Is Spotify stealing artists money?

[kiwilistener]

 

It would seem they are about to. One of my favorite hi-fi & music channels that I follow on YouTube posted this morning Spotify's intention to re distribute money small artists earn to bigger artists, in essence stealing from their suppliers. Watch the video. Recently I unsubscribed to Spotify as they no longer have music by some of my favorite artists, and I'm tired of continually paying for the privilege of listening to music that in some instances I already own.
For musicians just starting out in their music career, to be told that they will earn nothing for the privelege of having their music on Spotify is farcical.

Heres how they justify their decision, and while they do have issues with bad actors, this shouldnt impact what they term emerging artists. A thousand streams seems reasonable just as a thousand subscribers on YouTube is the qualifying threshold. The problem is this will turn away artists starting out and those who have only a small following. The whole streaming system is in need of serious overhaul.

Spotify's Notice to Artists - read it here.

Edited November 22, 2023 by kiwilistener

[Hydrology]

Such a horrible, horrible company

 

https://www.irishtimes.com/media/2023/11/07/spotifys-zero-royalty-plan-tells-musicians-their-work-is-worthless/?fbclid=IwAR05zr2xDbSJqRt2VwNjDH0MoOgLx4rB3E4Bt9ok4sigbFn0Vw_QwTQUgp8

 

 

[rantan]

This is way beyond reprehensible and IMO, a glimpse of the future.

 

I understand that ( some ) other streaming platforms pay artists far more than Spotify but a  likely future scenario is that once streaming is the only form of accessing music and large corporations have direct control, then we are highly likely to see this as a future standard.

 

I also understand the appeal of streaming and I would like to stress that I am not being judgemental of individual music playback choice but it really is a (very sharp) two edged sword and given the nature of corporate ideals you can be sure that profits and egregious acts like this one are the only priority and NOT the viability or well being of musicians.

[metal beat]

Not bad for a company that has never made a profit. 

 1.8b in debt.

 

I have a feeling it's more like Amazon was in the early days, making competing businesses bankrupt while never making a profit. 

  Then, bang so large and powerful they cannot be stopped. 

[rantan]

I have to say that I am really surprised about the lack of angst on this topic.

Does no one else give a schiit?

As music lovers we should be raising hellfire about this, but perhaps I shouldn't be surprised at all. All you-can-eat for $20/m and musicians be damned !

 

Just sad.

[metal beat]

It's clear that general consumers pay stuff all for streaming services, so their care factor is small. 

  Most companies should just double the cost   -  they might give a schiit then.

 

I pay more on one order for physical music than most pay all year for streaming.   I at least try to give some $$ back in the artist pocket by supporting physical music.

Edited November 24, 2023 by metal beat

[rantan]

6 minutes ago, metal beat said:

   I at least try to give some $$ back in the artist pocket by supporting physical music.

 

Exactly.

 

I wonder what subscription prices would be if ALL the artists on the popular streaming platforms were able to make a decent living and have enough for ongoing production costs of future albums.

 How about $60 per month for subscription and at lease 25% of revenue to go directly to the artist/s?

Meanwhile, I am completely with @metal beat in my  continuance of buying physical media, although my budget it more constrained.

 

[Demondes]

Yeah I have never paid for Spotify, their business practices have always smelt funny and they just get worse and more miserly with time.  As Corey Doctorow calls it the enshittification of the internet (particularly for platforms)

 

I pay for physical product (records only now) and a streaming service (Qobuz and before that tidal) run through roon and ripped copies of my cd’s.

 

 

[rantan]

How much better ( if any) are Tidal and Qobuz in terms of giving back to artists?

 

[Demondes]

5 minutes ago, rantan said:

How much better ( if any) are Tidal and Qobuz in terms of giving back to artists?

 

I don’t think anyone would state that any of the streaming platforms are fair to artists, but there is a definitely a difference Tidal (and I think Qobuz) and Apple etc definitely pay more than Spotify.

 

https://virpp.com/hello/music-streaming-payouts-comparison-a-guide-for-musicians/

 

There are some sites that breakdown the split between musicians and right holders as well.  Often 30/70

 

 

[rantan]

So my take out on this whole scenario is that people would prefer to pay next to nothing and as a result, artists cannot earn a decent living or cover their production costs.

How very sad.

[Demondes]

1 hour ago, rantan said:

So my take out on this whole scenario is that people would prefer to pay next to nothing and as a result, artists cannot earn a decent living or cover their production costs.

How very sad.

Free rider problem, when we think we can get away with something but don’t think about the longer term consequences.  It’s ok if only a few do it but if everyone does then the artists get nothing.

Edited November 24, 2023 by Demondes

[Honreekea]

8 hours ago, rantan said:

I have to say that I am really surprised about the lack of angst on this topic.

Does no one else give a schiit?

As music lovers we should be raising hellfire about this, but perhaps I shouldn't be surprised at all. All you-can-eat for $20/m and musicians be damned !

