Just a heads up.
As some of you know, Soundcloud is in financial trouble.
http://www.factmag.com/2016/02/11/soundcloud-financial-report-44m-losses/
 
However I have just read that the company which owns Soundcloud has itself just filed for bankruptsy.
 
As products like Sonar incorporate features regarding Soundcloud, I expect many of us have files etc at Soundcloud we may like to recover just in case their homepage suddenly becomes an 'error 44' !
 
 

They lost $44M but were willing to posit
==========================
 
In a statement given to FACT, SoundCloud said that the figures “reflect those of a company in a strong growth stage,” which still has “over 18 million creators are using the platform, sharing well over 110 million tracks, and reaching 175 million monthly active listeners.”
 
==============================
 
So they have a lot of files and they lost $44M but it's indicative of strong growth.
 
ROTFLMAO+LSHMCOMN=LOL

Yeah, hopefully it wont go defunct, but as I said, the owners have filed which leads me to think Soundcloud becomes an asset as part of that action. Im not an expert on that stuff but I think it works something like that. Id be gutted to see it go.

how long can a company give away free service,
before they go belly up?
 

Well that's just great. Really though it turned into a pile of annoying crap shortly after I signed up. The original design (or the one I stumbled in on) was simple and did it's job. Now with the completely unrelated autoplay crap and weird falsh design (or whatever it is) it's a bear to deal with and annoying to use.
 
But it seems to be the standard embed tool for a lot of soundplaying on news articles and websites so if they go mammories up it could be devastating for a lot of archived webpages. Also the fact that SO many sites use them (assumingly the pro version) it's a little weird they'd be struggling like that. Sounds like mismanagement or perhaps outright vulture capitalism.
 
Also with HTML5 embed stuff gaining traction (which AFAIK has a decent audio embed function) maybe it's simply becoming obsolete. However the server storage and reliable streaming for larger audio files is a huge part of it which makes HTML5 solutions not so great for the average shmuck.
 
Meh... thanks for the heads up. I've been meaning to look into other solutions anyway.
 
Cheers.

It's a strong brand. Someone will buy it.

Taylor Swift will no doubt be pleased to know that online music distribution can't support online music distributors either. In future, the money making model to replace SoundCloud will be to charge all the wannabees who post music a fee every time someone downloads their work, and making the download free to the user. According to the superstar-centric interpretation of the benefits of online music, a small fee to have your music heard should be amply repaid when you fill a stadium with your new fans at $60.00 a ticket. 

I only have juan fan.

sharke
It's a strong brand. Someone will buy it.

It, at its core, is a great service. Someone just made some dumb design mistakes IMO.
 
Maybe a new set of corporate overlords is just what they need to tidy up the design.
 
Seems to have purged some of the weirdo crap Roland was doing to us.
 
*ducks*

bapu
They lost $44M but were willing to posit
==========================
 
In a statement given to FACT, SoundCloud said that the figures “reflect those of a company in a strong growth stage,” which still has “over 18 million creators are using the platform, sharing well over 110 million tracks, and reaching 175 million monthly active listeners.”
 
==============================
 
So they have a lot of files and they lost $44M but it's indicative of strong growth.
 
ROTFLMAO+LSHMCOMN=LOL

Sounds like a typical successful internet content provider/company - it's worth quite a lot of money but no-one can work out how to run it to make a profit....