Spotify: Lady Gaga gets rich... Uhm. Not Really.

[Ol' Betsey]

I know figge mentioned this in another Spotify thread but I just wanted to highlight again here...

From Hypebot: Spotify Paid Lady Gaga $167 For 1M Plays

Lady Gaga’s “Poker Face” was one of the most popular tracks for 5 months on Spotify; being played more than 1 million times. But according to reports this weekend, the Swedish Performing Rights Society only paid her $167. If true, it confirms other complaints from other artists like those of Swedish musican Magnus Uggla who pulled his music off Spotify declaring, "I'd prefer to be raped by Pirate Bay than played on Spotify".

Many in the music industry have been quick to declare that streaming, which appears to be a substitute for illegal downloading for some, will be their savior. But serious questions remain how long rights holders and artists should wait for a reasonable pay day.

R.

[Llitsor]

Originally Posted by Ol' Betsey

Swedish musican Magnus Uggla who pulled his music off Spotify declaring, "I'd prefer to be raped by Pirate Bay than played on Spotify".

Never heard of him. To some extent, he seems a bit sore that his material is unlikely to even earn him so much as Lady G's $167.
However, something is better than nothing, however small. And just because it's low, that doesn't make piracy better. Which is what this Magnus Uggla guy appears to be implying.
Yes, the Spotify payment is rather pitiful (assuming it's true). But as a model, it's a step in the right direction.
Besides, in these times of economic doom & gloom, advertising revenue is often the first to suffer. So given this is what Spotify largely depends on for it's income, then im not surprised there isn't a lot of money to go around. Hopefully they can stick in there for a couple of years or more, and we'll see if things pick up for Spotify, and the artists. But so far, it's only been a few months. So I consider it too early to write them off yet.

[rack gear]

streaming doesn't pay... it was just a matter of time till the numbers caught up to the hype... Spotify is a black box for major labels

when the books come clean on this it's gonna be ugly


The Issue Over Major Label Spotify Stakes... — Digital Music News

Behind the music: The real reason why the major labels love Spotify | Music | guardian.co.uk

[hankdrummer]

ouch

guess it won't be long before every label remove their catalog from spotify

[rack gear]

Originally Posted by Llitsor

However, something is better than nothing, however small.

actually, not true. this is worse... 1 million plays for $167 is thievery, corporate thievery, paraded around as a "something is better than nothing" solution - to which it is not.

it is unsustainable, in the same way that allowing music piracy is an unsustainable policy for the survival of the business.

simple economics show that if someone can stream a song 1m times and make less than $200 dollars the model doesn't work. period.

[beanface]

Yeah, news like that is gonna send people running. But it is early days, though I have a feeling that Spotify will colapse in the not so distant future, but I think the model is a good one - I'm sure we'll see a more practical replacement.

[rack gear]

Originally Posted by hankdrummer

ouch

guess it won't be long before every label remove their catalog from spotify

the labels are equity partners in spotify, they get paid even if the artist doesn't - that's how this happen... the labels can make more money from advertising as a co-owner in spotify than they can from royalties.

the labels can then essentially, give away the music in their catalogs, but still collect advertising revenue as a spotify co-owner...

genius.

[Llitsor]

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

actually, not true. this is worse... 1 million plays for $167 is thievery, corporate thievery, paraded around as a "something is better than nothing" solution - to which it is not.

it is unsustainable, in the same way that allowing music piracy is an unsustainable policy for the survival of the business.

simple economics show that if someone can stream a song 1m times and make less than $200 dollars the model doesn't work. period.

I find it a little ironic then, that in an article you linked to yourself, it appears to show it is working just fine. Except apparently more in the record companies favour, than the artists.
Doesn't that suggest that a large proportion of the blame then lay with the greedy record companies? Spotify is merely the scapegoat for the whole deal, no?

Still, I don't see how Piracy is in any way better than what Spotify is doing.

[hipass]

If your an band there is only ONE way to make money.

Play Live shows....

Downloading has killed it for bands

[colinmiller]

Originally Posted by Llitsor

I find it a little ironic then, that in an article you linked to yourself, it appears to show it is working just fine.

“We think Spotify is a great service but they’re going to have to convince us they can convert enough people from free to paid subscriptions to make it worth our while,” one label told the Financial Times. “As an ad-supported service the economics don’t work at all.”

[rack gear]

Originally Posted by Llitsor

I find it a little ironic then, that in an article you linked to yourself, it appears to show it is working just fine. Except apparently more in the record companies favour, than the artists.
Doesn't that suggest that a large proportion of the blame then lay with the greedy record companies? Spotify is merely the scapegoat for the whole deal, no?

