[flagged]
Hating popular things doesn't make you an interesting person.
'Weird Al' Roasts Spotify's Artist Payout System in Year-End Wrapped Video
31–40 of 146 posts
Re: 'Weird Al' Roasts Spotify's Artist Payout System in Year-End Wrapped Video
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
From a different article: Not 3 cents, a third of one penny per stream. By that metric, Weird Al would have earned a little more than $12, more like $350,000 but his point stands. https://gizmodo.com/weird-al-spotify-wrapped-artist-pay-1851...
If that's how much he earns, I'm not sure his point does stand. If he's making $350k from Spotify, I'm guessing he makes about that much from all the other streaming services combined. $700k in income from what is essentially an advertisement for your tours and merch feels like a pretty good deal.
It's not income directly for him, it's paid to his label, and that label will take their own cut. My impression is that the label takes the largest cut of all the people involved, but I'm happy to be corrected on that.
Re: 'Weird Al' Roasts Spotify's Artist Payout System in Year-End Wrapped Video
#33AFAIK Spotify doesn't pay per stream. They pay a percentage of revenue to artists that is divided based on streams of their music. Record companies and big artists negotiate these deals with Spotify. It seems like artists should be more angry with their labels about the deals that are negotiated than mad at Spotify.
There's plenty of anger going around, especially when you consider the major labels own almost 20% of spotify.
Re: 'Weird Al' Roasts Spotify's Artist Payout System in Year-End Wrapped Video
#34> which is notoriously bad at paying musicians. The only thing I ever see are people comparing against the money that 90's rockstars used to be able to bring in from album sales. That ship sailed a long time ago, Spotify take everyone's money, substract a percentage for themselves and distribute the rest based upon number of plays. If you were a big artist it's probably worse because you aren't getting a sweet deal t…
Maybe I have a different memory of record deals, but I've never heard of a band that made money from album sales. This is why they are always touring. It's not to promote the album, but to make money themselves. That's why there are jokes about bands "coming out of retirement" to do a tour after so many years being because one of the members needs to make a payment for something or other.
Re: 'Weird Al' Roasts Spotify's Artist Payout System in Year-End Wrapped Video
#35> which is notoriously bad at paying musicians. The only thing I ever see are people comparing against the money that 90's rockstars used to be able to bring in from album sales. That ship sailed a long time ago, Spotify take everyone's money, substract a percentage for themselves and distribute the rest based upon number of plays. If you were a big artist it's probably worse because you aren't getting a sweet deal t…
[deleted]
Re: 'Weird Al' Roasts Spotify's Artist Payout System in Year-End Wrapped Video
#36[flagged]
HA! Must be hard knowing you'll never accomplish anything even remotely close to that mediocrity in your miserable life.
Re: 'Weird Al' Roasts Spotify's Artist Payout System in Year-End Wrapped Video
#37I want a streaming service with following business model:
I pay 10 dollars for unlimited streaming. Spotify gets 1 or 2.
I listen only to taylor swift on repeat - she gets 8 I listen to only one song the whole month - then some obscure metal band from Finland gets 8 I listen to 40 bands equally - they get 20c each I listen to 1 band as 20 other combined - the band get 4$ all the rest split 4. Thats it
Here is the kicker - no aggregation and averages for millions of users - my money goes only to the people I listen to in whatever ratios.
Re: 'Weird Al' Roasts Spotify's Artist Payout System in Year-End Wrapped Video
#38I think a better payout structure for Spotify would be to go per-user. For example, for each subscriber a given amount from their subscription plan is earmarked for payouts. Let's say about 4$ per user. We divide that amount by the number of streams the user had that month, and we simply pay that amount to the artist.
Examples:
- I only listened to one song this month? The full 4$ go to that artist.
- I listened to 2 albums by 2 artists this month, on repeat? 2$ each (assuming the same number of plays for each)
- I listened to 399 tracks from one artist, and one track for another? 3.99$ to the first and 0.01$ to the second.
- The gym next door is streaming Mariah Carey's Chrismas album on repeat? Their 4$ goes to Mariah Carey and mine still goes to the artists I enjoy.
I think the current model of per-stream across the whole platform distorts the playing field towards more popular artists that play in commercial settings.
Re: 'Weird Al' Roasts Spotify's Artist Payout System in Year-End Wrapped Video
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
If that's how much he earns, I'm not sure his point does stand. If he's making $350k from Spotify, I'm guessing he makes about that much from all the other streaming services combined. $700k in income from what is essentially an advertisement for your tours and merch feels like a pretty good deal.
It's not income directly for him, it's paid to his label, and that label will take their own cut. My impression is that the label takes the largest cut of all the people involved, but I'm happy to be corrected on that.
Not to forget that Weird Al is doing a lot of covers - so he is not the original composer of the song. Performers usually get paid way less (everybody can perform a cover of any song out there), but the composers get paid the lion share. I also doubt he gets $12 but probably lot more, the video is just intended to draw attention to Spotify's payout schemes.
Re: 'Weird Al' Roasts Spotify's Artist Payout System in Year-End Wrapped Video
#40AFAIK Spotify doesn't pay per stream. They pay a percentage of revenue to artists that is divided based on streams of their music. Record companies and big artists negotiate these deals with Spotify. It seems like artists should be more angry with their labels about the deals that are negotiated than mad at Spotify.
Most artists these days self-distribute via platforms like Distrokid, not via a label. Distrokid just passes along streaming revenue, so they don't have any incentive to fight for it. And obviously, artists aren't in any position at all to collectively negotiate - you publish on Spotify, or you're unknown. The fault does, in fact, lie mostly with Spotify here.