Jump to content

Spotify CEO: Taylor Swift would have made $6M this year


Morphine Prince

Featured Posts

Morphine Prince

HELSINKI (AP)  Spotify's Swedish CEO voiced disappointment Tuesday that Taylor Swift pulled her music off the popular music streaming service, denying claims it's making money "on the backs of artists."

Daniel Ek defended the service in a blog post, saying he had co-founded the platform to protect artists from piracy and had paid more than $2 billion to music labels and publishers since 2008.

In the blog titled "$2 Billion and Counting," Ek said that piracy doesn't pay artists a penny, "nothing, zilch, zero," while Spotify's payouts for a top artist like Swift were on track "to exceed $6 million a year."

Artists complain that music streaming services and file sharing have sharply cut into album sales and that the fees Spotify pays to record labels and music publishers, with a portion eventually funneled to musicians, is too small.

Swift pulled her music from Spotify last week, meaning her songs, which were among the most streamed on the service, are no longer available to its 50 million users.

"Music is art, and art is important and rare," Swift wrote in the Wall Street Journal last summer. "Important, rare things are valuable. Valuable things should be paid for."

Spotify says nearly 70 percent of the revenue it receives from paying customers goes back to rights holders in the form of royalty payments and the more people who pay for Spotify the more money artists get. Customers pay $9.99 a month for Spotify's premium streaming service, which gives them access to its music library on smartphones and computers without any advertisements.

The company claims 12.5 million of its 50 million users subscribe to the premium service, the remainder using the free service that is funded by advertisements.

Ek conceded that it was a big problem if "money is not flowing to the creative community in a timely and transparent way."

"We will do anything we can to work with the industry to increase transparency, improve speed of payments, and give artists the opportunity to promote themselves and connect with fans," Ek wrote.

Source: https://music.yahoo.com/news/spotify-ceo-bemoans-swift-exiting-174638412--finance.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Redstreak

It would have been 6 million out of an entire year divided amongst every single person who ever had a hand in working with her music. Hence why Aloe Blacc only got $4000 in compensation from a song he was on that was streamed MILLIONS of times.

Take a moment to think of just flexibility, love, and trust~
Link to post
Share on other sites

It would have been 6 million out of an entire year divided amongst every single person who ever had a hand in working with her music. Hence why Aloe Blacc only got $4000 in compensation from a song he was on that was streamed MILLIONS of times.

$4000 was only from Pandora, and he was only featured as a writer, not one of the main artists.

 

Honestly, Spotify is the future. Deal with it. People only look at countries like the US, the UK and Australia, where it doesn't really boost earnings that much. But look at it at a larger scale: Asia (excluding Japan) has 4 billion people, yet their music market is smaller than for example the US market, or the UK market. That's because in Asia, 99%+ pirates their music.

Now imagine if 10% of these 4 billion people went to streaming services, that'd 400 million subscribers (with probs. 50-100 million paid subscribers) who normally wouldn't buy music anyways. That's A LOT of people. Right now Spotify has 50 million subscribers, and a #1 song gets 10 million streams a week. With 500 million subscribtions, the #1 song would get 100 million streams a week, which equals ~700k earnings a week

Link to post
Share on other sites

Redstreak

$4000 was only from Pandora, and he was only featured as a writer, not one of the main artists.

 

Honestly, Spotify is the future. Deal with it. People only look at countries like the US, the UK and Australia, where it doesn't really boost earnings that much. But look at it at a larger scale: Asia (excluding Japan) has 4 billion people, yet their music market is smaller than for example the US market, or the UK market. That's because in Asia, 99%+ pirates their music.

Now imagine if 10% of these 4 billion people went to streaming services, that'd 400 million subscribers (with probs. 50-100 million paid subscribers) who normally wouldn't buy music anyways. That's A LOT of people. Right now Spotify has 50 million subscribers, and a #1 song gets 10 million streams a week. With 500 million subscribtions, the #1 song would get 100 million streams a week, which equals ~700k earnings a week

I never said Spotify wasn't the future? Just that its current methods don't fairly compensate the artists. No one is saying destroy Spotify, just fix up some of it's more negative qualities.

Take a moment to think of just flexibility, love, and trust~
Link to post
Share on other sites

I never said Spotify wasn't the future? Just that its current methods don't fairly compensate the artists. No one is saying destroy Spotify, just fix up some of it's more negative qualities.

They can't give the artists more money without asking more money from the customers :shrug:

Link to post
Share on other sites

DrewStevens

Pulling of her album from Spotify is just a marketing move, Beyonce and Coldplay did almost the same thing with their albums. 

 

Spotify and iTunes are not that different. They both take 30% of the royalties, the only difference is that they make more money with iTunes. But criticizing Spotify because they make money "on the backs of artists" and still using iTunes is very hypocritical, both companies make money from artists. The real enemies for artists are record labels.

 

itunes.gifNew-70-Chart.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 million (not like she'll get THAT much from it) is not a lot for someone like her.

 

She'll make it back easily on tour. :fan: 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think song writers should get a higher percentage in sales. They should be equal or almost equal to the recording artists...

 

But anyways, Spotify is a wonderful option, in comparison to pirating.

Xalser
Link to post
Share on other sites

GagaSlayedYou

$4000 was only from Pandora, and he was only featured as a writer, not one of the main artists.

 

Honestly, Spotify is the future. Deal with it. People only look at countries like the US, the UK and Australia, where it doesn't really boost earnings that much. But look at it at a larger scale: Asia (excluding Japan) has 4 billion people, yet their music market is smaller than for example the US market, or the UK market. That's because in Asia, 99%+ pirates their music.

Now imagine if 10% of these 4 billion people went to streaming services, that'd 400 million subscribers (with probs. 50-100 million paid subscribers) who normally wouldn't buy music anyways. That's A LOT of people. Right now Spotify has 50 million subscribers, and a #1 song gets 10 million streams a week. With 500 million subscribtions, the #1 song would get 100 million streams a week, which equals ~700k earnings a week

 

:tea: 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...