If a song is featured on Spotify playlist..

[TheCureinMalibu 45,913]

Source?

[Gaga Lazuli 8,654]

then those streams should not count for the BBH100 in my opinion. 

[TheFame Monster 8,924]

Article from The Verge

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2017/7/12/15961416/spotify-fake-artist-controversy-mystery-tracks

https://www.theverge.com/2017/7/12/15961416/spotify-fake-artist-controversy-mystery-tracks

 

[Girrr 1,086]

All those streaming parties for The Cure  You chart-thirsty hoes cost us the coins for a music video 

[TheFame Monster 8,924]

1 minute ago, Girrr said:

All those streaming parties for The Cure  You chart-thirsty hoes cost us the coins for a music video 

Gaga tweeted playlists to stream from

[TheCureinMalibu 45,913]

Wait is this the reason why our good sis Million Grammys didn't have the good chart-run on Billboard Hot 100? Cause the money is more important than the chart

#Moneynotthebling.

[Kalinda 1,130]

That's absolutely, 100% not true. And a little Google search shows nothing about Buzzfeed reporting anything like you're claiming. So, unless you have a different source (which I also haven't found searching Google News), this is the very definition of fake news.

[TheCureinMalibu 45,913]

1 minute ago, Kalinda said:

That's absolutely, 100% not true. And a little Google search shows nothing about Buzzfeed reporting anything like you're claiming. So, unless you have a different source (which I also haven't found searching Google News), this is the very definition of fake news.

https://www.theverge.com/2017/7/12/15961416/spotify-fake-artist-controversy-mystery-tracks

"Spotify was paying producers a flat fee to create tracks for its playlists — some of which garner over 1 million subscribers — instead of licensing the content and paying out royalties to the rights holders. In these alleged deals, Spotify would control the master copyright "

[Slayer 9,227]

41 minutes ago, GAGA1972 said:

It seems fair. That's called business. 

Lol how is that fair business? There's a difference between making a profit and robbing an artist. 

[Kalinda 1,130]

5 minutes ago, TheCureinMalibu said:

https://www.theverge.com/2017/7/12/15961416/spotify-fake-artist-controversy-mystery-tracks

"Spotify was paying producers a flat fee to create tracks for its playlists — some of which garner over 1 million subscribers — instead of licensing the content and paying out royalties to the rights holders. In these alleged deals, Spotify would control the master copyright "

That's A) completely different than OP's claim and B) not confirmed by The Verge that Spotify's pays no royalties for these songs. From your link, a bit further down: "Though The Verge found no evidence of Spotify independently commissioning music, a source close to Spotify confirms that the streaming service will reach out to labels — usually independent ones — to ask to license content to fill out certain playlists. That content is licensed in a non-exclusive manner; Spotify does not own the rights to the tracks."

[TheCureinMalibu 45,913]

1 minute ago, Kalinda said:

That's A) completely different than OP's claim and B) not confirmed by The Verge that Spotify's pays a flat fee and no royalties. From your link, a bit further down: "Though The Verge found no evidence of Spotify independently commissioning music, a source close to Spotify confirms that the streaming service will reach out to labels — usually independent ones — to ask to license content to fill out certain playlists. That content is licensed in a non-exclusive manner; Spotify does not own the rights to the tracks."

Let's just wait and see.

[lodylody 1,746]

Sis why didn't you give us a source tho, this is GagaDaily not HollywoodLife  

[Kalinda 1,130]

7 minutes ago, TheCureinMalibu said:

Let's just wait and see.

The Verge even says in their report that it's unlikely Spotify even pays a lower royalty rate for these songs, no mention that for these specific songs Spotify pays no royalties:

 

"So here’s what we know: the majority of the artists listed by MBW are legitimate artists, writers, and session musicians using pseudonyms for a variety of personal and business reasons. Many of them use seemingly legitimate publishing companies — including Universal Music Group’s publishing arm — to primarily publish instrumental piano songs that have a higher chance to make it onto piano playlists. Some of them use library music company Epidemic Sound, which has a royalty agreement with Spotify.

[...]

We also don’t know whether Spotify is paying a lower rate per stream for these tracks. It’s unlikely, given that some of these artists may already have existing deals in place with Spotify through music publishers associations, or are working with independent labels under the Merlin Network which negotiates deals for thousands of labels at once."

 

So, OP's claim is completely false. And even for this entirely different scenario, where Spotify reaches out to labels and anonymous artists to include songs on mostly ambient playlists, it's unlikely that they're paying a lower royalty rate per stream for these specific songs, let alone no royalties.

[DiamondAngel 5,044]

41 minutes ago, Slayer said:

Lol how is that fair business? There's a difference between making a profit and robbing an artist. 

They get the exposure? Spotify doesn't have to put those songs on playlists and cause them to blow up. It would be stupid of them to do it for free. And the artist's labels choose for them to do that - no robbery. That's a tad overdramatic. 

[Arturo 40,746]

That's fair. The promo needs to be paid for. Also no one is making money from streaming, song sales, or albums tbh.

Better that you use the relatively small amount of money you get from songs to make sure they're a hit and then use the success to sell tours.