Carving out a niche as a small artist on Spotify

What I am saying is that even though the $0.12 isn't based on the number of listeners, there is a number of listeners (n). So that $0.12 should be divided by that n in order to calculate how much money is paid per listen. If that n > 265, then Spotify is paying more per listen. I agree that the on-demand nature means Spotify should cost more than radio. Still, the argument that Spotify does pay less than radio per listen is wrong, and it makes your case a lot weaker if insist on that, because it's contrary.

When I said $0.12 a stream isn't a viable model for music, I didn't mean because it paid the artists too little, I meant it cost too much! Paying the artist and songwriter $0.12 per stream means charging the user about $0.15 each time they listen to the song. (Which doesn't seem right when compared to the purchase price of a song, unless people listen to music they purchase fewer than 8 times on average.) If they stream 25 hours per month, at average song length of 4 minutes, that's about 375 songs per month, or about $56/month. For heavy listeners, it would be a lot more. I don't think many people would sign up at that level. It definitely couldn't be covered by advertising. That said, you could probably get a lot more than Spotify is paying. Still, it does indicate some room there to get more than the $0.00318.

It is surprising to me that we don't see more exclusivity with music like we do with video content, where subscriptions to various services end up being necessary if you want to watch a particular show. The consumption patterns are quite different. However, given the number of competing platforms out there and the low switching costs associated associated, probably the best strategy is for a whole company with a lot of publishing rights to pull their content from the lowest paying services. Something like what Disney did to Netflix.

If you want it from a source other than me: "Inside the Black Market for Spotify Playlists" https://www.dailydot.com/upstream/spotify-playlist-black-mar...

Further apologies for not making it abundantly clear that I'm on your side on the topic that professional musicians deserve to be paid like any other profession including programmers.

So inadvertently my GP post probably come across as disputing your right to earn money with your music. That's the opposite of what I was trying to say.

My post was more an (obviously misfired) attempt to guide the argument away from the equipment and distribution expenditures side of making professional calibre music - since that's trending significantly lower and lower compared to the 70s and 80s. Therefore I believe professional musicians are doing themselves less and less favours by mentioning that argument.

I think the more successful leading argument would be the investment of talent and time. To me talent is a continuing valid argument, since as a music consumer I hate to lose the most talented musicians to being average in some other profession at the cost of them not developing that talent to the best it can be, and to publish their work for the benefit of larger society (including me). -- I'd also hate so lose the most talented programmers to other professions etc.).

And to maximize their musical talent, that talented individual needs to have the time and energy to invest by getting paid for making music. The required cost of gear only adds to that need, but I'd say that your time and energy is much, much more valuable than your gear with today's equipment. For example over 5 years, I'd say your time should be at the very least 5 to 10 times more valuable than your gear - quite possibly more. (That ratio was very different in the 70s and 80s with lower cost of living and higher equipment and distribution costs).

And hell yes, you should get paid - and my heart bleeds for you and so many other high caliber musicians, who are finding it increasingly difficult to make even a modest living with creating outstanding music.

p.s. I can't profess to be knowledgeable about your arm of the professional music business. I have however reasonably deep familiarity with other parts (assuming your definition of a professional musician would also include those parts). For what it's worth, I count a sibling, a sibling-in-law, and a nephew as current full-time professional musicians in performing live, producing, arranging, musical direction and such. And we are close, so therefore talk a lot. And it may not count anymore, but I also made my living with playing live music for a while before bailing out to become a software developer. Which in turn over the years funded my reasonably nice home studio - so I know the costs of acquisition, maintenance and continued upgrades quite intimately.

Agreed, I can become a developer for quite a bit less money in gear - but as I said above, the equipment cost pales to a rather small percentage in comparison to the time and energy investment while needing to eat, while keeping dry and warm/cool, and even more so when you're trying to support a family.

But above all: My very best wishes to you in trying to survive and hopefully find or continue your niche to thrive in the generally grim environment facing professional musicians - only made worse by the pandemic.