“Available exclusively at…”
That is a time-honored business maneuver in which a brand invests in exclusive distribution of a product, forcing users to buy from that company. The financial success equation is simple: Revenue/Cost > 1.00 over time. The consumer proposition can be disagreeable, inasmuch as customers are forced to consume the product from a single source which might not conveniently fit into their consuming habits.
Spotify has posted a rationale for its many podcast exclusives: Making Spotify’s Exclusive Content Inclusive to Creators and Listeners. (Read it HERE.) That title is a head-scratcher, and the article fails to clarify in our opinion.
“We want to acknowledge that some have pointed out to us that their favorite Spotify-produced podcasts have disappeared from their usual podcast feeds,” the post says. One point Spotify seems keen to make is that listening remains free — “exclusive” doesn’t necessarily mean “paid.” Fair enough, though beside the point.
The company acknowledges that when podcasts disappear from users’ apps and feeds, it creates confusion and could force a change of habit in order to keep listening. “Although this may require a shift in listening habits, we want to share more about why we are doing this.”
The explanation is ineffective and baffling in our opinion, but seems to hinge on the value of a platform dedicated to streaming, as opposed to the open podcast ecosystem where downloads have always been the currency of a show’s value. Does Spotify hope to displace RSS? “We believe that streaming is the future of all audio listening and that our technology can provide the opportunity for the podcast ecosystem to grow, innovate, and ultimately create more opportunities for creators across the globe.”
The article details two examples — The Get Up (a morning playlist that mixes host banter with songs) and Black Girl Songbook (a Black artist discovery show that, again, mixes talk and music from the Spotify catalog). Neither of those examples has any bearing on Spotify’s exclusivity strategy. By using Spotify’s music catalog, they legally cannot be distributed outside of Spotify … they must be exclusive.
We don’t know why Spotify was prompted to post such an ineffective and seemingly unnecessary apologia for its perfectly obvious and traditional business tactic: Exclusive representation of popular shows can drive user acquisition and retention. It can also anger listeners. Spotify’s confounding post does nothing to solve that second part.
.