One thing I want to add, and shortly because I know this belongs in another thread but it’s part of why I’d like us to create a sort of “S2O taskforce” where we have a few meeting about how to best market/sell/explain Stream 2 Own to people.
This point by @zetto.plus is CRITICAL, like, I can’t say it loud enough :
"We need to add copy here that includes figures that help assure listeners they aren’t going to spend more money streaming through our service because of our model.
If a listener spins [x] amount of new songs in a day, how much are they paying? If a listener spins [x] amount of songs they’ve already played at least once, how much are they spending? And how much does that add up to a month?
These are the kind of numbers we need to succinctly and gracefully feature in this area."
People NEED this breakdown, they need us not to hide these numbers, they need us to explain to them why its good and what kind of behaviors S2O nurtures and encourage, the good and the bad, but most importantly clarity.
Since S2O is a “user based pricing” model (ie. no fixed pricing it’s based on consumption habits, someone who just wants to discover and never listen to the same thing twice benefits from S2O a thousand times more than someone who wants to listen just to the 30 same albums all year, at which points S2O equates to buying 30 albums a year, in one case the value compared to Spotify is miles ahead and artists still get more support, in the other, it means spending possibly twice more BUT in turn all the money goes to supported artists directly) we need to make it clear what are the perks compared to the same behaviors in other streaming related model. I feel like if we hide this under an undecypherable explanation where each people are left to do their own math, it might appear to be fishy and predatory.
So we need to do our homework and explain our vision better, which is by being super pragmatic and putting ourselves at the position of a listener who counts his/her money every month and respect that reality, instead of having it all laid out from a bird’s view that doesn’t really correspond to anyone’s lived experience.
Anyhow that’s all but that’s a lot.
Addendum : I’ve read through all of @zetto.plus 's correction and I agree with all of them especially the exclamation points, it’s really not something I appreciate in general in those documents as I think it’s just better to let people be excited by themselves rather than try to provoke that excitement when we’re just proposing ideas to them.