This is why I thought some of their recent actions that hurt the lowest played artists was strange, you want to encourage artists to NOT use the big publishers to help break their triopoly.
I think the most recent changes are fine in practice, but the optics are not great which probably matters a lot.
Exactly, Spotify is stuck between pleasing artists and the big publishers.
Profit can be distorted based on how much you're paying your employees.
In this case royalties paid out to imaginary property holders means spotify is functioning exactly how it should. Those people are profiting, spotify's employees are being paid. Everyone directly involved has more money than they need.
I mostly listen to smaller bands and buy their stuff on Bandcamp. It sucks that Bandcamp was sold (twice now) and will probably go down the shitter, but that seemed like a more sustainable model. Also buying music is nicer than renting it for me.
Team Bandcamp as well. I'll be sad if it degrades. My hope is it survives long enough to be discovered by everyone as they get sick of the shit music streams on Spotify, Pandora and their ilk
Poor Spotify. Here's a Link to a documentary about the dark side of Spotify, by Slightly Sociable. Their illegal business, extortion of artists and support for scamming.
I believe Spotify is largely responsible for its own financial struggles. Knowing that 2/3 of their revenue goes to the greedy labels, they should consider scaling back on operational costs and excessive investments in advertising and celebrity podcast deals.
In a way, it serves them right. Spotify plays a significant role in transforming music into a product akin to fast food, prioritizing mass consumption over artistic value. This approach not only impacts their profitability but also contributes to a broader devaluation of music as an art form.
So fuck Spotify.
Spotify plays a significant role in transforming music into a product akin to fast food, prioritizing mass consumption over artistic value.
Have you never heard of Top 40 before?
To determine if this company is actually a poor widdle guy or just trying to look like their hands are tied with respect to paying artists, look up how much Daniel Ek is worth, and then look up what he does with his money
ok. they should get a job then. pull themselves up by their bootstraps
They just want your personal and behavioral data to sell to third parties for shady purposes. After all, AI's don't feed themselves
For a company that has revolutionized the music industry and changed the way we listen to music, one would expect Spotify to be making a lot of money.
How has spotify "revolutionized" the music industry? Are thy doing anything new? Streaming isn't new, yearly reviews aren't new, freemium isn't new, discovery isn't new... Is the revolution that it's now a standard target for artists?
Spotify literally changed the way people listen to music by being popular enough that the general way of listening changed from a purchase, listen forever model. To a listen to anything you want and never not have anything new, way of listening (but you don't own anything).
A song is no longer worth a purchase of a cd, or dollar at itunes. It's worth the 3 minutes of listening that it gives you when Spotify recommends it to you.
Obviously I'm biased. And also, yes, there were streaming services before Spotify, but nobody that mattered and with the influence of Spotify.
Yeah it's all the fault of the rightsholders. Definitely not bad management.
Not that I'm a fan of rightsholders but this is more like shifting the blame.
And snoop dog complains after receiving a measley $45k from one billion streams.
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
