It's very uncommon that we find a reason for comparing an apple to, for instance, a fridge. A rather common thing we hear when an ecosystem gradually is about to start changing is that somebody says that it's not good enough. The new kind of service, the new thing we see there. Like for instance, Spotify was fairly bad in the beginning. Actually, they did launch before, well not iTunes but before iPhone. So it didn't exist an app in the beginning? Yeah, correct. It was a rather bad service that didn't have all songs at that time either. So yes, correct. It was bad quality. Now somebody would say that it's still bad quality and the thing is if you think it's bad quality in a new ecosystem, by definition you're right because quality is actually owned by the consumer. The thing is quality is not owned by a provider. So if you claim that the music industry today, when it's disrupted and we have streaming services, is providing you with lower quality compared to yesterday. You're right and I have no decent reasonable possibility to question that. It could for instance be that you prefer vinyl records and you think it's better sound quality, signal quality. If using vinyl records today and you've come to the conclusion that it's fewer vinyl records that you could find in the music industry, which is correct, because it's not that many produced anymore. Even though a luxury segment with people who really like sound quality is existing. So you could definitely buy really expensive vinyl record players today and hear that song quality. Or it could for instance be that one of your favorite musicians have actually gone bankrupt during this process. Then you could for good reason, claim that it's lower-quality today compared to yesterday because you're not able to listen to that musician anymore. So you're right. The thing is quality is not owned by the providers. It's in the hands of the end customer and if an end customer says, "it's not better quality today.", it isn't. But the thing is the system we have, the system we see either the previous one or the new one is implicitly indirectly defined by the majority of end customers. It seems like the majority of end consumers of music today have decided that they find streaming services to be better-quality compared to yesterday. Now is it really better quality or lower quality? Well, as I said it depends on how we see it. What all this comes down to is actually that there is no point of comparing the new system with the old system or the old system with a new system. Somethings in some aspects could be better. Some things in other aspects could be worse and then it depends on who we are how we evaluate these parameters. Simply two different worlds and in most cases, there is no point of comparing well, we could compare an apple and an orange and conclude that both of them are fruit and they taste differently. But it's very uncommon that we find a reason for comparing an apple to, for instance, a fridge. That is the best metaphor to see these systems, It's just two totally different worlds. In most cases it's in the way for us if we try to compare it particularly with the old criteria because criteria tend to change. So having that set comparing with the old preferences could be in our way for understanding how the new system is evolving. In most cases, it's for better trying to understand how the new system is evolving compared to sticking to the way the world did look before.
