134 karma · joined April 16, 2014
Instead, it appears Apple and the major labels believe that three free months of Apple Music threatens to hurt Spotify's userbase growth at a crucial time for Spotify (fundraising pre-IPO). The industry has lost its faith in freemium (Apple Music, trial aside, has no free tier) and either this will kill Spotify or get them in line.
The indies, who overall can't afford losing three months of revenue, are just caught in the cross fire.
If anything, the "unfairness" of the contract terms is a reflection of the HUGE amount of leverage the record labels have because their content is so valuable. Is it evil for the labels to attempt to maximize their profit while minimizing Spotify's?
> On a hike up Camelback Mountain in Arizona, he pitched the idea to executives from Williams-Sonoma, who agreed to be the client for his class.
Just casually pitched an exec and got a brisket sponsor, no big deal...
Are these experiments dollars-and-cents profitable? Almost certainly not.
1. http://pando.com/2014/07/08/boxs-updated-s-1-contains-onerou...
But there almost always is in reality, if there's a reasonable suspect. The only exception seems to be with law enforcement officers.
[1] http://nonchalantrepreneur.com/post/70130104170/bitcoin-and-...
[1] http://qz.com/248572/squares-search-for-a-viable-business-mo...
http://www.quodb.com/#search/we've%20got%20company
Incoming is the moral equivalent (and is much more popular), but is less impressive since it's only one word.
1. Uber drivers don't make as much as Uber PR claims (based on data Uber provided).
2. Uber the business doesn't seem to be wildly profitable, or at least not in a defendable way (based partly on data Uber provided).
3. The large amount of capital being injected into Uber are not indicators of growing real value, but instead indicators of a weaker-than-acknowledged business.
It's possible for all of the above to be true but for drivers and riders to both be very happy with the service. Especially since UberX seems to be offering rides for below market prices but the drivers are getting switching bonuses and per-hour guarantees (see elsewhere in this thread).
type Person struct {
Name string
Address Address
}
is equivalent to type Person struct {
Name string
Address
}
And in fact, these are equivalent too: p.Address.Zip = "01313"
p.Zip = "01313"
http://play.golang.org/p/aKH3YxT5MbGo doesn't really support is-a for structs, as pointed out elsewhere in the comments here. Interface implementation is the only way to get the sort of "this type can be substituted for this other type" idea that is-a inheritance provides in other languages.
Also, as an investor in such a late round, there are likely multiple provisions for getting your money back such that while a large investment, it may not be particularly risky. Even if Uber crashes and burns and gets acquired for only $3B, investors in this round probably still double their money.