Infinite Catalog的动态

Everyone is mad at Spotify again cuz they tried to flip the script on Phonorecords IV. But what is this Phonorecords IV, you ask? Phonorecords IV (CRB IV for the cool kids)?is the latest contract in the music biz, all about the cash flow for tunesmiths and word weavers coming from those streaming giants we all hate, but vibe to begrudgingly - covering 2023 to 2027. This deal got cooked up after some fast but real talk between the National Music Publishers’ Association (NMPA), the Nashville Songwriters Association International (NSAI), and the Digital Media Association—yeah, the backwards-hat wearing tech bros repping Spotify and Google. Here's why CRB IV is lit, and why it matters: ??We're finally seeing a little bump in the payout for songwriters and publishers, with a headline rate of 15.35% for that five-year run. Not much, but better is better. ??This deal got sealed way faster than the last one, Phonorecords III, which was like an endless encore nobody asked for.? ??The streamers have been hounded for the deets, which they wouldn’t give up, so SOMEBODY dropped an unredacted version of the agreement for all to peep. Yeah, the plot thickens right about here. The Copyright Royalty Board (CRB) stamped this bad boy with the official seal of approval. But, not everyone's throwing up peace signs. Some songwriters and their squads are throwing shade, calling for a total redo of how these rates get set - they’re not feeling the transparency or the terms. Now sure, dive into the nitty-gritty, and you'll find the 411 on stuff like "family plan”, "free trial offering," and "bundled subscription offerings," (which to be honest, is a pretty devious play on Spotify’s part) and penalties, late payments and the rates themselves. But this deal? It's a game-changer for the music makers and their bank accounts for the next few spins around the sun. So, what does Spotify decide to do? They’re shaking things up by calling its Premium plans 'bundles' now 'cause they're tossing in audiobooks. But here's the kicker (and where it gets confusing too): this switcheroo means the dough rolling out to songwriters is not as fat as the solo sub rate they all thumbs-upped in the CRB IV deal. And yeah, obviously that's got the NMPA throwing some serious side-eye, claiming Spotify's playing them dirty. But wait, there's more. Spotify's dropping a fresh audiobook-only tier and bumping up the price tag on all those Premium plans. And get this, to confuse you on the motivations of Spotify even more, a new 'Basic' tier is on the horizon too, serving up just the beats & podcasts, minus the bookish vibes. This one's apparently gonna stick to the full agreed payout rate for the lyrical geniuses and their paper-chasing pals. Despite stirring the pot, Spotify's all, “(Spotify) is on track to pay publishers and societies more in 2024 than in 2023". And after already sliding nearly $4B to the rights holders in the last two years, maybe, just maybe, things are gonna get better?

Spotify's aggressive bundling #strategy has officially started impacting publisher #royalty statements, with nearly 97% of subscription accounts now categorized as bundles in the #UnitedStates. This shift is affecting music publisher #bank accounts and wallets, as Spotify accounts for 42% of all mechanical royalties paid in the U.S. Despite a contentious lawsuit filed by the #MechanicalLicensingCollective (MLC) and multiple regulatory complaints lodged by the National Music Publishers' Association, Spotify is pushing full steam ahead with its aggressive bundling shift. Preliminary statements shared with #DigitalMusicNews confirm that nearly 100% of all Family and Duo plans are now bundled, with a substantial chunk of the all-important Individual subscriber plans also transitioning. Spotify is expected to release a music-only option in the United States, with #subscribers potentially having the option to downgrade into a non-audiobook, music-only option for $1 less a month. The damage to publishing payouts may be greater than anticipated, with the bundling #royalty decline pegged at $150 million. However, based on preliminary royalty drops reviewed this week, DMN’s back-of-the-envelope calculations now peg that figure well past $160 million. NMPA chief David Israelite has been highly vocal about the issue, describing the bundling shift as a “war on songwriters.” The organization has filed a #lawsuit filed by the Mechanical Licensing Collective (MLC) challenging the bundling reclassifications and seeking unpaid royalties. Spotify has publicly defended its actions, stating that its approach to #bundling and #pricing is #industry standard. The company emphasizes that it notifies users in advance of any price increases and offers multiple plan options. Sources to DMN have indicated that Spotify plans to battle the NMPA on all fronts and remains confident that they will prevail in various legal and legislative disputes.

