensated)
        itunes same or similar price point

        beats music damn near the same price point as tidal and apple just paid out the wazzu for it – and beats subscribers ain’t crying about the price point they’re steadily increasing numbers

        tidal may or may not do the same – but to infer a whole community is hating on jay z because people complain about him on a message board

        enjoy your revolution – i’m going to bed

      • Dark Matters

        So, you’re suggesting that people knew Furious 7 wasn’t garbage before they saw it? Nonsensical. The fact is if people were able to watch Furious 7 for free they would value it less and subsequently due to lost revenue, fewer and fewer good films would be made. That is partially what is happening to music.

      • Edward Mayes

        based previous history most who paid to see it either were fans or brought into the marketing

        either way you can’t asses value without addressing outlets and mediums
        theater goers go to the movies because they want to see a movie
        dvd purchasers the same principle
        television viewers the same principle

        musicians particularly rappers and those too lazy to put sweat behind their work.. blame the public for record sales
        but what is it you’re putting out
        5 garbage titles before you come up with an actual classic and you want the consumer to support you while you find yourself
        what are you providing for the consumer?

      • Dark Matters

        So, you’re going to tell me for example, that Kanye West sold less copies of his last album than J Cole not because people automatically chose to download it for free, but because it was “garbage”?

      • Edward Mayes

        add to it kanye’s behavior and other nonmusical stuff

        the bottom line is if people don’t want to buy what you’re selling
        it’s not their fault it’s yours

        personally you might have enjoyed kanye’s release i haven’t heard it
        based on his previous work i have no interest in spending a dollar for his music
        it’s a personal decision.

      • Dark Matters

        Going by your logic the reason people steal from stores or elsewhere is because that which they’re stealing is garbage and without value, rather than the fact that people have the opportunity and the desire for what they’re stealing. Man – it must be a slow day upstairs. I think you ought to get some sleep. Rest your brain a little.

      • Edward Mayes

        it’s a personal decision – you can quantify anyway you choose
        at the end of the day, it’s a personal decision

        everything in the world didn’t come in a box
        it doesn’t fit all neatly in a box
        but based on broad generalizations and categorizations
        you winnow the points down to fit any narrative you choose

        just remember the answer’s always in the back of the book

        individuals make decisions on what’s best for the individual

      • Edward Mayes

        here’s the kicker

        why pay the bootlegger 5 or 10 dollars for the latest release when you can spend that same money to go see it at a theater (cue those moaning it cost more or less in whatever city)

        perceived value to the consumer – even though the bootleg is likely a degraded garbage version people pay because the perception of value gratifies the need to consume. at the end of the day perception rules
        and whether whomever makes a dime or a dollar
        there will be those who perceive it positively or negatively

      • 5% Hov

        15million people pay for Spotify….WTF?

        Your generation is paying nigga – my generation dubbed shit off the radio.

    • Dark Matters

      Never mind broke ass black people. They’re so conditioned to poverty and disenfranchisement they can’t stand a black person getting money. It gives them heart palpitations.

  5. chosenxeno

    There’s a $9.99 version of Tidal. There’s a $9.99 version of Tidal. There’s a $9.99 version of Tidal. There’s a $9.99 version of Tidal. There’s a $9.99 version of Tidal. There’s a $9.99 version of Tidal. Didja hear? lol

    In all seriousness people keep complaining that Tidal in $20 dollars. That’s for the Hi-Fi version which is better in quality than other streaming services including the $9.99 version…of Tidal. I am using the free trial atm. I probably won’t subscribe because my iTunes library is pretty stacked:P

  6. xxthoughtxx

    All these artists have to do is make GOOD MUSIC. you never heard anybody complain about the cost of music from the 1990s back, WHY because artist in every genre were giving great music, fast forward till now the music isn’t all that great, more then 80% of the music today will not be playing on your oldies radio channel, meaning this music has no soul, its premature, soon hiphop will be like rock n roll, no more because the creative aspect has been lost behind the internet, everybody think they are a star, and now we are all critics, remember how the critic would get the album at least a month before the people now the people make the decisions and most people now are “followers” not true “listeners”,, just like all your fav social MEDIA people “follow”, and that’s not inherently a hiphop thing because true hiphop heads are listeners….. I think tidal will work, WHY PAY. these people have to figure out a way to give back to the consumer, never have they given us a free CONCERT Tour, not even once, but complain we don’t pay them enough lol lmao, teachers get paid shit smh and these fool got millions, but couldn’t even give back.. I CAN REMEBER IN TH ELATE 80s & EARLY 90s RAPPERS FIGHTING AGAINST LIQUOR STORES IN OUR HOODS NOW YOUR FAV RAPPER IS SELLING YOU LIQUOR THE NUMBER ONE DRUG IN THE WORLD SMH … CANT TRUST THESE NEW NIGGAZ

