Spotify is now assuming its strongest stance yet against accelerating artist and label departures. That includes the recent pullout of more than 200 labels represented by STHoldings, and the rumored threat of more Coldplay-like licensing refusals.
This is a statement the company emailed Digital Music News this morning, specifically in response to the ST situation.
Comments Closed
Maxwellian Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Thrilled?
As in, "I'm THRILLED with this revenue! It's so much!"
That sort of thrilled?
Visitor Tuesday, November 22, 2011
So if Spotify paid $150 MILLION... what is the cooresponding Itunes payment for the same time frame, in the same territories in BILLIONS...
Sure $150 Million sounds like a lot until you get your check for $149 DOLLARS... for over hundreds of thousands of steams...
There's no artist discovery mechanism, which makes Spotify a Double No Thanks...
nat Wednesday, November 23, 2011
you can't compare itunes revenue to spotify revenue - one is a streaming service and the other a download service. okay it's 99p or whatever for an itunes download, but that's a one off fee never to be paid again. with spotify, you pay for each listen.
steveh Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Which would you rather have:- your week's wages this week or a quarter of your week's wages spread over 10 years?
Magic Sunday, November 27, 2011
Which would you rather have one check for a $1 or 10,000 checks for a dime?
DudeNoDude Wednesday, November 23, 2011
huge quantified catalogue numbers do not necessarily mean all the songs on Spotify are huge in quality, so i for one would like to see the following provided by Spotify:
1. to verify the overwhelming acceptance, a list of bands and artists and their managers (not record execs) that are in favour music on streaming on Spotify.
2. a complete list of recognizable Bands and Artist's that most folks that are not in the catalogue.
3.. a complete list of all labels whose bands and artists are included in the Spotify service.
4. what's the broadcast quality of all the files being streamed on the Spotify?
5. updates of recognizable artists and labels, when they are added. Just like they do when artists go on tour or have a new product available.
6. access to song rotation spin numbers ongoing, in order to measure bands/artist popularity; by country, city and genres. Top 1000 tracks, Bands/Artists charts based on audited numbers.
cheers,
OK
@heysusannah Tuesday, November 22, 2011
susannah caviness
LOL
alden Tuesday, November 22, 2011
hey Spotify, leave the fiction writing to the RIAA. just be honest and you'd be surprised how people will react differently
Bryan Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Magic Sunday, November 27, 2011
Here's the bottom line, mobile apps are the future. Streaming (not Cloud) will be the wave of the future and when people realize that they can stream a library of millions (for a monthly fee) vs. purchasing one song or CD at a time, then storing it on a Cloud or locally...it's a no brainer.
Streaming is the only logical choice for people who want to take a large library on the road. Multi core Smart phones and tablets will/have made HD streaming the 1st choice for me.
I rarely use iTunes anymore, for $120 a year I have access to millions of songs...why would anyone buy one song/CD at a time?
@gunizt Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Güniz Trkylmz
Spotify'dan cvp geldi
steveh Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Spotify would also wish you believe that Saddam Hussein had WMDs.
Seems we found the answer! Tuesday, November 22, 2011
«...a few labels and artists...» [have left Spotify]
The people who run this setup lack basic math skills. They see hundreds of artists/labels walking away and they translate it to "a few".
Perhaps this is why Spotify pays so ridiculously low royalties to the indie artists? Its accountants can't do the math?
Visitor Tuesday, November 22, 2011
--> This article articulates the reality perfectly.
It is not the "job" of other music tech companies to be soley responsible for figuring out what "works" for the artists and what doesn't work.
These companies are simply creating an alternative revenue stream based on subscription and ad units. This is what these labels signed up for.
If this solution is in fact so piss poor, than why don't they come up with a better solution? Labels are in the best position to start their own alternative business models as they don't have the licensing hoops to jump through.
Itunes is an updated version of an antiquated model... it's not going to keep recorded music sales afloat forever.
Whether or not streaming cannibalizes this model - is for the individual labels to decide based on their own data. It's not Spotify, or any other streaming companies job to make this prediction.
Stop whining and innovate. Or jump on the band wagon.
Peter Wednesday, November 23, 2011
You should checkout airbornemusic.com
In their video they use an Einstien quote "You cant solve a problem with the same thinking that created it" and I think this is quite true.
All these other music services good but limited by the licensing payments/regions that they have to comply with.
Visitor Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Yeah I'd seen that video once before, I think through DMN ? It's an interesting concept for sure - also avoids regional licensing issues like you said. Whether or not it works remains to be seen - however these are exactly the types of revenue models that should continue to be expiremented with. good call.
Vail, CO Wednesday, November 23, 2011
such BS
you realize that streaming services are on a P.R. campaign to make themselves look better? they want to make the world think they're not screwing artists. Techcrunch took the bait
the campaign focuses on one thing that people hate: labels. It's all about blaming them and sayiig if labels are screwing their own artists there's nothing we can do about it. SPotify's just a scam, investors are screaming for an I.P.O. or some acquisition and artists yanking their songs isn't helping that.
Unknown on this site Wednesday, November 23, 2011
I made sure my Digital Label and all my music as well as other artist on the label are not part of Spotify.
We are in the Electronic Music Arena. Royalties from Itunes flow in every month at a nice %. Our label is more than profitable with Itunes alone. However, we also sell limited releases on Dj Download and Beatport.
I was on the phone with GOOLE music yesterday. The will be rolling out a "label" division for their GOOGLE music store in 4 to 6 months. I am debating on wether to add the label contet with Google.
