4 ms·

> Spotify is famous for how little they pay artists for song plays Maybe, but > 60% of Young's streaming revenue comes from Spotify meaning the move is likely

by cronix 5y ago

> Spotify is famous for how little they pay artists for song plays Maybe, but > 60% of Young's streaming revenue comes from Spotify meaning the move is likely to cost him and his record label, Warner Bros[1] So what "little" they paid him was still the majority of what he was making. And I think it will be hard for someone from his genre (1960's/70's) to make a come back. Most people under 35ish-40 have never heard of him and likely won't listen due to the genre. [1] https://www.euronews.com/culture/2022/01/27/spotify-grants-neil-young-s-request-to-remove-music-in-conspiracy-theory-row https://www.euronews.com/culture/2022/01/27/spotify-grants-n...

rpd9803 5y ago
LOL Do you really think musicians make most of the money they make from streaming? Dude could have 1 concert a year and pull in more than his streaming would in a decade. Not to mention merch, commercial licensing.. etc.. LOL
- cronix 5y ago
  > So what "little" they paid him was still the majority of what he was making streaming There, I fixed it. LOL
pwinnski 5y ago
60% of his miniscule streaming revenue? 60% of 1% is 0.6%, I think he'll be okay.
pseudalopex 5y ago
He sold 50% of his music rights for $150 million last year. And he was rich already. His investments should make much more than streaming. He just signed a deal with SiriusXM too.[1] I think he'll be all right. [1] https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/digital/siriusxm-neil-youngs-music-after-spotify-removal-1235082417/ https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/digital/siriusxm-...
- snowwrestler 5y ago
  Deals like this are happening because there is so little revenue from streaming. This is why you hear Led Zeppelin and Dylan songs in car ads now. With little revenue from recording sales or streaming, artists are leaning more on other revenue like sync licenses and co-marketing deals. If you read carefully, the Sirius deal is not just access to Young’s back catalog, it is using his name to market Sirius. He gets paid for that on top of the music itself.

by cronix 5y ago

rpd9803 5y ago

LOL Do you really think musicians make most of the money they make from streaming? Dude could have 1 concert a year and pull in more than his streaming would in a decade. Not to mention merch, commercial licensing.. etc.. LOL

cronix 5y ago
> So what "little" they paid him was still the majority of what he was making streaming There, I fixed it. LOL

pwinnski 5y ago

60% of his miniscule streaming revenue? 60% of 1% is 0.6%, I think he'll be okay.

pseudalopex 5y ago

He sold 50% of his music rights for $150 million last year. And he was rich already. His investments should make much more than streaming. He just signed a deal with SiriusXM too.[1] I think he'll be all right. [1] https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/digital/siriusxm-neil-youngs-music-after-spotify-removal-1235082417/ https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/digital/siriusxm-...

snowwrestler 5y ago
Deals like this are happening because there is so little revenue from streaming. This is why you hear Led Zeppelin and Dylan songs in car ads now. With little revenue from recording sales or streaming, artists are leaning more on other revenue like sync licenses and co-marketing deals. If you read carefully, the Sirius deal is not just access to Young’s back catalog, it is using his name to market Sirius. He gets paid for that on top of the music itself.