A Pandora Blog Post You Must Read Right Now (Update 1)
Updated in the final paragraph to include positive analyst sentiment and Pandora's Wednesday stock action.
NEW YORK (TheStreet) -- That's a Twitter exchange I had midday Wednesday. Thanks to "Fitz Hugh Ludlow" for passing on the information.
I didn't see the CNBC treatment of the story, but I hope it was more complete than everything else that has been done on the topic over the last year or so. In case, you don't know what we're talking about, allow me to refresh.
You have probably seen this headline or something like at some point in the last 24 hours or so:
Pandora Users Played David Lowery's Song a Million Times and All He Got Was $16.89
What have I been bitching about for months? Context. Media outlets pick up these Pandora
But, I digress.
At his blog, theunderstatement, Michael DeGusta does an excellent job setting the record straight and putting Lowery, who is complaining about how much he made off of Cracker's hit "Low," in his place.
While I have not yet gone through DeGusta's numbers with a fine tooth comb, at a glance, they seem accurate, even if off by a percentage point here or there. I'm quite confident, however, that if there are errors, they do not detract from the must-see numbers or the must-read analysis DeGusta provides.
Chest bumps and fist pumps to DeGusta, who astutely states:
None of this means Pandora ought to pay less in royalties. On the contrary, it seems quite likely that others should be paying more. And perhaps the non-artists involved in the transaction shouldn't be taking 53% of the total for their services. But attacking Pandora with intentionally misleading statistics just undermines the credibility of the argument.
Bingo. The system's broken. That's not Pandora's fault, but, of course, there are moves Pandora can make to take the high road and move this whole chaotic conversation forward to a sound resolution.
Update: Despite Microsoft's
--Written by Rocco Pendola in Santa Monica, Calif.