Spotify

What companies are leading in innovation in Europe in 2025?

Europe's Most Innovative Companies

Leaders in all industries rely more than ever on Big Tech—and appreciate the giants that deliver, at scale, without drama.

World's Most Admired Companies

The European edition of the Fortune 500, ranking companies by revenue.

Fortune 500 Europe

The first-ever European edition of the Fortune 500, ranking companies by revenue. 

F500 EUROPE 2023 SPOTIFY Music And Sound Streaming Platforms Stock Photos

Spotify Technology ranks 285 with $12.3 billion in revenue (up 7.9%). The Sweden-headquartered entertainment company has 8,359 employees and made a loss of $452 million.

These innovative companies are laying the foundations for robust growth—and outsize returns for shareholders.

FUTURE-50-2023-Spotify

Spotify has steadily pulled ahead in recent years in the streaming-audio wars: The company now claims an industry-leading market share of about 30%, with nearly 600 million monthly users and 226 million paid subscribers. Spotify continues to be at the center of heated debates over how much—or how little—musicians get paid for their work. But its growing influence in podcasting and live music as well as music streaming, along with its pricing power, have made investors optimistic. (Above: Dominican artist Natti Natasha performs at a Spotify-sponsored concert in Chicago.) Analysts forecast that Spotify’s revenue will top $14 billion in 2023 and grow another 19% in 2024.

The Future 50

Explore this year's ranking of the 50 companies with the best long-term growth potential.

Future 50-2020-Spotify

<p class="p1">Daniel Ek’s pioneering audio platform has always been a clever piece of Swedish kit—a two-sided marketplace that makes money both from listeners and creators. With the live-entertainment industry on its knees, thanks to a pandemic, Spotify has a fresh window of opportunity to double down on artist services and exclusive content (such as podcasts) and has proved effective at wooing customers away from competitors like Apple.</p>

Fortune's proprietary methodology allows us to zero in on the 50 global firms that are best poised to deliver—and continue delivering—above average gains.

Future 50

Overall Score

Sector

Key Financials (last Fiscal Year)

Revenues ($M)

Profits ($M)

Assets ($M)

Total Stockholder Equity ($M)

Profit Ratios

Profit as % of Revenues

Profits as % of Assets

Profits as % of Stockholder Equity

Industry

Current All-Star Rank

Previous All-Star Rank

Industry Rank

Previous Industry Rank

Innovation

People Management

Use of Corporate Assets

Social Responsibility

Quality of Management

Financial Soundness

Long-Term Investment Value

Quality of Products/Services

Global Competitiveness

Strongest dimension

Years on list

Country

Spotify (SPOT): Company Profile, Stock Price, News, Rankings

legacy

spotify

Spotify (SPOT): Company Profile, Stock Price, News, Rankings | Fortune

Dave Lozo

Morning Brew

Spotify’s 696 million users can now message each other directly—incentivizing users to keep their eyes and ears on the app for longer

/2025/08/27/spotifys-696-million-users-can-now-message-each-other-directly-incentivizing-users-to-keep-their-eyes-and-ears-on-the-app-for-longer/

Andrew Nusca

The terms of the U.S. government’s 10% Intel stake

/2025/08/25/the-terms-of-the-u-s-governments-10-intel-stake/

Elon Musk is still the highest-paid CEO in history

/2025/08/05/elon-musk-is-still-the-highest-paid-ceo-in-history/

The EU has a bone to pick with Temu

/2025/07/30/eu-temu-illegal-products-global-500-spotify-earnings-palo-alto-networks-cyberark/

Emily Steinberger

Photos: Tim Cook, Sam Altman and Silicon Valley’s elite arrive at the ‘summer camp for billionaires’

/2025/07/09/photos-silicon-valley-elite-arrive-sun-valley-conference/

Lucas Shaw

Bloomberg

Spotify signs Bill Simmons, its $250 million man, to a new deal

https://fortune.com/2025/03/12/spotify-bill-simmons-podcast-ringer/?itm_source=parsely-api

Sunny Nagpaul

20 years ago Rolling Stone promised subscribers a 'lifetime' print magazine for just $99—now they’re canceling and readers are 'enraged'

https://fortune.com/2024/06/05/rolling-stone-subscription-lifetime/?itm_source=parsely-api

