Hacker News Reader

Comment by TillE | Hacker News Reader

That's pretty much it. It's a modest marketing investment which probably makes them look better than if they'd just done the right thing in the first place. I doubt it was calculated like that from the start, but that must be how it looks to them now.

View on HN

Yeah, my guess is that their legal department negotiated the hell out of these contracts with the labels (which is what they're supposed to do) and obtained a concession. Someone at the labels probably went to Taylor Swift about this and told her what was happening, knowing that she would cause a public stink about it and Apple would cave.

Anyway, it's not as if Apple and the labels have a cozy relationship -- so all's fair in love, war and contract negotiations. I'm sure Apple has plenty of other pricing / payment levers they can use to claw back most of what they're losing anyway (which probably isn't much at all).

> Someone at the labels probably went to Taylor Swift about this and told her what was happening

I think you are painting her as more naive than she is. She’s been critical of streaming services in the past, I’m sure she (and her entourage/business partners) were following Apple’s announcement closely without the labels telling them anything.

Yeah, by "went to Taylor Swift" I really meant "went to her business manager" or whoever. She's actually pretty damn business savvy, though when your mom is a marketing executive and your dad is an investment banker, a little will rub off.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com