The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
How does Spotify make sense - it seems crazy to me!!
Old 11th November 2009
  #31
Lives for gear
 
mingustoo's Avatar
 

For me, the really scary thing about this whole Spotify thing is...
"...I really like Sting,

So normally he brings an album out, and to hear it I would rush down to town and buy the CD .... it was kinda exciting."
Old 11th November 2009
  #32
Lives for gear
 
CaptainHook's Avatar
 

IF spotify can generate enough revenue, and that's obviously THE big "if", i think it's
a great service. It's not available in my country yet, but signing up through a proxy
is possible.

From what i can tell, it runs just as fast as itunes on my computer. Searching and
playing songs is INSTANT. I hope it is the future and everyone can get paid from it.

I also found myself playing and searching for more obscure songs than the classic 'singles'
which i found interesting.
Old 11th November 2009
  #33
Lives for gear
 

Think of it this way: how much does the average music consumer spend on music in a year? Even in a good year, or the best year ever, 1999? Did they buy 10 CDs a year? 20? Let's say 15 CDs a year at $15 a pop (seems overly generous IMO). That's a little less than $20 a month.

If all of those people switched over to a subscription service for $20 a month, the industry would have the exact same revenue, just distributed differently. I think that number is probably a bit high though. Anywhere between $10 and $15 a month for an unlimited subscription to listen to any music ever recorded would be a total no brainer that would attract everyone from the 10 CD a year people to actual music fans, with the former subsidizing the latter.

Then imagine combining that with plans that would bundle the subscription cost with your existing phone, internet or cable subscription. People that might balk at a $20 a month music subscription wouldn't think twice about the difference between a $40 a month and a $60 a month cellphone plan.

That's the future IMO although it brings up a lot of questions about who will profit, and how to distribute fairly. Will it be a winner-take-all sort of scheme like publishing royatlies? Probably so, since the majors seem to own Spotify. A successful subscription service could be the best thing to ever happen to the music industry or it could be yet another way to strangle off indie access.
Old 11th November 2009
  #34
here's the bad news about Spotify... the four major label groups, providing the bulk of the content, are equity participants in the company.

what that means is, although they can negotiate "royalties" on one hand, that need to be paid to artists - they can reduce those fees because, helping spotify, because...

as equity participants in spotify, they really make money off the bottom line revenue which does not need to be shared with the artists...

awesome, the major labels just figured out Web 2.0 - create or partner with black box holding companies to launder advertising revenue without having to pay artists.

majors are requiring steep multi-million dollar advances, and/or equity stakes in these start ups. it not good for anyone other then the executives making the deal.

genius.

no thanks.

see here:

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

Spotify says it needs more time to make money | Technology | guardian.co.uk

This Is Quite Possibly The Spotify Cap Table

and one more...

proposed baseline accounting for music streaming sites
Old 12th November 2009
  #35
Gear Addict
 
starseed's Avatar
Big news in Sweden: Major artist complain he made 70 dollars in a year from Spotify...how much in lost revenue incurred from his catalog being available for free, he didn't say.

Max 3 is going to be so nice. New model.
Old 12th November 2009
  #36
Lives for gear
 
jindrich's Avatar
 

As a music lover, Spotify is a godsend.

For just €10 a month you have unlimited access to ANYTHING:

Stevie Wonder "songs in the key of Life", 1976? Boom. Some Chet Baker song? Boom. You heard at a mall that song, how was it... "Last night a DJ save my life"... Boom. Wolfmother just released new record? Boom.
You want to check your mixes agaisnt some record, any, in the studio? Boom.

ANYTHING you want. INSTANTLY. And you can make your own playlists for a party or for a lonely rainy afternoon. And music plays at 320kbps, which is not too bad.


I love it.

Another story is for the artists and thier royalties, but that is a contract/label matter, nothing to do with Spotify/iTunes/whatever
Old 13th November 2009
  #37
Lives for gear
 

People can slate spotify for not making artists enough money, but it makes them more than soulseek or limewire does.
Convincing a generation who have become used to listening to whatever they want for free to change their habits and 'go legit' seemed like an impossible task a few years ago. Credit for spotify and the likes for at least trying to create a positive, legitimate, legal way of doing things that isn't ignorant of current public habits.
Old 13th November 2009
  #38
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by yolkboy View Post
People can slate spotify for not making artists enough money, but it makes them more than soulseek or limewire does.