Ryan Hogg

Spotify CEO Daniel Ek surprised by how much laying off 1,500 employees negatively affected the streaming giant’s operations

https://fortune.com/europe/2024/04/23/spotify-earnings-q1-ceo-daniel-eklaying-off-1500-spotify-employees-negatively-affected-streaming-giants-operations/?itm_source=parsely-api

Spotify's 696 million users can now message each other directly—incentivizing users to keep their eyes and ears on the app for longer

https://fortune.com/2025/08/27/spotifys-696-million-users-can-now-message-each-other-directly-incentivizing-users-to-keep-their-eyes-and-ears-on-the-app-for-longer/?itm_source=parsely-api

https://fortune.com/2025/07/09/photos-silicon-valley-elite-arrive-sun-valley-conference/?itm_source=parsely-api

Spotify’s HR chief says remote staff aren’t ‘children’ as company sticks to work-from-anywhere policy

https://fortune.com/europe/article/spotify-hr-chief-remote-staff-arent-children-company-sticks-to-work-from-anywhere-policy/?itm_source=parsely-api

https://fortune.com/europe/2025/04/29/spotifys-hr-chief-remote-staff-arent-children-work-from-anywhere/?itm_source=parsely-api

David Meyer

Mark Zuckerberg says Europe needs more consistent AI regulation—and even his privacy nemesis agrees

https://fortune.com/2024/09/19/mark-zuckerberg-meta-europe-ai-regulation-inconsistent-max-schrems-gdpr/?itm_source=parsely-api

Tesla's Cybertruck just can't catch a break

https://fortune.com/2025/03/17/tesla-cybertruck-just-cant-catch-a-break/?itm_source=parsely-api

Presenter: Bill Gross, Founder and CEO, ProRata AI; Founder and Chairman, Idealab