Spotify has finally achieved profitability! Yes, you read that right. The popular music streaming app, which had been operating at a loss since its inception in 2006, has reached a significant milestone. How did this happen, you ask? Let me break it down for you. Spotify disrupted the music streaming industry during a time when independent music artists, recording labels, and distributors were grappling with declining record sales due to the rise of music pirating services. Despite facing resistance from industry giants, Spotify successfully secured licensing rights to host records on their platform. However, this victory came at a substantial cost for the startup in the form of licensing fees. Currently, Spotify allocates approximately 70% of revenue from its music service as licensing fees for record label and independent distributers, etc. on its platform. Despite steadily increasing revenue over the years, Spotify remained in the red until the the first quarter of 2024 when it finally turned a profit of 197 million euros ($210.0 million). This achievement was the result of a combination of strategic moves, including: - Downsizing headcount - Streamlining operational expenses - Implementing price increments - Diversified offerings (Spotify now offers podcasts and audiobooks, not just music.) What lies ahead for Spotify? In the foreseeable future, it is expected that Spotify will continue to build on its profitability, with year-over-year increases, for the following reasons: - Disciplined expenditure practices - Commitment to continuous innovation (Spotify stands out as one of the most innovative companies in the industry) - Empowering independent artists, thereby shifting power dynamics away from the traditional "big three" record labels - Further diversification Spotify's journey from losses to profitability is not just a success story; it's a testament to strategic adaptability and perseverance in a rapidly evolving industry. #Spotify #Podcasts #Audiobooks #BusinessGrowth #BusinessStrategy #Innovation #ConversationsWithHarp #StrategyWithHarp #InnovationWithHarp

So how strong is the MLC’s case against Spotify? Will the MLC, working on behalf of songwriters and publishers, be able to win back the income lost to Spotify’s change? Based on MBW’s analysis of the case, we think the MLC has a solid chance of winning… in the short run. In the longer run, there may be little that the organization can do to prevent Spotify from switching a good chunk of its customer base over to a bundled offering.

If you are a music lover with a Spotify account, I implore you to please stop using their service. If you're unaware, as of April 1 they have demonetized all tracks with less than 1,000 streams (ie the work of HEAPS of independent artists). Prior to that, they were already one of the lowest-paying streaming providers - paying artists only $0.003 per stream. Tidal, Apple Music and believe it or not - NAPSTER pay artists a little more fairly. And bandcamp is obviously the best. The ux on these apps is nowhere near as good. It's frustrating. You will miss some elements of Spotify. However, I can't think of a better analogy than this one: Spotify is the cage egg of streaming platforms. It's unethical to continue to give them money. Oh, and you know what else? Spotify has made lyrics a premium feature - they're now charging for accessibility. If you're an artist, I encourage you to take your music off Spotify. I've requested a takedown via my DSP and unfortunately it's taking a lot longer than I would like (months) to have my music removed. I'm sure they currently have a backlog of independent artists trying to remove their music from Spotify. In summary - Spotify = bad.

This inspired me to finally ditch Spotify. Spotify billed itself early as the solution to music piracy and recorded music essentially becoming free. They’ve achieved remarkable things, most notably huge consumer and culture shifts over time. And credit where credit is due, they have implemented plenty of initiatives that support artists to grow and monetise their careers. But streaming, and recorded music itself is still broken, despite huge profits made by streaming companies and the record labels that own them. From a business model context, I can understand why Spotify would make this change; they ultimately want to eradicate a huge inefficiency of paying out tiny royalties to a huge number of artists, and divert these funds to larger artists and labels that pull strings. This will help them to say that their per stream royalty payouts are increasing. And to cut expenditure, boosting profitability and their share price. They say they will divert funds, but this is just a way of covering up the fact they are now saying this: “If you are an emerging artist, releasing your first song, your work is worthless and you should produce music for us, for free.” They know they will cop flack, they will lose some users, but Spotify is a hard platform to leave and over time, consumers will forget and the way these royalties are calculated will become normalised. The problem here is that if we do nothing, more companies are likely going to want to replicate what Spotify is up to. They are already spinning this by saying they will divert funds to “emerging artists” which is a lie, because every emerging artist starts by needing to get their first 1000 streams. Streaming is broken, there’s no perfect platform, and no substitute for buying tickets and merch direct from your bands, especially small and mid tier artists, they need it most. We need to think about the future we want; who will make music in 10 years? What we support today is what we will experience in 5 years. Spotify could have followed Soundcloud in making their royalties fairer for smaller artists, instead they are cutting them off, choosing their record label owners. If you’re after an alternative, Apple Music and Tidal typically payout higher royalty rates, and you can easily migrate your music library through a platform like https://soundiiz.com Changing won’t fix the mess the music industry is in, but doing nothing won’t either. If we’re not careful we could very well lose the heart and soul of the one artform that unites the planet more than any other, we shouldn’t take that for granted. Spotify & the major record companies seem more than happy to, just to line their pockets and boost the share price. If you make music or care for anyone who does, consider switching. And ask the artists you care about how you can help them, by buying and supporting directly.

Spotify has announced record profits and a huge jump in its gross margin for the second quarter of 2024 – after implementing a change that lowers artist royalties. The streaming giant saw subscribers jump 12% year-on-year to reach 246 million, while total revenue was up 20% to €3.8 billion (A$6.24b), and the gross margin hitting 29.2%. The gross margin increase in particular will draw ire, given Spotify recently changed the way it pays out mechanical royalties in the US by re-classifying its Premium plans as ‘bundles’ — as they include audiobooks?and?music — which then allows it to pay out a lower rate than for a standalone subscription with just music. This change happened in mid-April (during week three of Q2) with a Spotify spokesperson announcing at the time: “As our industry partners are aware, changes in our product portfolio mean that we are paying out in different ways based on terms agreed to by both streaming services and publishers. “Multiple DSPs have long paid a lower rate for bundles versus a stand-alone music subscription, and our approach is consistent.” This certainly helped the gross margins for the Premium tier, which jumped to 31.4%, and dragged the company’s overall earnings up, all thanks to what Spotify calls “improvements in music profitability”.