Still, I don't see how Piracy is in any way better than what Spotify is doing.

because piracy is in fact theft without the guise of being a legitimate alternative to something - neither is sustainable, but Spotify is pretending to be an an alternative when in fact it is not...

[initialsBB]

Turns out that this story wasn't accurate. $167 was just the performance royalties from Sweden only. In addition to that there would be performance royalties from other countries, as well as publishing royalties and whatever royalties are being paid to the label which she should also presumably get a piece of.

Music Ally | Blog Archive » Spotify slaps down Lady Gaga royalties rumours

[narcoman]

Originally Posted by beanface

Yeah, news like that is gonna send people running. But it is early days, though I have a feeling that Spotify will colapse in the not so distant future, but I think the model is a good one - I'm sure we'll see a more practical replacement.

I predicted earlier this year that Spotify would collapse by around june 2010. I'm even more confident now - although as a company that does music supervision it's very useful!!

Apparently no one is taking the subscriptions on - and that was supposed to be the revenue creator. Spotify haven't done anything wrong - they divvy up the royalties and divide proportionally by plays - if there is no money in you cant blame Spotify. You can blame lack of advertising {a global phenomena in TV too} and nobody taking subscripions out.

[narcoman]

Originally Posted by hipass

If your an band there is only ONE way to make money.

Play Live shows....

Downloading has killed it for bands

no money in live either. Too many shit local bands {you know the type - the unsigned Myspace dross with 784 friends} putting people off the the whole thing - been like this for years!!

[duvalle]

Originally Posted by hipass

If your an band there is only ONE way to make money.

Play Live shows....

i am not sure if that will work for every band.
i know a couple good bands that actually "pay to play" in some way.
(5 members, gig in another city, renting a bus, paying for gas and food ...
all these costs eat up the cash they get for the gig!)

on the other hand:
i know some ok "top 40" bands that really make some cash playing private parties,
weddings and so on. but that's hard work ...

imho if a big worldwide chart hit like "pokerface" only gets like 200$
from streaming this can not be the future ....

[JJAM]

I too reckon Spotify will be gone very soon. What I found very odd about it upon first using it is the ads - I would have thought that they'd be more obtrusive (for example, playing whilst you're listening to a song). Without this being implemented, I fail to see why anyone would take out a subscription.

[JJAM]

Originally Posted by duvalle

on the other hand:
i know some ok "top 40" bands that really make some cash playing private parties,
weddings and so on. but that's hard work ...

You can't knock the function band scene...you'll make more money per gig than with 99% of major label signed touring bands (at least in London) - it always helps in keeping the chops up as well...

[gainreduction]

Originally Posted by Llitsor

Never heard of him.

He is a very successful artist with a 20+ year carreer filled with hits and good sales. He is totally unknown outside Sweden as he sings in Swedish. The lyrics are ironic and satiric and he is universally loved by the majority of the population.

He is open with the fact that he has made tons of money and would like to continue doing so. Him pulling his songs off Spotify does indeed have some symbolic weight to it.

Yes, Spotify will die as noone is making money, including the owners and investors.


BTW, music sales are up 18% in Sweden over the last 9 months. thumbsup

[duvalle]

by the way:
Spotify Fights Back: "We Paid More Than That!"

but they won't say how much ... lol!

[narcoman]

Originally Posted by gainreduction

BTW, music sales are up 18% in Sweden over the last 9 months. thumbsup

actually it's music revenues - not quite the same thing. But nice news none the less!!

[gainreduction]

Here´s an article about the recovering music sales in Sweden right now:

Sweden sees music sales soar after crackdown on filesharing | Business | guardian.co.uk

[figgebass]

Originally Posted by initialsBB

Turns out that this story wasn't accurate. $167 was just the performance royalties from Sweden only. In addition to that there would be performance royalties from other countries, as well as publishing royalties and whatever royalties are being paid to the label which she should also presumably get a piece of.

Music Ally | Blog Archive » Spotify slaps down Lady Gaga royalties rumours

Does it say that the sum of 167 dollars per 1 000 000 streams is wrong? Nope...As far as I am concerned 167 dollars per 1 000 000 streams is still pathetic.

[figgebass]

Originally Posted by Llitsor

Never heard of him. To some extent, he seems a bit sore that his material is unlikely to even earn him so much as Lady G's $167.