Brainstorm AI 2024: Building A Better Model For Creativity

Conferences

I've been an entrepreneur all my life. And as a 16 year old in passing to California, I was reading Fortune Magazine looking up to all the incredible businesses that they spoke about. And then I had a chance to come to all these fortune conferences and learn so much from all of you and all the people at Fortune Magazine. And now here I am on stage telling you about a new idea. So it's really thrilling to be here. Thank you so much. What I want to talk about today is the disruptive world we're living in right now, which is just more disruptive than anything I've ever seen. You. Cue to my slides, please. We are living in wildly disruptive times. And the question is how will creators survive in these times? Think back to all the different technological revolutions and how creators how to adapt to be able to thrive back to the printing press, radio, television and of course the internet. But I think these times are even different than anything we've ever seen before. I think this A I disruption will dwarf anything we've seen in our lifetimes. I put up on this slide four things that I saw in my lifetime which when I saw them I saw thought the world will never be the same. I go back to the IBM PC in 1981. It actually came out the very month I graduated from college. I went down to my local computer land store in Pasadena, California bought a $5000 monochrome machine with two floppy drives and 256 K of ram for $5000 no hard drive because the hard drive hadn't been invented yet. But it completely blew my mind and of course, it changed the world. It led to a whole new form of creativity code and led to trillions of dollars of wealth creation. Then Netscape in 1994 when I saw that, I also felt the world will never be the same. In fact, I was running a company called Knowledge, a venture at the time selling educational software for kids. And we sold that company in 1995. And now I had all these new ideas for internet companies that you could build on top of the browser. I put down my favorite 12 ideas and I was trying to select which one I wanted to start. And I actually decided to start all 12. And the way I did that was by starting idea lab, a technology incubator where I could start all 12 at once under one roof. One of the companies we started based on the browser was a company called Go to. We invented paper click advertising and it completely changed the way monetization worked on the internet. We were really proud of that, but that just shows how new models are needed whenever there's a new platform, a new technology. And of course, the mobile revolution has been talked about already today that changed all of our lives in 1994. When I started looking at Netscape and seeing how powerful it was, there were 30 million browsers in the world, think about how pitiful small that is compared to the number of mobile devices that are on the planet. Now, 5 billion supercomputers in everybody's pockets all over the world. So all these changes were so dramatic. And then November 2022 we're at the twoyear anniversary of CG BT being released. I remember playing it with that, that one day and saying this is going to change everything. And of course it has, it's led to a trillion dollars of wealth creation and expenditures in just two years, not like the PC, which took two decades for that kind of impact to be felt. So when you have something that big, why does it cost so much change? Well, hugely disruptive changes occur when the cost of something approaches zero with the internet, the cost of distribution approach zero with the cloud, the cost of storage approach zero and with generative A I, the cost of knowledge or knowledge creation is approaching zero. So what does that mean for content creators when the cost change that dramatically, this disruptive moment is really, really large. Well, until now one side of the equation, some of the gene A I companies are saying the content must be free. The other side of the equation, the content producers are suing on the one side, you have Mustafa from Microsoft saying everything on the internet can be used for free to train A I models or Sam who is saying we need this copyrighted material for free to make this business model work. On the other side, you have the New York Times, Dow Jones and many, many other companies suing a lot of the generative A I companies because they feel their content is being stolen in a funny tweet Ariel Dumas says I've been told to stop stealing muffins from the bakery. Unfortunately, it's the only way to keep my lucrative muffin stand of business. Everyone is fine with this and of course, there's sarcasm here, but it's maybe not that far from the truth about companies lifting other people's content and using it without paying for it. And that leads to a dilemma today. Well, in almost all other forms of digitization revenue is shared, I'll give you some examples right here on the App Store and on Google Play revenue shared with creators on Spotify revenue shared with the artist. In fact, Spotify shows that you can make a business like this work even with significant revenue share, Spotify's market cap just today crossed $100 billion. They had $16 billion of revenue and $10 billion of revenue was shared with creators. It was shared based on counting the streams that were played youtube