      • xxthoughtxx

        Crazy right, but the truth is id love to hear her then, but her music doesn’t move my soul, we are living in the age of “MOMENT MUSIC”

    • Sean Power

      in the 90’s there was no there option to get music other dub off a tape, you can’t even compare
      9..99 a month for unlimited music is great if want compare to the the 90’s where that would only get you a single not even a album

      • xxthoughtxx

        The major difference is the music in the 90s far out weighed what’s out now, so people didn’t mind paying for music, if something is good people will pay top dollar in any time period

  7. IceBergSlim

    Man. I am not paing for this when I can gt it free.. Ths bamma got enough cake and got the nerve to be on ths joint crying man please ..Talk to your record company who gets a 46 percent cut from these companies like Pandora..Pay for tidal oh no slim.. I have copped all this cats album paid for.now if I’m not in the house playing my CD’s or istening to what I may have already dowloaded cool but if I’m out chillin and listening to music on my phone.. I’m not paying for it

  8. dru523

    But are they going to go at Google Music or iTunes? Do those 2 share profits differently?, or are they just scared to come at the gatekeepers of technology?

    • Sean Power

      if tidal get the support they will be force to change the policy, just by all the artist jumping shipping

      • dru523

        True, but I think it’ll be difficult since everything is based around the OS. Google & Apple will have the ultimate say so in regards to what apps are published in their market.

  9. seendadream

    the days of simply writing a song and making a fortune are over. it was good while it lasted. consider yourself lucky you’ve reaped some of the benefits. you will NEVER make that money off of your music again. stop trying….

  10. jacksjus

    Jay will lose this battle. Spotify is free unless you can’t tolerate the 30 second ads here and there. $20/mo is too much.

    Pandora, Spotify, iTunes Radio are all free.

  11. Slaughtr

    Fck Tidal Wave all it does is further kill the artist, and fck streaming you loose money as an artist again.

  12. Riko7467

    I’m not going to pay for that bullshit gayz is washed up. I will go buy that new scarface album when it drops and I’m buying all gunits new shit

  13. RichFromBX

    when you charge the user double for your service, then yes, you can easily pay the artist more than the competition. What I think is missing here is how many more people are attending concerts and shows as a result of hearing a song on Spotify that they might not have had the opportunity hear without Spotify.

    There have been artist who have sold 3 or 4 million albums and still in debt to the record label however, because the income from shows goes to the artist and not the label, these artist are still very very well off.

    Jay notes that through Spotify Aloe Blacc only made $4k on 168 million streams but doesn’t say what those 168 million streams would’ve made him through Tidel.

    • eboni

      I dont subscribe to either so correct me if Im wrong…but Spotify is 9.99 and the lower tier of Tidal is also 9.99 right? the 19.99 tier is for the hi-quality audio if I understood the article I read.

      • RichFromBX

        Tidal is $12.99 for the standard service which is 30% more than Spotify with the end user receiving nothing in return for that additional 30%.

        Ultimately the consumer dictates the market. Either the users will be fine with the paying 30% more or they won’t but if your selling point is that you just want to pay artist more with no added benefit to the end user, it’s unlikely paying the higher price will be acceptable.

        Keep in mind that the other services have a free option so the royalty structure accounts for that while Tidal is a subscription service only. It’s great that they want to pay the artist more but they’ll never get the same reach. I’m curious how many spins would it take to get an artist $4,000 and if a paid only service can get that reach. Obviously, because of the higher royalty, it will take less than 168 million but how much less.

    • Dark Matters

      “Jay notes that through Spotify Aloe Blacc only made $4k on 168 million
      streams but doesn’t say what those 168 million streams would’ve made him
      through Tidel.”

      Well, I’m sure all that matters is that the artists who are moving over to Tidal know the difference. Why would he make that info publicly available to his competition? All that matters is that the artist be pleased with it over what the competition is offering.

