3 ms·
The average consumer only spends $48 on recorded music per year.[0] At $100+ per year, services like Spotify are much more expensive for all but the most proli
by dublinben 12y ago
The average consumer only spends $48 on recorded music per year.[0] At $100+ per year, services like Spotify are much more expensive for all but the most prolific music collector.
[0]http://recode.net/2014/03/18/the-price-of-music/ http://recode.net/2014/03/18/the-price-of-music/
- danieldk 12y agoBut only one quarter of the users is a subscriber: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/12/spotify-60m-users-15m-subscribers http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/12/spotify-60... Suppose that the average price for subscribers is $7.50 (since students get discounts and they are probably a large chunk of subscribers). That's (12 * 7.50) / 4 = $22.50 Suddenly that $48 starts to look pretty good.
- ghaff 12y agoYeah, but you probably shouldn't assume that Spotify is the only money they spend. Just because someone has a Spotify subscription (and thus has demonstrated a willingness to spend money on music), they might buy at least the odd track and/or also subscribe to other streaming in some form on other services, e.g. as part of Amazon Prime. And OTOH, unpaid Spotify subscribers will in some cases be unpaid precisely because they get their music from other sources (streaming, paid, "free"). Of course, music revenue has declined overall in any case.
- megaman821 12y agoThanks for that link. I always assumed that the music subscription services charged more than what the average consumer pays for music in a year. It appears that the artists aren't getting paid enough because there are not enough subscribers. And there are not enough subscribers because the price is too high for the average music consumer. So lowering the price $5/month might actually drastically increase the artist pay.