shares revenue, full 5050 revenue share sharing revenue with the street, with the person who created the stream, Apple music and also Apple News. Apple News is another example of another method of counting. You can count by streams, you can count by views or downloads. Apple News counts by minutes minutes spent in different media content. And Apple News took in $2.3 billion of subscriptions last year and they paid out 1.15 billion to all the content partners who provide the content and even in the physical world for offline distribution revenue is shared companies like Nielsen Ascap BM I count and share revenue in those use cases as well. So why are there no revenue shared standard in generative A I? It's because there's no simple streams or views or downloads to count the answers that come from generated I generative A I are an amalgam of different content. But what if you could reverse engineer the output of generative A I and figure out what content contributed to the answer that would enable a fair revenue share. So right now, some of the A I companies are saying we don't want to pay because we can't afford to. We don't think we have to. But some generative A I companies are saying we can't pay because we don't know how to. Well, what if there are a way to solve how to, well, that's what we set out to do. We set out to create an algorithm that could take a look at the operative gen A I, whether it's text images, movies or music, analyze it using A I and figure out where that content came from. And not only figure out where it came from, figure out the percentage that came from each place. And just today, we launched this new search product called GIST at G dot A I. You can go type in a query and you see an attribution bar at the top that attribution bar at the very top is breaking down the sources and where how they contributed to the answer. So for example, in this particular question, 34% came from the Atlantic, 25% came from time, 25% came from Fortune. Fortune is one of our partners and 16% came from the Guardian and all of the sources are called out clearly on the right. This then allows us to share revenue 50 to 50 with all those partners on that exact pro rata basis. We think this is fair. We think this is a great way to encourage monetization of content in the generative A I era but also encourage by providing a business model for more creators to continue to make great content to power. Generative A I. If generative I only starts using synthetic data for its training, the result in quality will go way down. But if content creators have the incentive to keep on creating great content, the quality will go up. So we really believe this is the future and we really want to try and make something like this be the standard. We really feel that generative A I needs to be ethical and fair to make this grow and thrive. I showed you the example with text. It also could be done for images. Here's an example, the prompt that was typed in was generate an image of a mass red superhero that can climb walls, meta generated this image. We look at that image, we analyze it, we look at all the source images and we figured out that this came 90.3% from Marvel and 6.2% from DC Entertainment. Again, giving us the exact percentages so the revenue can be shared. So engine of A I, it is now fully possible to look at the output and figure out who contributed uniquely to that content. So far, hundreds of publications, authors and musicians and artists have joined our system. Actually 400 as of today, 20 more just joined this morning, we made an announcement this morning of new ones including a company called Lee Enterprises which has 71 markets around the United States. And we're working with them to revolutionize the way local news is surfaced in generative A I and also the way local news can monetize with generative advertising as well. We really feel that this is a new frontier. If you think back to search and how it's gone through multiple iterations, search 1.0 was monetized with banner ads. Think back to excite and Lycos and Altavista and Yahoo search 2.0 was monetized with paper click. I believe that search 3.0 which we're seeing right now will just deliver you answers directly. You won't have to click but it will be monetized with paper use. The paper use is the ability for the content creators to make some revenue every time their content is used. Of course, their content also can be used for training, but that's a one time fee just for training. The model paper use enables the content creators to have a sustainable revenue model that can be ongoing. So pro rata dot I enables pro rata compensation on this paper use basis. And I really feel I'm so passionate about this because I really want to make a world where content creators can thrive where it's fair and ethical for everybody and everybody can participate and wherever the content is created anywhere on earth, it could be surfaced in answers to help you have the best content possible and to make a revenue stream monetti, I'd love to work with any of you here. I'd love to have some of you join our Pro Rata platform. But mostly I would like feedback and ideas on how to make this a more successful, thriving ecosystem around generative A. I feel free to reach out to me directly. I'm Bill at pro rata dot A. I thank you very much. You've been a great audience.

