markfiend wrote: ↑25 Nov 2020, 17:59
Let's say (a generous sounding) £45 per song, works out at £0.00014 per person per song (roughly equivalent to "per stream")
Good point.
Big difference there is that a much bigger chunk of those royalties get to the artist & not just spread about among the big music labels regardless of whatever else is played on the radio. Plus, it's a promotional tool more than anything else.
It's a better deal than the
streaming models by far where the service takes its cut, then hands the lion's share of what's left to the big music labels who then take their cut & (I only learned this today), they often factor in between 10 & 25% for "breakages" which is an archaic hangover from days when physical product was de rigueur & sometimes would get damaged in transit/ manufacture etc. & then spread what's left among the all artists that they stream.
Tom Gray did an exercise & worked out the the B**tles, who were the biggest band on the planet in their day, would have been in debt to their label if they had relied on a
streaming model & were unable to play concerts.
Fact is, if you listen to a stream of, say, The Sisters, a chunk of the money you pay (should you pay a subscription) for that stream will go to Taylor Swift or Justin Beaver or someone else you don't actually listen to.
The tech itself isn't a problem. In fact it's a great concept given the number of mobile devices globally. It's the model that's unfair.
...
...
