4 ms·

I think the issue with Spotify is that artists compare revenue to CD sales, when they should be comparing it to piracy. I listen to (estimated) one new album e

I think the issue with Spotify is that artists compare revenue to CD sales, when they should be comparing it to piracy. I listen to (estimated) one new album every day, as part of about 5-10 hours of listening to music each day depending on my work schedule. $10-$20 an album is just not a price I'd be prepared to pay on a daily basis to listen to new music, and before Spotify I wasn't spending that money; I was pirating them or streaming them on websites without a revenue share model for labels. I still buy just as many CDs as I used to (probably about 10 a year), plus Spotify gets an additional $120 a year from me (70% of which goes to the music industry), which is a no brainer for me for the convenience of the service. In addition to the considerable sum ($2000+) which I spend annually on live music. The best solution I feel is a two-week exclusive on all new releases for physical and digital purchases before they hit subscription services. If you really want the CD, you can buy it, or you can wait two weeks until it's free on your $10 a month subscription. Sure, piracy will go up, but it is not the music industry's business to stamp out piracy, it is their business to maximise music revenue. This, along with the increased value-adds of physical purchases - deluxe vinyl editions, signed editions, additional goodies - the "Kickstarter" pricing model, if you will - is how the music industry will continue to make money. That and increased ticket prices for live music, and I anticipate most record deals includng a cut of live revenues for major labels in the future (if they aren't already). For the record, I do not think major labels are inherently bad for music - if you cannot afford to record and promote your album, a major label can do it for you, at the cost of a large chunk of your profits if you're a hit, but not leaving you in the red if you aren't - a major part of record label's profitable artists must cover all the ones who are not also. If you don't want to do such a profit split, the option is always there to finance the record yourself and pay labels up front for distribution and marketing.

forrestthewoods 12y ago
My only issue with Spotify is that it tricks listeners into thinking they're supporting artists when they so totally aren't. I equate Spotify to piracy. Yeah I give them $10 a month but so little reaches artists I might as well have stolen the music. And I'm fine with that. If people want to support an artist then they should buy their album, go to liveshows, whatever. As long as we don't incorrectly assume that Spotify is supporting the artists we enjoy then everything is fine.
- batiudrami 12y ago
  Well they are supporting the artist. $500,000 paid to Taylor Swift is better than what she would have received if people listend to her albums on Grooveshark, or torrented the album, or whatever. Sure, half a cent per stream is not much, but it is something. It's not on the same level as buying a CD, but it's better than piracy, where revenue for the artist is zero. The other thing is, it's not like Spotify is making bank off their service either - last I checked they still haven't posted a profit. They can only charge so much because people will only pay so much for a monthly music subscription, and 70% of revenue paid directly to artists/labels doesn't sound unreasonable to me. I guess fundamentally the problem is "people don't want to pay much for music" not "Spotify is allowing people to not pay much for music". Artists seem to be placing the blame at Spotify's feet, when it is less people being willing to pay for music any more.
  - forrestthewoods 12y ago
    You are right that Spotify is lose/lose/lose. It's helping crush the industry, they're losing money hand over fist, and artists aren't being supported. Awesome. Like I said, I'm totally cool if people want to not pay for music. That's fine. Great. Continue to not pay for music! I won't even blame you. Just don't falsely believe that Spotify supports artists you enjoy. If you want to support an artist you gotta do it yourself.
  - adamnemecek 12y ago
    the issue is that you only make $500k if you are a name like taylor swift who ironically doesn't really need that money since she can make much more from touring. if you are an indie artist, you are making basically $0.
    - fivedogit 12y ago
      I happen to know a few indie artists in my area and I can tell you that after equipment, travel costs for gigs, printing media, hosting a website, etc, almost all of them are losing money.
jug 12y ago
I agree with you that they're misunderstanding Spotify and how its revenue model isn't about CD sales. Artists and labels should _really_ forget about CD's or anything physical. That's a long time ago that was a working business model now and belongs to the past. And so does the type of sales you can expect. I think that Spotify is competing with radio and avoiding piracy in the process. So they should find Spotify useful; it's a very efficient bullet against piracy, much moreso than sending cease and desist letters. It works on huge masses, millions of people, and it doesn't need lawyers to be paid. And it often works. As for payments, It hink we're moving into the radio comparison. It's about streaming, not ownership, so obviously they can't compare Spotify to sold CD's. Every time a user listens to a song on Spotify, the artist/label is paid. Not so with a CD. So a CD is more expensive, and better compared to iTunes. The iTunes with a business model in trouble and rumors that Apple is intending to change, where they have already started with iTunes Radio. Coincidence? No, I definitely think not and refer to my first paragraph. So: Beat piracy, and provide radio for the 2010's. It's part radio where music is chosen at Spotify's discretion, part chosen by the user via playlists. So it's a net loss for music labels since the user is given much more control, but hey, times are changing. Users now have this today, so they will expect it tomorrow. If they stop supporting Spotify today, many of their users will be more inclined to move into piracy than ever tomorrow. These times when they can go back... They've already passed.