D.A. Wallach, Recording Artist; Co-founder and General Partner, Time BioVentures

Brainstorm Health 2024: Lessons from the Music Industry

Well, thank you very much. It's great to be here following an actual death panel. And um as you heard in my introduction, I'm a bit of an odd duck. Um I run a biotech and health care venture fund in L A called Time Bio Ventures, but this was my previous life. And as you can tell from this photo, uh you should take everything I say today with a grain of salt. I want to talk a little bit about the parallels between the lessons we've learned in the music industry and what I perhaps see uh on the horizon for the healthcare sector. And when I was in college and got my first record deal, we entered the industry at a remarkable time when things were in total freefall. So what you see in this graph here is us, recorded music revenue over time starting from about 1970 the peak is the absolute bonanza of an era that the nineties were as the recorded music industry resold the entire history of music uh on compact discs, people were just rolling in cash. And when we got our first record deal in 2007 this freefall had been catalyzed by the advent of Napster and then youtube and with it, the erosion of consumer spending on recorded music. So you probably remember these record stores, they were progressively going out of business at this time. And a couple of years after we entered the industry, I had the good fortune of meeting the founders of Spotify. And when I saw their product, I was just completely blown away by the potential that I saw in it to get people paying for music. Again, it was such a compelling product that you could imagine consumers going from free music to something uh for which they would pay a monthly subscription. And that's exactly what happened. The old music supply chain was I think to a lot of folks at that time, clearly anachronistic and you'll remember these days, it was basically this very clunky intermediate system to get content to consumers. So you'd go into a brick and mortar record store and you'd sort of prostrate in front of Grand Wizard of music who would query their huge brain for all of the history of records. And they'd recommend to you just the perfect record to get in this example, the Jimi Hendrix experience. And that record typically would have come through one of just a few record labels like capital or Sony that were basically the sole distribution channel through which artists could get their content into their fan base. And Spotify succeeded by dramatically simplifying that connection between consumers and content. And it put all consumers on an equal footing such that they could access the same catalog of music globally for a very low monthly price. And here's the end of that story or at least up until today, what's happened with streaming, which is depicted in green here, consumers started to pay and revive the industry. Health care in some ways has the exact opposite problem, which is that we're spending too much and the amount that we're spending is growing too fast. And most of that spending is on our hospital centric business model. So as you can see from this breakdown of the 4.5 trillion we're spending in the US per year, something between 70 80% of it is basically going to human mediated health care services, be it in hospitals or brick and mortar clinics. And this model, as I see, it is really trapped in an 18th and 19th century factory paradigm where the concept is basically get a bunch of big brains into big buildings and you'll realize production efficiencies. And we have similar issues in education with large universities and in criminal justice. These are all a paradigms that originated in the 18th and 19th century and they're all in certain similar ways failing us today that fits into a supply chain. It might be a little bit of a stretch. But I think it's actually reminiscent of the music industry supply chain that I described previously. Instead of going into a record store, you go into a hospital or a clinic and you're seen by a physician who queries their huge brain which has been stuffed full of information, the whole corpus of medical knowledge. And they will try and identify for you the perfect intervention. And if that happens to be a drug as here, that drug will have come from one of a few large pharmaceutical companies like pfizer, which similar to the record labels are essentially now the distributors for those who really create new medicines, which are the small and mid size biotech companies. And so the question I want to raise is whether we should do to these and please forgive me when I was putting these together. I did not know that Johns Hopkins or CV S were sponsors of this great event. Nothing against either of them. I think they're fantastic organizations just a little bit dated. And so I wonder if we should do to these, what we did to these and if we do, what would the equivalent of Spotify even be, what would streaming medicine be? What I propose? Is that what we need to build? And this includes A I and a lot of the other technologies that people have been talking about today. And yesterday is a single global catalog containing all medical knowledge, all diagnostics, all interventions and all medical reasoning. Essentially the super A I of medicine in the cloud to which people can connect from anywhere in the world and connect to the exact same knowledge just like today. They connect to the same music catalog through Spotify or the same film and TV catalog through services like Netflix. My belief is that this type of knowledge centralization is actually the only way to make medicine modern and I would define modern medicine as evidence-based. I don't see why we should distinguish between medicine and evidence-based medicine. I don't think anyone goes to the hospital looking for non evidence based medicine. It should be personalized with validated algorithms that are universally applicable to patients. Uh everywhere in the world, it should always be up to date. So the standard of care that someone gets in Botswana should be exactly the same that they get in Los Angeles or New York. Uh We should be honest that if we're not giving people the same high quality care everywhere, we're doing that because they're poor, not because they deserve a different standard of care and it should be geography and income invariant again, the same medicine no matter where you are, no matter who you are with that type of centralization of knowledge. I believe we can actually decentralize the care itself. So on the one hand, centralize the information out of hospitals, sort of evaporated it into the cloud and then push down care into the community through decentralized delivery. And I've chosen the village people here, not because I think they should be your doctor, but just to make the point that perhaps people who today have different jobs even outside of health care in the future, when paired with this type of technology streaming medicine could end up being superior as a way of delivering care to even super doctors like house. And so I think in the future, we're going to marvel at the fact that you had to be a genius to be a doctor in the past. I actually think that's a moral imperative because lowering the barriers to medical competence is the only way that we can possibly scale up high quality care globally. What you see here is that the darker countries are those with a higher density of physicians per capita in the US. It's about three doctors per 1000 when you get into countries like Madagascar. Uh it's less than 1/10 of a doctor per 1000 people. So we're not going to fix that by manufacturing doctors in our current paradigm, it's just impossible. I would propose that maybe the doctor of the future is more like an accountant. It's a highly trained specialized person, but not necessarily someone who is educated for 15 or 20 years. And I think there are a million potential configurations of how those sorts of professionals could fit into something like streaming medicine to deliver better care. But this is just one kind of spitball idea. I came up with, imagine that patients get a voucher to spend on choosing a sort of primary care navigator and then hire this person. This is again like the sort of health care accountant character and they're paid directly by this voucher, not by insurance. So take primary care out of insurance, put them entirely on the side of the patient. And then this team, the patient, their care professional working with streaming medicine can navigate the system and choose the best products and services to cure them and then align cost savings with patients, let them capture the savings that they generate by navigating their own care in a thoughtful and cost effective way. Again, apologies to CVS and Johns Hopkins. But a couple of weeks ago, we learned Wal Mart is not going to save us. And I don't think that this is a particularly exciting future either. I would be shocked if 100 years from now, the way we're doing medicine is in minute clinics and huge buildings. And fortunately in my day job, we get to see amazing entrepreneurs coming up with all the little seeds of this future that I'm outline and we're not investors in all or even most of these companies, but I think they're really promising. And I would invite any of you who are working on this, who sort of believe in blowing up the system and starting from a blank sheet of paper to reach out to us. We're super excited to engage in entrepreneurs who are thinking really big and I appreciate your time. Thank you.

How do you slyly tell your boss that you need more than five weeks off to film a hit reality T.V. show where you could meet your future spouse in a 12-by-12-foot pod? Better yet, how do you explain that you won’t see your partner before actually saying “yes” to a marriage proposal, you’ll only have 28 days with them before you say “I do,” and you’re quitting your job to pursue an influencer career?  

