It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
It’s very sad . A chap I know in Germany got a government grant to go on tour with his chamber quartet . Meanwhile here in the U.K. you can’t even get to see a dentist
Imagine releasing your debut single, it’s a hit, you get 10 million streams in a week, you’ve made it… you’re famous, but you’re still going to work on Monday because you’ve earned £17,300 and there’s 4 of you in the band, and whoever else is waiting for a cut…
It’s no wonder ticket prices are up.
When I say that I would not pay significantly more for music (than the £16.99 I pay each month for Spotify), it’s almost irrelevant to think about the morality I do/ don’t bring to the situation; I simply cannot afford to pay significantly more than that for music - I would just have to limit my consumption to what I could afford.
Point being, to pay huge amounts to artists from streaming needs huge amounts of money to come in from consumers, and I can’t see enough of the latter happening to allow for the former.
Unless we put up with more advertising, but I pay for Premium precisely so I don’t have to put up with advertising.
Ebay mark7777_1
https://www.riaa.com/u-s-sales-database/
Physical sales imploded independently of digital media. You'll note that, from 2008, digital downloads have been fairly static but CD sales were on a serious decline even before digital grew past being a rounding error. Since 2016, streaming has been the only part of that graph that's growing (apart from the weird anachronism that is vinyl), and the only part that decreased as streaming grew was digital downloads.
So...yeah, physical sales weren't killed off by streaming, downloads were.
Now, let's ask ourselves: why did CD sales tank? It's simple - the labels kept jacking the prices up to the point where it didn't make sense for anyone to buy. There was even a discussion on here about it in the early days of the forum, as I recall.
So...yeah, they could easily jack the prices of streaming accounts. It'd mean more money in the big platforms' pockets, so...why don't they? It's certainly not because they're already swimming in money; Spotify first became profitable in 2017, and it's only made a profit in eight quarters out of seven years since then, so they'd definitely have an incentive (ironically, artists are doing better out of the deal than Spotify are...).
The reason is that streaming is the only growth segment of note in the music industry right now, and they've learned their lessons from the mistakes of the past. If they fuck that up, there's nowhere left to go.
Problem is, this would annoy your Ed Sheerans, Adeles and Iron Maidens, and you don’t want to drive them away from your platform.
Wrong. If streaming services paid what streams ARE WORTH and expected an ever-so-much-smaller profit things would be better.
Spotify is the worst.
The only problem with that is the law and the contracts artists signed. That's why independent artists make more from streams than signed artists, and (coincidentally) that's also why signed artists are generally the ones pissing and moaning the most - they signed abusive contracts. If they'd stop doing that, the labels wouldn't be able to get away with so much and suddenly we'd be hearing about this an awful lot less.