forrestthewoods 12y ago

My only issue with Spotify is that it tricks listeners into thinking they're supporting artists when they so totally aren't. I equate Spotify to piracy. Yeah I give them $10 a month but so little reaches artists I might as well have stolen the music. And I'm fine with that. If people want to support an artist then they should buy their album, go to liveshows, whatever. As long as we don't incorrectly assume that Spotify is supporting the artists we enjoy then everything is fine.

batiudrami 12y ago
Well they are supporting the artist. $500,000 paid to Taylor Swift is better than what she would have received if people listend to her albums on Grooveshark, or torrented the album, or whatever. Sure, half a cent per stream is not much, but it is something. It's not on the same level as buying a CD, but it's better than piracy, where revenue for the artist is zero. The other thing is, it's not like Spotify is making bank off their service either - last I checked they still haven't posted a profit. They can only charge so much because people will only pay so much for a monthly music subscription, and 70% of revenue paid directly to artists/labels doesn't sound unreasonable to me. I guess fundamentally the problem is "people don't want to pay much for music" not "Spotify is allowing people to not pay much for music". Artists seem to be placing the blame at Spotify's feet, when it is less people being willing to pay for music any more.
- forrestthewoods 12y ago
  You are right that Spotify is lose/lose/lose. It's helping crush the industry, they're losing money hand over fist, and artists aren't being supported. Awesome. Like I said, I'm totally cool if people want to not pay for music. That's fine. Great. Continue to not pay for music! I won't even blame you. Just don't falsely believe that Spotify supports artists you enjoy. If you want to support an artist you gotta do it yourself.
- adamnemecek 12y ago
  the issue is that you only make $500k if you are a name like taylor swift who ironically doesn't really need that money since she can make much more from touring. if you are an indie artist, you are making basically $0.
  - fivedogit 12y ago
    I happen to know a few indie artists in my area and I can tell you that after equipment, travel costs for gigs, printing media, hosting a website, etc, almost all of them are losing money.

jug 12y ago

I agree with you that they're misunderstanding Spotify and how its revenue model isn't about CD sales. Artists and labels should _really_ forget about CD's or anything physical. That's a long time ago that was a working business model now and belongs to the past. And so does the type of sales you can expect. I think that Spotify is competing with radio and avoiding piracy in the process. So they should find Spotify useful; it's a very efficient bullet against piracy, much moreso than sending cease and desist letters. It works on huge masses, millions of people, and it doesn't need lawyers to be paid. And it often works. As for payments, It hink we're moving into the radio comparison. It's about streaming, not ownership, so obviously they can't compare Spotify to sold CD's. Every time a user listens to a song on Spotify, the artist/label is paid. Not so with a CD. So a CD is more expensive, and better compared to iTunes. The iTunes with a business model in trouble and rumors that Apple is intending to change, where they have already started with iTunes Radio. Coincidence? No, I definitely think not and refer to my first paragraph. So: Beat piracy, and provide radio for the 2010's. It's part radio where music is chosen at Spotify's discretion, part chosen by the user via playlists. So it's a net loss for music labels since the user is given much more control, but hey, times are changing. Users now have this today, so they will expect it tomorrow. If they stop supporting Spotify today, many of their users will be more inclined to move into piracy than ever tomorrow. These times when they can go back... They've already passed.