Spotify has profoundly changed the way we listen and what we listen to. The service is a library, but it’s also a recommendation service, and its growth is fuelled by this second function, and by the company’s strategies for soundtracking the entirety of our days and nights. Just as we train Spotify’s algorithm with our likes and dislikes, the platform seems to be training us to become round-the-clock listeners. Liz Pelly’s new book, “Mood Machine: The Rise of Spotify and the Costs of the Perfect Playlist,” is a comprehensive look at the impact of the streamer’s dominance. She argues that Spotify’s greatest innovation has been its grasp of affect, how we turned to music to hype us up or calm us down, help us focus on our homework or simply dissociate. Unlike a record label, a tech company doesn’t care whether we’re hooked on the same hit on repeat or lost in a three-hour ambient loop, so long as we’re listening to something. “Spotify just wants as much of our time and attention as possible, and a steady stream of melodic, unobtrusive sounds could be the best way to appeal to a passive listener,” Hua Hsu writes. “You get tired of the hit song after a while, whereas you might stop noticing the ambient background music altogether.” As a result, “what we have now is a perverse, frictionless vision for art, where a song stays on repeat not because it’s our new favorite but because it’s just pleasant enough to ignore.” Hsu looks at the true cost of Spotify: https://lnkd.in/gUWy2SFE

Spotify is in hot water. Artists are whining, again. Spotify raised subscription prices in the U.S., U.K., and Australia to cover costs for their new audiobook service, which is part of the premium subscription. Kristin Robinson from Billboard said the changes allow Spotify to cut royalty payments to songwriters by up to $150 million a year in the U.S. The new royalty calculation is provoking backlash. Yet, this isn’t the first time Spotify has gotten complaints from artists who feel they don’t get paid a fair share. You’ll recall Neil Young, Joni Mitchell, and Taylor Swift boycotted Spotify - all 3 have since changed course by the way. Here’s the thing. Spotify is a consumer-first platform. They’re also a for-profit company. So, we shouldn’t be surprised if Daniel Ek is making bundles more valuable to consumers at the expense of the supply side. Like merchants who list products on Amazon, artists aren’t forced to use Spotify.?If they don’t like the payouts, they can take their content elsewhere. Yet, the vast majority won’t abandon ship because the benefits of streaming, albeit controversial, are very real for artists. With Spotify, musicians have: ? a global platform for listener discovery ? a plausible monetization channel in addition to YouTube and TikTok ? a platform that prioritizes music first ? an affordable channel to market content without the costs of going direct The reality is, royalty payments vary based on artists' agreements with record labels.?Since 2014, streaming revenue has grown 44% each year and is the main revenue source for these labels.?About $0.70 of every $1 Spotify makes goes to these rights holders. If anything needs a second look, it’s how record labels are sharing that revenue with their artists. So let’s stop the whining and appreciate how important Spotify has been to an industry once mired in piracy. ------------- PS?? I post on subscription, strategy, and entrepreneurship. Follow Adam Levinter for more. Grab my newsletter ?? https://lnkd.in/e7St_YeT

Spotify's Record Profits and the Royalties Debate Spotify has posted record profits in Q2 2024, prompting significant stock sales by top executives, including co-founder Martin Lorentzon, who sold $85.8 million worth of shares. This move is part of a broader trend among Spotify's leadership, with key figures like Alex Norstr?m and Gustav S?derstr?m also cashing in on the company's stock. In total, Spotify executives have offloaded over $166.8 million in shares, capitalizing on the streaming giant's strong financial performance. Despite these profits, the company faces criticism for its recent reclassification of Premium tiers as 'bundles,' which has led to a projected $150 million reduction in royalties paid to songwriters. This change affects mechanical royalties, a key income source for songwriters, by altering how payouts are calculated. The music community has raised concerns about the fairness of these changes, especially given Spotify's significant profitability. The controversy highlights a broader issue within the music industry: the distribution of streaming revenue. While Spotify and other platforms have enabled easier access to music for consumers, the financial benefits for creators, particularly songwriters, have been a contentious topic. Many argue that streaming services, with their substantial revenues, should provide fairer compensation to the artists and writers who create the music that drives their success. Spotify's recent actions underscore the need for a more equitable model in the music industry. As the company continues to grow, balancing its financial success with fair compensation for all contributors remains a crucial challenge. This situation not only affects the livelihoods of individual songwriters but also has broader implications for the sustainability and fairness of the music ecosystem as a whole. As the industry evolves, finding a balance that ensures all stakeholders are fairly compensated will be critical to its long-term health and sustainability. -Jay #Spotify #MusicIndustry #Royalties #Streaming #FairPay #ArtistRights #MusicBusiness #MusicTech #MusicStreaming #FinancialTransparency