That's true BUT someone IS making money...now who is that and why isn't it the artist?

here's some strange info that I really do hope is incorrect...
When you have a free account then half the income generated by ads goes back to the artists/writers etc....when you have a paid account then that money go directly to the owners of spotify....! Go figure....
Old 13th November 2009
  #39
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolkboy View Post
People can slate spotify for not making artists enough money, but it makes them more than soulseek or limewire does.
Convincing a generation who have become used to listening to whatever they want for free to change their habits and 'go legit' seemed like an impossible task a few years ago. Credit for spotify and the likes for at least trying to create a positive, legitimate, legal way of doing things that isn't ignorant of current public habits.
the current public habits are stealing...

all of these conversations are secondary to restoring copyright protection - which thank God is being addressed at the highest levels of government, globally.

hard to believe we live in an age where any business model competing with thievery is actually being taken seriously as an option... it's not going to last... here comes the hammer...

Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement
Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) | Office of the United States Trade Representative

World Intellectual Property Organization
WIPO - World Intellectual Property Organization

Global Congress on Combating Counterfeiting and Piracy
Global Congress Combatting Counterfeiting & Piracy
Global Congress Combatting Counterfeiting & Piracy


Of course the "I want it for free" crowd and doom room philosophers will be up in arms that the party is over, and the teleco's, ISPs, and huge websites will also flipout... but hey... the free ride of building your business from our labor and IP is coming to end...

yeah... that sucks for you... put yourself in our shoes.

imagine having the labor of your livelihood be stolen for a decade...

buckle up... people who built business off the free stolen goods of the entertainment industry are on notice...

as a society, we will either respect copyright and intellectual property or we won't... it looks like in the end we will.
Old 14th November 2009
  #40
Lives for gear
 
TheMarqueeYears's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mingustoo View Post
For me, the really scary thing about this whole Spotify thing is...
"...I really like Sting,

So normally he brings an album out, and to hear it I would rush down to town and buy the CD .... it was kinda exciting."
Cryptic reply .... cool

WTF does it mean. Beats the heck out of me?

TMY
Old 14th November 2009
  #41
Quote:
Originally Posted by zboy2854 View Post
Supposedly the plan is to offer it for free (or rather ad-supported) right now to spread the word and get people used to the service and interface, then introduce a subscription model.

Either way, whether it's Spotify or some other company, it is clear to me that the future of music consumption will look like this, i.e. subscription based high quality on-demand streaming of whatever you want, whenever you want, rather than purchasing and downloading individual digital files or physical CD's.
I'm def intrigued by their pay plan, with the understanding that it will offer higher quality streams (if they ever make it over to the States).

Still, I'm otherwise largely very satisfied with my current subscription stream service, Rhapsody. It's the third subscription stream service I've had over the last 5 years and by far the best.

The first, MusicMatch, was bought by the second, Yahoo Music, which put some effort in but seemed hobbled by the parent company's obvious lack of interest and general cluelessness... when Yahoo wanted out of its committments to subscribers, they set up a deal with the far superior Rhapsody -- which I'd resisted because it is owned by RealNetworks -- but even though I had a bad taste in my mouth about their previous efforts, I have to say that Rhap is great, as far as I'm concerned -- it's the first of those I've tried with any kind of classical/serious music collection, among other things, and has all over better selection and performance than the others did.