Bottom line, there are plenty of ways for Artist and Labels to make money. SPOTFIY is not something that is "Revolutionary" nor will it take away the Market Cap from Itunes. My sales in Europe, Asia, and other overseas markets has not drop because people rush to by other artist using Spotify.
Streaming Services will be part of the equation however, I have yet to see my revenue drop due to Streaming Services Capturing a % of "EDM" fans and therefore, they no longer buy from Itunes. In fact, we are gaining more market share and revenue is rising via Digital Sales, which is the only way I sell music now.
gaetano Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Yeah.
I'm just gonna wait for this one to come out on DVD.
lost john Tuesday, November 22, 2011
"150-million" divided by "many thousands"...
Faza (TCM) Wednesday, November 23, 2011
I call BS. Growing the service won't change anything for the vast majority of independent artists/labels, unless there's some way of scaling per-play payments along with it (which basically means charging the customers more).
The biggest improvement I've seen from Spotify was when they drastically scaled back their free tier. The improvement was from "are you taking the piss?" levels to "half-a-thousand plays more and I'll be able to afford a beer" levels.
If Spotify is looking to major labels for opinion, then of course they're going to learn their service is great: a major label earns money on a substantial portion of total plays. They shouldn't be surprised, though, when more and more people start walking away.
Barry Wednesday, November 23, 2011
and here's another perspective:
@fmomboisse Wednesday, November 23, 2011
francois momboisse
Spotify: 15 m titres, 150 m$ de revenus aux majors depuis sa création. sans hadopi.. stop ou encore?
IPO Wednesday, November 23, 2011
I'll put my tracks back up on Spotify in exchange for shares of the upcoming IPO.
Not thrilled with my 5 month $850.00 loss in iTunes sales
Not thrilled with my 5 month $8.60 Spotify earning
In The Know Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Let's remember that Spotify advanced many millions of dollars to the majors and nothing to the indies. With that in mind, the majors can take a longer view and look at empirical data as to what effect (positively and negatively) that streaming services like Spotify have on downloads. The hardback (download)/paperback(streaming) windowed releases will probably become more prevalent on the heels of Coldplay's move. Hard to say if the label licenses require delivery of all of their catalog (clearly not required for EMI or maybe just "licensed" acts such as Coldplay) or if the majors were able to create carve outs to allow for holdbacks. Chili Peppers aren't on their either and no one is talking about that.
The study needed to complement this debate is whether Spotify has a positive effect on piracy (i.e. less) and what that means vs. any potential loss of download revenue.
P.S. Rdio and MOG are also "free" streaming services. Are people pulling their catalogs down from them as well?
billydoux Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Where the problem starts is with the under-cover, locked-up, totally sealed deals that Spotify has done with the rights holders. What we do know, is that huge sums have been involved any time the record companies allow access to their (entire) repertoire, for whatever kind of distribution. There are deals done everyday, chunks of dosh deposited into their accounts; because of confidentially clauses, NOBODY outside of the deal partners has any access to the knowledge of that income. As far as we know, NOT A CENT has been passed down to artists, those whose work makes up the value of what they sell. The artists are 'earning' on their royalty rates, which most of the time are still unrecouped. This is the future of distribution: the rights holders will earn, nobody will ever know how much, and the artists will see pennies, if that.
@nickobyrne Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Nick O'Byrne
Then there's this article which says that labels are happy. A look at the comments shows skepticism though...
burnt Thursday, November 24, 2011
another addition to the news-flow of streaming services...
http://solutions.finetunes.net/musicnews/streaming-services-some-calm-advice-for-labels/
Caroline Bottomley Thursday, November 24, 2011
As a user, I rather like Spotify. The playlisting facility fills that neat space in between hearing a song I like and wanting to commit to buying that song if I decide I like it enough.
Is it true that there is no incentive to the label to pass on Spotify revenues to their artists? I understand that is currently the case and it puts me off Spotify. I don't have an alternative at the moment, other than going straight to purchase for songs I quite like, which would be expensive. But the fact (?) that labels keep all the $/£ does put me on the lookout for a Spotify-type thing which guarantees or at least improves the likelihood the artist gets the revenue (minus a label cut, fair enough obv).
Caroline Botomley
www.RadarMusicVideos.com
Yves Villeneuve Friday, November 25, 2011
true Friday, November 25, 2011
Another reason the industry has to step away from the bubble gum pop trends.
tech details Friday, November 25, 2011
Songwriter Guy Friday, November 25, 2011
I'm a world reknown songwriter who's songs appear on Spotify and are streamed daily. There is one simple reason why Spotify is incredibly valuable to the music business and its future. "IT IS CAUSING AN ADVERSE REACTION TO ILLEGAL DOWNLOADING" Think about it? I would rather make a fraction of a cent on a free stream of my song than no cent at all. DOWNLOADING illegally usually takes a few minutes to hear your song. Streaming happens in literally seconds. In the long run, streaming will be great for the music business as revenues increase from advertisers.
That said, there is only one thing about Spotify that makes me uncomfortable.... HOW is the $10/month fee divided up from all of the paid subscribers? From what I understand, that has never been disclosed. Transparency in this day and age is key. That's one of the reasons why the major labels lost their trust from the music consumer in the first place. :)
Just sayin'
ThatLabelGuy Monday, November 28, 2011
The problem is not with Spotify or any other streaming service. The problems lies within percentages and payouts that were created when the music business was making tons and tons and tons of money and when digital technology was brand new. We have to adapt our payouts to the changes. Spotify is simply paying out what they are required to based on the streaming revenue rates. OR they are paying out what is negotiaed with the labels.
OUR SPONSORS
© 2011 All Rights Reserved
Follow Us