We quit our six-figure jobs after joining ‘Love is Blind’ and now make 3x our salaries as influencers 

Deepti Vempati and Natalie Lee have netted over $500,000 each from their influencer careers.

Features

Neither ended up saying “I do” at the altar, but their season’s finale was just the beginning of profitable careers as viral personalities

We quit our six-figure jobs and now make 3x our salaries as influencers 

How do you explain to your boss that you won’t see your partner before actually saying “yes” to a marriage proposal, you’ll only have 28 days with them before you say “I do,” and you’re quitting your job to pursue an influencer career?  

As influencers after the show has aired, we both made over a half a million dollars each each. My name is Patty. I am 32 years old and I'm Natalie Lee and I'm 31 years old and you may recognize us from Love is season two. I really enjoyed my job. I still kept my job throughout filming Love Is Blind. And also after, and even while the show was coming out, I also loved my job. And even though I quit that job, I can still use the things that I learned in technology in content creation today. Honestly, I did not tell my boss that I was going to go film a reality TV show because I, I just don't think that I would have gone over. Well, you didn't, no, I didn't have um I was just like, I accumulated my PT O days and I was just like, hey, I'm gonna be taking a long vacation and most of like the filming the second half of it, I literally just worked around it. So I didn't have to tell them. I was honest with my boss that I was doing a reality TV show I didn't say it was Love is Blind because I feel like that would have been a whole other conversation about, you know, getting engaged, sight unseen and things like that. We were able to work while filming Love Is Blind. So that made it much easier and more like palatable for my boss allowed me to take the time off for the show. They were like, what are you doing? They're like, you don't really seem like the type to do reality TV. And I was like, oh, it's like a marriage, a serious marriage show. And then so they didn't know it was Love Is Line and then it came out and they were like, uh you did this show on Netflix. Like we thought it was like a documentary about like this is why I didn't tell them. This is why I didn't tell them because I'm not trying to have that conversation. I won't lie. It did impact me professionally a lot. Like I remember being in meetings with my coworkers and my clients and they would like, you could tell, they want to ask questions and, you know, I'd be doing a presentation or something and they're like, so, uh how was it like in those, I'm like, what I thought we were talking about like this Excel Sheet that I spend like 18 hours on while the show was airing. I realized like, the impact that it had just on my life in general. And I really wanted to continue working. But I was realizing like kind of months into it that I wasn't able to do content creation and working full time and showing up at my 100% in both. So for me just to give it my own all into one career path, I had to pick a lane. And so I decided to take a risk and to quit my corporate job after love is aired. And you know, our social media following went up, I did see a huge shift when it came to my yearly salary. I am making as a content creator three times my corporate salary. And so it just made sense for me to pursue content creation full time. I would say 95% of my current income. It's from brand deals. Me and my brand manager don't want to overwhelm like my social media because you want to have a mix of like organic content and branded content. When you're representing a brand through your content, you want to make sure that it speaks to you. Sometimes it can be a very high deal like almost a salary as worth. But other times it's very low like only 2 to 3 K, but those smaller brand deals mean more to you because you are using them in your everyday life. When we saw the money that we can make from sponsorships and just from social media and putting content out there, that's when I started to think I could really go far with this. I won't share the brand, but I, the most I've gotten paid for a brand deal is around 50 K. And um that was pretty amazing and I used the brand and the fact that they also allowed me the creativity to create content for them of authentically using it. I thought that was so cool. The amount that I'm making now is exponentially higher than what I was before. I do invest a lot of it into stocks. I'm trying to educate myself more in the financial world and to figuring out how I can invest it, I want to be a homeowner soon. So even investing in property is a big deal for me and also saving for my environment, OK, here's how I save and invest my money first, it goes into my 401k, I max that out and then it goes into a back door Roth Ira and then I will invest in index funds. So the S and P 500 then I can from finance and then I will put a little bit into my high yield savings account or into the money market, my money market account. And then, yeah, and then I have nothing for myself and I are both daughters of immigrants. Something that we've talked about often is like the money that we save is really for our family to kind of give back and, and what they put in on us, like I know that sending me to college, but just like making sure that I got the best education growing up that took a lot on my family and to take me to violin lessons because they wanted me to have different skill sets. Like I know that that was a struggle for my family sometimes. And so for me, when I think about the money that I make as an influencer, it's not for me, it's for my family. Absolutely. I second that like, um my parents sacrificed so much and they left their entire family behind so that me and my could have an amazing life here. And so this is just like a testament to their sacrifice. It's really hard hearing their stories and how they grew up in the US is facing a lot of racism, but also just how poor they were in the country because they didn't know English and their parents didn't know English. I remember my dad told me that having cereal was a luxury. Like it was kind of seen as dessert when he was growing up. My parents immigrated from India. I was eight years old when I moved to America and it was the toughest transition ever. And I think I mentioned before, I was like extremely bullied. I couldn't even understand my teacher's English. Like it was like a hard dialect for me to pick up on. And so it was a hard transition I think it's really powerful, like coming from um a family of immigrants and just kind of the different values and skill sets that you do learn, you know, just the skill sets of survival, surviving in a country where you don't speak the language. Um And so you, it really helps you not take life for granted. I think the podcast has really given us a platform and an opportunity to really connect with people on a broader scale. We took a conversation and we made it into an idea and then uh everything kind of just came to fruition from there. We got the mics, we were like, let's just practice, let's let's just recap these episodes. And I think that really spearheaded us into such an amazing opportunity because now we have a platform to really speak our mind and also, you know, talk about a show that has um you know, spearheaded us into uh all these opportunities we edit, we produce the videos all on our own. And so it's been a huge learning opportunity and another opportunity for us to be entrepreneurs. We partnered with an agency. And right now we are um in the works of signing with a podcast network. So we would have never thought that our podcast could have gone this far, honestly hitting um number 20 on Apple podcast charts and also number 10 on Spotify Us podcast charts. I mean, that was insane. We did not realize um how successful the podcast can be. The show has really opened up a window of opportunities for me. I am a ted speaker. I'm an author. I feel like I have no idea what's gonna come in the future and it is a little scary, but it's also extremely exciting. I have no idea how long this content creation or influencer life is going to last. But as long as I show up authentically create good content for brands, I feel like I can keep it going. And if at any moment, I can't, I literally will go back to training, get well versed in technology again because that's where my roots are. I'm not an author, but I was mentioned in one page in D C's book. But for me, it is short term. Um I just can't see myself doing it forever and sharing my life. Um I'm a pretty private person and quite honestly, I really like being a management consultant. I like being able to work with different people, work in different industries, work with different clients and learn from them and you can't really do, do that as an influencer. So I really do kind of miss that world. I'm gonna take advantage of the money strike when the iron's hot, obviously. But I think within the next few years, I could see myself going back into the corporate world. I'm sure someone's gonna watch this interview and talk about how it was pile, right here and right here and you know what I mean? That sure. Yeah.