I have no idea how the subscription model works out for labels and artists, but as a consumer, I could barely be happier. (OK... I would really like it if they got all their content providers to give them at least 256 kbps files. Most sound good but every now and then you get one that sounds like someone at the label just didn't care. And that couldn't be, right? heh )
Old 14th November 2009
  #42
Lives for gear
 

i've been tempted to get a premium subscription, but if the artists get near to nothing from it, i won't subscribe
Old 15th November 2009
  #43
Quote:
Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios View Post
here's the bad news about Spotify... the four major label groups, providing the bulk of the content, are equity participants in the company.

what that means is, although they can negotiate "royalties" on one hand, that need to be paid to artists - they can reduce those fees because, helping spotify, because...

as equity participants in spotify, they really make money off the bottom line revenue which does not need to be shared with the artists...

awesome, the major labels just figured out Web 2.0 - create or partner with black box holding companies to launder advertising revenue without having to pay artists.

majors are requiring steep multi-million dollar advances, and/or equity stakes in these start ups. it not good for anyone other then the executives making the deal.

genius.

no thanks.
Haha.... wow. That IS genius! Thanks for the info and links, red velvet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Guardian Newspaper
In Sweden, where Spotify has been running the longest, Magnus Uggla – well-established since the late 70s – has withdrawn his music from the service. On his blog he said that, after six months on the site he'd earned "what a mediocre busker could earn in a day". Regarding his record label, Sony Music, he says "after suing the **** out of Pirate Bay, they're acting just like them by not paying the artists". When he found out that Sony had 5.8% equity in Spotify he wrote: "I would rather be raped by Pirate Bay than ****ed up the ass by (Sony boss) Hasse Breitholtz and Sony Music and will remove all of my songs from Spotify pending an honest service."
Nice.
Old 15th November 2009
  #44
Lives for gear
 
rkopald's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios View Post
the current public habits are stealing...
....
.....
buckle up... people who built business off the free stolen goods of the entertainment industry are on notice...

as a society, we will either respect copyright and intellectual property or we won't... it looks like in the end we will.

For real. I've stopped using precious brain cells trying to keep track of how many idiots have asked me to "burn me a disc".
Theft is theft. It seems like it's coming to an end. Streaming subscription services are probably the way of the future. Nobody should get jacked from what they're owed due to revenue streams changing. If we can't get paid for creative content, get used to nothing but major label music being widely available. We all have lives. Our life partners don't want to join our pedantic arguments about this crap. I'm pretty damn sure Conan, Letterman, et. al. are covered from copyright infringement. Time for musicians to figure out how to protect their property. If we don't somebody else will. and they'll get rich and sleep well at night too. dfegad
Old 15th November 2009
  #45
Lives for gear
 
lagavulin16's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_David View Post
I'd have thought more people would like this business model.
Don't know the ins and outs of "spotify" specifically but I think it's the way forward.

Certainly, the cd business will never recover. itunes will get less and less too.

The only way the music industry can make any money will be the same way google/youtube etc do it.

Attracting people to a website and selling advertising. Free for the end user but lots of money splashing around from traffic. Hopefully, some business plans will be drawn up whereby artists/producers/labels make as much money as CD era, if not more.

That's my wishful idealistic opinion anyway.

As everything, it's gotta be done right and I'm not convinced spotify has cracked it.
Maybe when itunes is no longer viable, apple could do it and make it work.
It's really just a replacement for radio. You listen for free, you listen to ads.
Old 15th November 2009
  #46
It's doomed. If you offer people all the free music they want, an all they have to do it listen to an ad every 20 minutes, they'll still just block the ads, making advertising on the service worthless. Many people avail themselves of this site day after day, while blocking the very ads that make it possible to be here. Might as well just drive to Jules' house and spit on him.

Even in the TV world, people will just use programs that remove all the ads from even OTA content, which is only available to them for free because of the ads.

BTW, how is Spotify different, other than cutting out some middle men by the labels themselves being in it, different from the other service that a while back announces they were going to (if I remember correctly) drop the free service and that, even with 10M subscribers, they were going broke because the subscription cost had to be so low in order to get those folks to subscribe that they couldn't pay for the music?

What is the name of that company? I hate it when I can't remember stuff. A senior moment.

Anyway, with 10M subscribers, that's about as many people used to buy some single albums, and they probably weren't paying much more than for a single recent release album a year to be a subscriber and listen to the entire catalog available on that service. So how could you possibly have anything other but an imploded industry if that's the way it goes?
Old 15th November 2009
  #47
Lives for gear
 
7161's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMarqueeYears View Post
I really like Sting,

So normally he brings an album out, and to hear it I would rush down to town and buy the CD .... it was kinda exciting.

