Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Spotify demonetizes all tracks under 1k streams

djmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 425 posts

Re: Spotify demonetizes all tracks under 1k streams

#171

Post by pydry »

kunley wrote: post #121
snailmailman wrote: post #11

I don’t know much about how music licensing works. But would this cause smaller musicians to decide to pull their stuff off Spotify? I listen to a lot of music on Spotify. And some of it is from smaller indie artists. Not a huge amount, but I’ve definitely listened to songs that are in that It surprises me how much of my Spotify library is no longer available. There’s at least a few dozen songs in my Spotify library…

The mechanism there is kind of "dontcareism": yes, indie musicians will go away, but Spotify doesn't care, because ultimately this won't stop listeners from using it, over time most of them will forget what they really wanted

They do care, they're just exploiting the indie musicians' lack of leverage. Together they matter a lot, they're just powerless individually.

It's the same dynamic companies use against ununionized labor.

Re: Spotify demonetizes all tracks under 1k streams

#172

Post by anentropic »

> Since going public on the stock market in 2018, the company has lost money every year

they don't even have a business model

the whole thing is a massive scam that devalues music just to earn some VCs a big payout

it's like if I said I was going to "disrupt the supermarket industry" by giving away free food

Re: Spotify demonetizes all tracks under 1k streams

#173

Post by jhrmnn »

helsinkiandrew wrote: post #152
atoav wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am in a small and new band. In 2023 we earned roughly 500 Euros via Bandcamp (digital, physical and merch) 300 Euros selling merch on gigs 2000 Euros playing gigs 20 Cents on Spotify There is no monetary reason to be on spotify, the only reason we are on there is because fans asked.

> There is no monetary reason to be on spotify, the only reason we are on there is because fans asked. This isn't an excuse for Spotify not paying much for plays, but I bet having music on spotify helps the gig revenue though. In some ways this is also true for Taylor Swift et al - they also make thousands times the amount from playing gigs than 'selling' albums, streaming, and radio plays but that drives ticket sale…

Spotify should then be run as ad business—charge artists to let them advertise on Spotify.

Re: Spotify demonetizes all tracks under 1k streams

#174

Post by lotsofpulp »

xerox13ster wrote: post #162
lotsofpulp wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The comic does not make sense for iTunes, since if you buy music from Apple, you get the non DRM file that is yours to use however you want.

It’s xkcd number 488, it was probably made when iTunes was still selling or just after it stopped selling DRM music.

Good point, the comic was published Oct 2008 according to xkcd and Apple stopped selling DRM music in Jan 2009.

Re: Spotify demonetizes all tracks under 1k streams

#175

Post by geraldhh »

max_ wrote: post #144

The market is hungry for a well-done music streaming service. I don't know why there is no venture backed competitor.

i guess the economics are not favorable because the music industry is already well positioned to extract wealth from populism and will give a hell of a legal/drm battle if threatened. the long-tail of indy artists doing essentially nothing for the bottom line doesn't help either.

Re: Spotify demonetizes all tracks under 1k streams

#176

Post by petecooper »

atoav wrote: post #54
snailmailman wrote: post #11

I don’t know much about how music licensing works. But would this cause smaller musicians to decide to pull their stuff off Spotify? I listen to a lot of music on Spotify. And some of it is from smaller indie artists. Not a huge amount, but I’ve definitely listened to songs that are in that It surprises me how much of my Spotify library is no longer available. There’s at least a few dozen songs in my Spotify library…

I am in a small and new band. In 2023 we earned roughly 500 Euros via Bandcamp (digital, physical and merch) 300 Euros selling merch on gigs 2000 Euros playing gigs 20 Cents on Spotify There is no monetary reason to be on spotify, the only reason we are on there is because fans asked.

Reading this has made me buy the last two physical items on my Bandcamp wishlist.

Bandcamp isn't perfect, but it fits well with my listening habits and I'm glad it earns _some_ money for you in the grand scheme of things.

Re: Spotify demonetizes all tracks under 1k streams

#177

Post by fimdomeio »

"You wouldn't stream a car for free would you?" This is just playing with meanings but for most musicians having their music on Spotify or on torrents is pretty much the same. the only difference is that only in one case there's a company profiting in the process.

Re: Spotify demonetizes all tracks under 1k streams

#178

Post by cal85 »

tgv wrote: post #149
asdof wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd wager the income from playing gigs would be substantially lower if you weren't on Spotify.

Your arguments veers close to the "for exposure" payment. People don't go to indie concerts because of a spotify track. Nor to big name concerts. And 20 cents corresponds to around 50 to 100 plays according to the numbers mentioned here.

It is extremely common and often perfectly rational for creatives to do things in exchange for exposure. There is nothing fallacious about this.

> People don't go to indie concerts because of a spotify track.

Yes they do.

Post reply on HN