The “Call Her Daddy” host, who struck a $60 million deal with Spotify, answers some of our burning questions.

Podcaster Alex Cooper shares her best dating advice, what she can’t live without, and more

Magazine

Podcaster Alex Cooper's best dating advice

Alex Cooper shares her best dating advice, what she can’t live without, and more

Ali versus new york, you can't ask that question. Both, both hosts, I love you. There is no big hi, I'm Alex cooper and I am the host and creator and call her daddy okay, fill in the blank, having $60 million product ideal in like it's like getting to wear your previous sweatpants every single day, just having each, that's the worst. Oh wow, I don't even, I was gonna say, I don't think I've ever been on a bad place to date only because I'm a control freak that I would never ever let it be a bad place or a bad experience. It can be bad, but where we're going, it's never a problem and you can't live without, I can't live without my don't move yourself and trying to make the other person like you who has been your favorite color daddy interview. I these are the hardest questions, I don't think I can answer that. I think every single person, daddy, I'm so grateful they come on and share with me and daddy, like I love everyone in different like my Children, right? Like you love all your Children in different ways, What about the weirdest interaction you've ever had? All of them are weird because it's like we're family and everyone's always like, oh you guys know each other from high school, I'm like, no, I just met her, but like daddy gay, so it's always weird, we just like jump into knowing each other and like telling each other our life stories and whenever my mom's walking to make the kind of friend from high school and like, yeah, basically, you know everything about each other.

Spotify

Spotify in Fortune Rankings

Spotify stock chart

Videos