Now he has released "If on a Winters Night" and a day later there it is FREE on Spotify.

So I'm now listening to it (sounds cool) and it's cost me NOTHING!!

I really don't get it ... it just seems madness to me.

Can anyone explain it to me.

Thanks
TMY


agreed. i think we're gonna see a second dotcom bubble-burst soon and it'll be the slew of ludicrously overvalued music sites which have arisen in recent years. and then where will everyones 'strategy' be?

at some point when we've finaly finsihed this stupid game of watching various corps try and establish control of the market or retain control of the market, we're gonna have to go with reality which is legal p2p with payment tracking which is a system that's established globaly already, and is distributing music globaly already - but legal p2p with tracking isnt being tried cos companies want to control the market.

legal p2p with tracking doesnt allow anyone to control the market, it only allows companies to promote and then be judged/renumerated based on the quality of that promotion.

personaly i thought spotify was doomed from the get-go, but people wont have it.
Old 15th November 2009
  #48
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by hankdrummer View Post
i've been tempted to get a premium subscription, but if the artists get near to nothing from it, i won't subscribe
Old 15th November 2009
  #49
Lives for gear
 
7161's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Guardian Newspaper:

In Sweden, where Spotify has been running the longest, Magnus Uggla – well-established since the late 70s – has withdrawn his music from the service. On his blog he said that, after six months on the site he'd earned "what a mediocre busker could earn in a day". Regarding his record label, Sony Music, he says "after suing the **** out of Pirate Bay, they're acting just like them by not paying the artists". When he found out that Sony had 5.8% equity in Spotify he wrote: "I would rather be raped by Pirate Bay than ****ed up the ass by (Sony boss) Hasse Breitholtz and Sony Music and will remove all of my songs from Spotify pending an honest service."
exactly! the labels here are subsidising free use, while as commented: they sue the crap out of pirate bay

can you finaly see whats really happening? this is about control of market, NOT about selling more or paying artists

the labels are terrified of the www, if they lose control of the sales/ranking system they will find street level acts suddenly being ranked at number-1 while their appalling 'styled' offerings merely languish around the lower rankings.

the reality is, what kids have on their walkmans and ipods is not what's in the chart, & hasn't been for years.

legal p2p which they have been crushing for ages offers free distribution, so why would any company turn their back on a free distribution model unless it was for other reasons?

the second reason they fear legal p2p with payment ranking is.... bands wont need labels so much anymore and indie artists can garner payments without signing to a label


that'd be the end of the world as THEY know it.
Old 15th November 2009
  #50
Lives for gear
 
Tom Hakala's Avatar
 

If you go and buy Sting's album he will get money from it. Let's say 2 dollars. But he won't get anything if you still listen to the album after ten years or so. But with Spotify artisti will still get money. So in a long run I think it's pretty nice what an artist could possibly make, in a long run.
Old 15th November 2009
  #51
Lives for gear
 

in france, the ads are just spotify announcements. "did you know you can use spotify on your iphone ?" - yeah, cause you've told me about 50930497 times !

i've heard some 3rd party commercials, (mostly for music) but veeeery rarely, and a long time ago. it seems they're not selling that much advertising time.

what do you hear in your country ?
Old 15th November 2009
  #52
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by hankdrummer View Post
in france, the ads are just spotify announcements. "did you know you can use spotify on your iphone ?" - yeah, cause you've told me about 50930497 times !

i've heard some 3rd party commercials, (mostly for music) but veeeery rarely, and a long time ago. it seems they're not selling that much advertising time.

what do you hear in your country ?
I have gotten myself a premium subscripion because I couldn't resist having it on my iphone so I haven't hear commercials in some time BUT I find it kind of strange that a platform that millions of people around the globe use doesn't attract more "sponsors"...
And for the artists , who ,on spotify ,from what I've heard ,get their share from the income of ads it's a disaster and will probably in the end cause the whole thing to collapse since the income from premium customers go directly into the owners pockets.....I hope I am wrong....but I'm afraid I am right...