      • RichFromBX

        you’re crazy if you think Spotify and the others don’t know the royalty structure that Tidal is offering. The reason Spotify can’t/won’t match it because they know they would have to raise their prices.

        if your going to make the fact that the artist will be paid the highest royalties of all other services as a main selling point than you should back it up with stats. Making up numbers here but let’s say Spotify was paying the highest at 2%, all Tidal has to do is pay 2.25% percent and they can legitimately claim that they pay the highest royalties. Applying what we know about Aloe Blacc, all the additional 0.25% would’ve paid him was an additional $10.

        Which is a bigger pitch “Highest paid royalties in the business” or “make a few pennies more with Tidal”

      • 5% Hov

        Nope. They dont pay the royalties cause they dont have to.
        No competition.

        Hov went over your head again nicca.

      • RichFromBX

        you Jay Z dick riders will never learn. Tidal will not succeed at $12.95 and $19.95 price points. Spotify also offer discounts to students on the premium service. They will see a bump in users over the next 30 to 60 days because of the free trial but the conversion rate from trial to paid will be terrible.

        Will he raise some awareness and help artist negotiate better rates with streaming services, probably so no argument there but Tidal will not be consumed anywhere near the rate of Spotify and Pandora. It will go the way of Rhapsody.

      • 5% Hov


        (Reuters) – Shares in music streamer Aspiro, a majority of which was bought earlier this month by hip-hop star Jay-Z, soared on Tuesday to as much as 11 times the price at which remaining shares will be acquired in a compulsory squeeze-out only days away.

        In what appeared to reflect investors clamouring too late for a piece of Aspiro’s music streaming service Tidal, the shares were up 938 percent at 11 Swedish crowns just before trading was halted.

  14. Getatme

    more people say they wont pay but some seem not to have a problem with it. I just think they want to uphold the integrity of the transaction for music since it has been devalued by the influx of popcorn rappers.

    We gotta understand who he’s representing in this case and its not the consumer. Its the artists. But if u wan to rep for the artists then double charging the consumer isn’t the way, especially when we can get it for free. How about musical artists producers creators and performers form a union to protect artist who are not being compensated?

    • ItGoesDownINtheDM

      they will get consumers i know alot of people who already pay for more than 1 streaming services google play and spotify … but like some people were stating this could get out of hand … cause you also got beats audio etc……. no telling who else will pop up in the future ….. sadily these guys arent realizing thier fans gotta eat too … $20/per month doesnt sound too bad but after a few years done went by that starts to add up …. me personally i dont like BILLS anything i can pay off .. i do just that … my goal is the only bills ill have @ the most is a morgage payment, insurance & cell phone … anything else if i cant pay for it right there then i cant afford it and need to wait on it …. that includes cars … ive own 7 cars so far and i only financed one of them and that experience insured me that buying my cars was the right move to make … sn i brought my first car cash when i was 14 no drug money … 🙂

      • jacksjus

        Here is why $20/mo is bad. When you add it up that equals $240/yr. Now ask yourself when was the last time that you bought $240 worth of CDs in one year?

      • ItGoesDownINtheDM

        lets say on average $20 per cd thats 12 cds … i def dont think ive ever brought that many cds def not albums …. but back in the day of cassettes … maybe between albums and singles i prob pulled that off but then again tapes werent in the $10-$20 range …. but i totally agree with you … i think a better way where they can compensate the artist and make it more affordable to the consumer is doing quartly or yearly subscriptions …. maybe more like $20 per quarter or maybe $50-60 yearly like the xbox live subscription ….

      • jacksjus

        I’m sure you aren’t alone however for the majority there isn’t $240 worth of good music coming annually. It hasn’t been that good since 98.

  15. meanygreene

    I wonder if it got nas’ music. With that being said, “what, you think you gettin’ girls now because of yo’ looks, NEGRO PLEASE”.

  16. 5% Hov

    Catch up, niggas

    Damn you fadin’ ’em, Hov. How you gave ’em that?
    Audemaurs Piguet, with the alligator strap
    Sick of y’all niggas with ya Now & Later raps
    Rap about it now, hope you get it later
    Do a couple shows, hope you niggas is savin’ up


    • The Legendary Troll

      No. Jay is trying to stop people from stealing music. How would you like it if people showed up to your job expecting you to work for free? He just trying to make sure artist are properly compensated for their work

  17. 5% Hov

    (Reuters) – Shares in music streamer Aspiro, a majority of which was bought earlier this month by hip-hop star Jay-Z, soared on Tuesday to as much as 11 times the price at which remaining shares will be acquired in a compulsory squeeze-out only days away.