 

Just sad.

Yes....I do...I voted with my dolla and went with Qobuz, which I understand pay the most royalties.

 

[rantan]

14 hours ago, Honreekea said:

Yes....I do...I voted with my dolla and went with Qobuz, which I understand pay the most royalties.

 

 

A genuine question if I may.

 

Are the royalties paid by Qobuz sufficient for musicians to make a viable living or is the rate just superior to Spotify?

[Honreekea]

1 hour ago, rantan said:

 

A genuine question if I may.

 

Are the royalties paid by Qobuz sufficient for musicians to make a viable living or is the rate just superior to Spotify?

When I investigated Streaming companies...Qobuz paid the most in royalties. 

Whether it's enough to live on....you'll need to ask a musician, I guess

[Ruffter]

I’ve gone with qobuz because I like the idea of being able to pay for the digital copy in FLAC. Got an album I haven’t been able to find for $23.99, I wonder if the amount back to the artist would be the same had I walked into JB Hifi and bought the CD?

 

Cheers,

Andrew

[ray4410]

weather we like it or not streaming is only going to get bigger and bigger as a way to listen to music
the majority of people don't care about who gets what as far as royalty payments go they just want the convenience of streaming and most for free
i myself pay a subscription for streaming i also still buy CDs bought a couple yesterday to add to the thousands i already own along with heaps of music DVDs not to mention the thousands of vinyl records i have bought so i think i have paid my fair share of royalties and still do
most of the stuff i listen to via streaming is music i already own and paid for so i have contributed already to the artist's royalties
a case in point is that i was streaming on YouTube and found a few artists that i really liked so found their website and have bought several album's  from them so streaming can be beneficial to the artists especially if you are dealing with the artists directly. 

[rantan]

2 hours ago, ray4410 said:

the majority of people don't care about who gets what as far as royalty payments go they just want the convenience of streaming and most for free

 

Absolutely correct.

I must say that I do find it interesting that people worldwide have the notion that music is free. it started with Pirate Bay and Napster and we have been transformed into people who don't give a schiit about artists being able to earn a living or not.

I wonder if those people would go to their local shopping centre and expect the businesses there to give them fresh food for nothing?

 

Of course that scenario is absurd, but despite that, the underlying principle is the same. We seem to want musical gratification,while the creators of that gratification work for nothing because

1. We say it is inevitable

2. Many of us have scant regards for the musicians welfare.

3. We don't care even slightly, that access to music rewards large corporations hugely and musicians miserly.

 

 

**** I really want to stress that I am not being critical of any person on this forum, but perhaps we should ask ourselves an ethical question about the sustainability of independent music****

[Honreekea]

5 hours ago, Ruffter said:

I’ve gone with qobuz because I like the idea of being able to pay for the digital copy in FLAC. Got an album I haven’t been able to find for $23.99, I wonder if the amount back to the artist would be the same had I walked into JB Hifi and bought the CD?

 

Cheers,

Andrew

I would wager, that if the muso is on Bandcamp, they would get the best deal ( of course now that they'e been bought out....another story?)

[Honreekea]

2 hours ago, rantan said:

 people worldwide have the notion that music is free. it started with Pirate Bay and Napster and we have been transformed into people who don't give a schiit about artists being able to earn a living or

Don't forget about Cassettes.....( from the 70's)

[Ruffter]

5 minutes ago, Honreekea said:

Don't forget about Cassettes.....( from the 70's)

Haha, sitting on the radio ready to press record!

[Honreekea]

1 minute ago, Ruffter said:

Haha, sitting on the radio ready to press record!

oooh...did lot of that myself...lol

[rantan]

Back in-the-day, I did a lot of copying to tape, but always from vinyl LPs that I already owned, in order to preserve the life of the vinyl albums.

I never recorded any music from any other source, although I did a lot of mix tapes for parties etc.

The pre-recorded tapes were so bad that I never bothered.

 

Lots of memories there.

[betty boop]

i am trying to remember which artist it was that in an interview said in this day and age you make a pittance off the streaming platforms... and the album sales are not where make money any more soo where they actually make money is in shows and merchandise... thats what brings in the cash and why shows also cost as much as what they are .. and the merchandise costs what it is 

 

its just the way world is going ... even though we do go to shows we can , we cant afford to go to many of the shows these days ... thats if can even get a ticket .. whcih are usually sell outs .. so folks are paying that i guess ... 

 

i'll keep buying physical media as i can... and pay our apple music subscription which no doubt pays its artists a similar pittance ... 

[Chigurh]

I remember some years ago Noel Gallagher basically mocked his fans when Definitely Maybe was re-issued. Saying things like it was "money for old rope" and that it was a "cash cow". Considering the cost of records these days it's hard to feel sorry for pricks like that if the streaming services aren't paying them much. Perhaps bands should view streaming services as simply a means to get their music out there.