He's one of Swedens longest serving and biggest pop artists.
Here's his discogarphy:

Albums:
# 1975 – Om Bobbo Viking
# 1976 – Livets teater
# 1977 – Va ska man ta livet av sig för när man ändå inte får höra snacket efteråt
# 1978 – Vittring
# 1979 – Magnus Uggla Band sjunger schlagers
# 1980 – Den ljusnande framtid är vår
# 1981 – Godkänd pirat – Live
# 1983 – Välkommen till folkhemmet
# 1985 – Retrospektivt collage (samlingsalbum)
# 1985 – Collection (semiofficiellt samlingsalbum för den finska marknaden)
# 1986 – Den döende dandyn
# 1987 – Allting som ni gör kan jag göra bättre
# 1989 – 35-åringen
# 1993 – Alla får påsar
# 1994 – 100% Uggla – Absolut inget annat (samlingsalbum)
# 1997 – Karaoke
# 2000 – Där jag är e’re alltid bäst
# 2002 – Klassiska mästerverk (samlingsalbum)
# 2004 – Den tatuerade generationen
# 2006 – Ett bedårande barn av sin tid – Magnus Uggla sjunger Karl Gerhard
# 2007 – Pärlor åt svinen
# 2008 – 1975-2008

And just to keep bashing the-"I've never heard of him so he's just sore he's not as big as Lady Gaga"-statement ;-) I'll give you the singles aswell...:
* 1976 – Sommartid
* 1977 – Varning på stan
* 1977 - Jag skiter
* 1977 – Yeh, Why Not
* 1977 – Ja just du ska va gla
* 1978 – Vittring
* 1979 – Everything You Do
* 1979 – Johnny the Rucker
* 1980 – Skandal bjotis
* 1980 – Centrumhets
* 1981 – Ain’t About to Go Back
* 1981 – Sommartid (ny version)
* 1981 – Body Love
* 1983 – IQ
* 1985 – Retrospektivt collage
* 1986 – Joey Killer
* 1986 – Fula gubbar
* 1987 – Vem kan man lita på? (finns i två varianter med resp utan textraden om Afzelius)
* 1987 – Ska vi gå hem till dig
* 1989 – Jag mår illa
* 1989 – Baby boom
* 1989 – Dum dum
* 1990 – Stig in och ta en cocktail
* 1993 – Varning på stan
* 1993 – 4 sekunder
* 1993 – Jånni Balle
* 1993 – Första gången
* 1993 – Dansar aldrig nykter
* 1994 – Victoria
* 1994 – Mitt decennium
* 1994 – Trubaduren
* 1997 – Kung för en dag
* 1997 – Jag vill
* 1998 – Pom pom
* 1998 – Hand i hand (tillsammans med Dogge Doggelito)
* 2000 – Nitar & läder
* 2000 – Hotta brudar
* 2001 – Stockholms heta nätter
* 2001 – Där vi är e're alltid bäst
* 2002 – Vi ska till VM
* 2004 – Värsta grymma tjejen
* 2004 – Efterfest
* 2005 – Nu har pappa laddat bössan
* 2006 – Jag är ett bedårande barn av min tid
* 2007 – För kung och fosterland
* 2007 – Pärlor åt svin
* 2007 – Vild & skild
* 2008 – 24 timmar
* 2009 – Hatten av

Most of these were serious hits in Sweden and the guy is HUGHE . He's been misquoted to some extent cos what really pissed him off was , ofcourse in combination with the lousy payment, that his record company Sony owns a serious share in spotify so he said he'd rather be raped bu TPB than by his Sony boss....

[figgebass]

Originally Posted by gainreduction

Him pulling his songs off Spotify does indeed have some symbolic weight to it.

By the way, his songs are still on spotify.....Oh..I have a premium subscription...maybe that's why...?

[rack gear]

Originally Posted by figgebass

Does it say that the sum of 167 dollars per 1 000 000 streams is wrong? Nope...As far as I am concerned 167 dollars per 1 000 000 streams is still pathetic.

yup

so what would she need to sell on itunes to make $167... let's see

about 23 albums

or

238 song downloads

hmmm

[narcoman]

actually she'd need to sell about 200 albums or 2000 downloads - but I get your point.

[Ol' Betsey]

Originally Posted by narcoman

actually she'd need to sell about 200 albums or 2000 downloads - but I get your point.

@ Redvelvet: Yes if she was selling directly to iTunes via Tunecore et al but I highly doubt that Lady Gaga has the time or the inclination to upload her music directly to an aggregator. But I get your point too!

Narcoman: I'm curious as to how you would break that figure down from Point of Sale?

R.

[narcoman]

6.5% publishing {because online doesnt pay the usual 8.5%} and guessed at a 15% artist royalty - minus aggregator/distributor cost and you get roughly those figures.

[rack gear]

itunes pays $7.00 per album and .70 per song - how the label then redistributes that is another story... point being, at gross revenue - itunes is looking a lot better than spotify...

I do not license any of the catalog I manage to any streaming services. None. Zero.

I may start w/ baby bands - for the sake of exposure - but even on the low end it's hard for me to see how it's really benefitial.

[Revmen]

How much do the artists, that are played on MTV, get paid?