The problem I have with these sorts of articles is the "they". I love bandcamp, I'm not happy to see it being cut way down, but who is at fault here? It's not Songtradr. And it's not Epic. It's the original founders who sold the majority shares.
They took it from being a company with a culture that they built, and a community of employees and users and musicians, and said "We are ok with this all going who knows where if we cash out now for enough money." They know damn well anything could happen from then on. Any hiring or firing decisions from that point on are a part of someone's money-making plan that (almost always) ends in another sale (whether private or IPO). Did anyone honestly think Epic was going to be a good custodian?
No one has to do that. Songtrader and other giants and all the PE big funds in the world can't make someone do that. The world is full of companies that never sell 50% of the shares because they care about what they have built more than cash and would prefer to keep a modestly profitable business going that employs their friends and families and continues to embody their values. Some of these even take outside investment from private equity funds - I've done diligences for them - where the deal is very clearly that less than 50% is ever going to be for sale. (These are called "minority" or "growth" investment, less common, but they exist a plenty.)
Ableton famously refuses to take outside investment because the founders care more about the thing they have made and their position in the music and technology culture than they do about being as rich as possible. And they have been an excellent new owner for Cycling 74.
I hope bandcamp makes it, because I still think it's a great alternative to other options. But I'm under no illusion that it's the same thing it was in the beginning. That ship sailed with the first transaction.
They took it from being a company with a culture that they built, and a community of employees and users and musicians, and said "We are ok with this all going who knows where if we cash out now for enough money." They know damn well anything could happen from then on. Any hiring or firing decisions from that point on are a part of someone's money-making plan that (almost always) ends in another sale (whether private or IPO). Did anyone honestly think Epic was going to be a good custodian?
No one has to do that. Songtrader and other giants and all the PE big funds in the world can't make someone do that. The world is full of companies that never sell 50% of the shares because they care about what they have built more than cash and would prefer to keep a modestly profitable business going that employs their friends and families and continues to embody their values. Some of these even take outside investment from private equity funds - I've done diligences for them - where the deal is very clearly that less than 50% is ever going to be for sale. (These are called "minority" or "growth" investment, less common, but they exist a plenty.)
Ableton famously refuses to take outside investment because the founders care more about the thing they have made and their position in the music and technology culture than they do about being as rich as possible. And they have been an excellent new owner for Cycling 74.
I hope bandcamp makes it, because I still think it's a great alternative to other options. But I'm under no illusion that it's the same thing it was in the beginning. That ship sailed with the first transaction.