3 ms·
I was thinking mostly on artists in general, though Taylor sparked this discussion (the news article, etc). I agree totally with your point, the economics for
by sandstrom 12y ago
I was thinking mostly on artists in general, though Taylor sparked this discussion (the news article, etc).
I agree totally with your point, the economics for her (and other mega-stars) are likely different from the median artist.
The labels also play a part in this, they take most of the CD/online/radio revenues, where as artists keep most of their tour earnings (this is what I've heard). In such a model it may make perfect sense to restrict streaming, since it may tilt more people towards paying for a concert.
This may very well be 'revenue maximizing' for her, but I think for artists as a group they will may make more by extracting a reasonable sum from large swathes of people by providing a good chunk of value (e.g. Spotify/Pandora), then trying to drive up CD sales.
- maxerickson 12y agoI think many artists with less exposure make an even larger portion of their income from appearances (vs licensing). An absurd example: a piano man.