I love the service but I can't see it lasting if artists and songwriters get paid.....I mean if I pay something like 100 pounds per year (which by the way is waaaay more than I have been paying for new music per year in a loooong time) and if there are 10 million users more around the globe doing the same thing....then that'd be a billion pounds to share.....now THAT would so something.....
Old 15th November 2009
  #53
Lives for gear
 

another thing to consider : the KIDS who never ever bought a CD, will they get a premium subscription ? would they pay for music ? i doubt it
Old 15th November 2009
  #54
Gear Nut
 

My kid doesn't download anymore cos we explained why he shouldn'y and he's empathic so...but I def see ur point
Old 15th November 2009
  #55
Quote:
the reality is, what kids have on their walkmans and ipods is not what's in the chart, & hasn't been for years.
This is not supported by the research, which indicates that what is most popular is what is most downloaded. Obviously, given that there are only twenty top twenty songs, and tens of thousands of other songs, just by sheer numbers, anyone who has any number of songs on his/her iPod will by definition have more non-top twenty stuff than top twenty stuff. But the top twenty stuff will be on more people's iPods than any other songs, based on downloading stats.
Old 15th November 2009
  #56
Lives for gear
 
steins's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by hankdrummer View Post
i've been tempted to get a premium subscription, but if the artists get near to nothing from it, i won't subscribe
I have some minor releases available on both Spotify and iTunes. Here are the numbers for a given period, you decide what is best. BTW, I'm both the artist and record company, so there is no-one besides my digital distributor who gets a cut before I do.

Spotify:
1793 streams = approx. $1

iTunes:
2 complete albums DL, 14 individual songs DL: $21

Stein Tore
Old 15th November 2009
  #57
Quote:
Originally Posted by steins View Post
I have some minor releases available on both Spotify and iTunes. Here are the numbers for a given period, you decide what is best. BTW, I'm both the artist and record company, so there is no-one besides my digital distributor who gets a cut before I do.

Spotify:
1793 streams = approx. $1

iTunes:
2 complete albums DL, 14 individual songs DL: $21

Stein Tore
Then come the Italian sports cars, and the fast women, then the cocaine by the mansion pool. That kind of success has destroyed more than one artist.
Old 15th November 2009
  #58
Gear Nut
 

Stein.... That's just comical in a very depressing way... :-/
do u know what a writers situation is? Do I get money for a song that I've written that's streamed on spotify? This is just ridiculous....
Old 15th November 2009
  #59
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by steins View Post
Spotify:
1793 streams = approx. $1
Thank you steins, that should end any further Spotify discussion.
Old 15th November 2009
  #60
Lives for gear
 
steins's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by figgebass View Post
Stein.... That's just comical in a very depressing way... :-/
do u know what a writers situation is? Do I get money for a song that I've written that's streamed on spotify? This is just ridiculous....
It really is :-).

I don't know how intellectual properties are dealt with when it comes to digital distribution, but it's a interesting subject. Digital distribution is considered an alternative way of selling your stuff. If you record anyone else's songs, you normally have to pay a licence fee before you can distribute your recording. This fee is used to pay the rightholder(s). What is interesting is that, at least here in Norway, you don't have to pay this fee (called NcB-fee here in Norway) when releasing material for digital distribution only, since this fee is calculated based on the number of pressed CDs. Another question is if Spotify can be considered a record store or a radio station. Rightholders get paid everytime their music is played on the radio, thanks to world-wide, established systems taken care of by Intellectual Properties Organisations. AFAIK, this is not the case for music streamed on Spotify. I bet there are people who knows more about this than me.

I think there are a lot of unresolved issues regarding digital distribution. Remember, the whole recording business has had nearly a hundred years to establish the money-making system and infrastructure used up until the digital revolution. And now they (we) have to think different. It will take some time to establish new infrastructures and find new ways of generating money from them.

The main problem as I see it is not the lack of services for downloading music. iTunes works, so does Spotify. The problem is: It is not generating enough money to warrant the time, cost and effort it takes to write, record and publish your music.

Stein Tore
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
roadsweeper / Music Business
129
bexarametric / Music Computers
9
spektor / Electronic Music Instruments and Electronic Music Production
34
moderngroove / Electronic Music Instruments and Electronic Music Production
14
Alécio Costa / Mastering Forum
4

Forum Jump
Forum Jump