    In what appeared to reflect investors clamouring too late for a piece of Aspiro’s music streaming service Tidal, the shares were up 938 percent at 11 Swedish crowns just before trading was halted.


    • ItGoesDownINtheDM

      def i should of been up on it … most of the time when entertainers create business ventures its usually not publically traded … the last time this happen it was with 50 cent and his just soared just as high but also took a serious dive and plateau so def watch out with this one …..

      • 5% Hov

        they were due to – but delisted early as the price hit 11 Skr,

        I got this from a Reuters Article published 31/03/2015

      • ItGoesDownINtheDM

        cool makes sense … but glad to hear stuff like this def keeps me on my toes … people dont know you land a stock thats going for less than a $1 thats on the rise !!!! that better than dope $$$$ right there lol #rs

      • 5% Hov

        word. I brought Aspiro in December for $0.63 per share…. if only i’d brough more I would be laughing right now…

        Hov is first Hiphop nigga to buy into a Publicly traded company but niggas act like he aint pushing these boundaries daily….


      • ItGoesDownINtheDM

        hey NOW YOU GOT THE EXPERIENCE im sure you learned from it and next time its on !!!!! but actually 50 cent was when SMS was sleek audio they were own by a company that was publically traded i cant remember the name but they were the ones suing fif for stealing thier audio product lol ……. but anytime someone of thier magnitude (50 cent jayz etc…) partners up with a publically traded company and its currently a penny stock … cop up !! only if you can afford to lose what you put in tho just in case LOL …. but yeah ive been waiting for that next opp …. trying to stay ahead of the curve we done seen so many companys blow up in the last 10 years from amazon to netflix …. companies we could of made some serious coin on just by investing in them …

      • ItGoesDownINtheDM

        and the success of netflix def makes me interested in Aspiro which is the same business model except instead of movies its music WITH an higher premium subscription rate ……

      • 5% Hov

        Nah Sleek werent publicly traded when 50 acquired.

        And im willing to bet in a few years when Aspiro exits it will be worth a bullion or so easy.

        We will see,

      • ItGoesDownINtheDM

        you are 100% right sleek wasnt public it was the company that owned sleek …. i just cant remember the name i remember the ticker started with the letter H thats all i can remember …. this was like back in 2009 …….

      • 5% Hov

        But he didnt buy the parent company… so its not the same thing. SEC filings and protocol doesn’t apply…

      • ItGoesDownINtheDM

        yup thats why he got sued for he ran with that companys product and rebranded it as sms …. and i did some research and found out the name of the company was HNHI (ticker name) aka TV GOODs … is who own Sleek audio and was the portion that was publically traded where we could take advantage of the hype 50 was creating …. same situation with jayz and Tidal which isnt publically traded but Aspiro who owns Tidal is a publically traded company … WELL WAS !!!!! until april 2nd 🙁 …………..

      • 5% Hov

        No dude u got it backwards.

        Aspiro was publicly traded at the time of Jay-z purchase.
        HNHI sold sleek to 50…. is still public.
        Not the same thing.

      • ItGoesDownINtheDM

        i doubt itll be worth a billion tho too much competition….. and its not innovating enuff all its doing is giving a better business model for artist … there are already many Tidals that exist out here and lets not forget the pirate sites that still exist … not knocking the hustle just giving my opinion on the future of this move … its def going to be a money maker business wise and stock wise if they ever do another ipo … but i dont see it pulling in “beats” type numbers which was an innovated product …… apple was innovated …. netflix during thier initial creation was innovating … this is more of an improvement that only impacts the artist …. however them sticking everyone up for $20 subscription fee is something to see .. thats a nice price margin for a digital product … netflix is only an $8 service and its valued @ 25 billion so who knows def will be interesting to see im def not 100% sure about my opinion and would invest in this move if i could ……..

      • 5% Hov

        There is hardly any competition.
        they are the only ones promising high royalty for artists…
        and its probably worth a billion already based on last Tuesday share price lol

        and for the 800th time – Tidal is 9.99 for the same service… SAME PRICE.

        artists will migrate once they realised the payoff in royalty fees – as more artists more to tiidal so do the fanss,,,,


Leave a Reply