Spotify label royalty

[TribunalRecords]

I am not saying this is all labels but I doubt it's much different for anyone else out there, but I just got my digital statements and as promised I would post my amount. my label gets $0.01365004 per stream on Spotify.

Let the discussions begin....

 

[skyrefuge]

my label gets $0.01365004 per stream on Spotify.

Wow, are you sure you got the decimal point correct there? You're getting 1.36 cents per stream? If so, that's nearly 10 times the rate that was being paid out earlier this year (in the previous thread, we were assuming 0.16 cents per stream). That would change the economics significantly!

Anyhow, thanks for following up...this really shows how important up-to-date data can be in these discussions!

Neil

 

[Creeps]

looks like you may have misread that.. or I really suck at math. I'm assuming it's no different than getting paid for having music streamed through TouchTunes jukeboxes in bars and such.

At least people are hearing your tunes right?

 

[TribunalRecords]

actually, as i am digging deeper into the Spotify stuff. i pulled out a variance of amounts i am getting paid per track. the first number at the top was for Spotify in Spain. but these are for streams in the US.

0.00075992
0.00649244
0.00413724

just a random sampling from various tracks. i will try and figure out the reason for different pricing points later. could be song length, etc. who knows. this could be stream price vs track sale price.

but again, feel free to discuss.

 

[nailz]

>0.00075992

What was this for and why is it so low?

 

[skyrefuge]

actually, as i am digging deeper into the Spotify stuff. i pulled out a variance of amounts i am getting paid per track.

Does it report an average anywhere? Or do you have to calculate that yourself from the individual payouts?

The variance in payouts is apparently "normal", and has no logical basis behind it that anyone has been able to discern, and Spotify doesn't explain it (at least that was the state of affairs back in March, when this article, attempting to understand the strangeness, was written). I read someone who had different friends with different Spotify subscription levels listen to different tracks in an attempt to deduce if that affected the payouts, but it didn't, so I'm pretty sure track length doesn't have anything to do with it either.

But that article points out that even though the individual numbers jumped all over the place (from $0.00019 to $0.0085), the average seemed fairly constant across time periods and rights-holders, near $0.0016. So that would be the interesting figure to compare to. Already it looks like you had at least one stream that paid you more than any stream from that article.

Neil

 

[Diamond45]

I wonder how much Spotify pays versus SiriusXM, Pandora or other services, both Internet and non-Internet based.

 

[TheGodofMusic]

wow, thanks for posting that. really insightful and helpful information.

 

[King Lek]

Is there anyplace anyone can see how many times a song has been played on Spotify?

 

[MEGALOUD]

Yup, that's what I'm seeing too from Spotify, for streams, it's much like napster and Rhapsody with their models as what labels end up with, and artists typically get 50% of what labels do for their digital. so... guess what, it's nothing! It's sub pennies... if you get streamed 100,000 times you may actually make enough to drive to work at McDonald's for some real money lol. But you could think of it as radio royalties of the 21st Century without having to deal with the performing right agencies.

 

[AeonicSlumber]

I wonder how much Spotify pays versus SiriusXM, Pandora or other services, both Internet and non-Internet based.

Sirius XM is not a service... it's a radio station. I'm not even sure if it pays mech royalties either like for example Headbangers Ball does. Pandora's payout model is very weird. Sometimes it pays out, most of the time it does not.

Spotify has yet to disclose the rhyme or reason for its own payout model, but my theory is that the more streams, the higher the rate becomes.

 

[AeonicSlumber]

But you could think of it as radio royalties of the 21st Century without having to deal with the performing right agencies.

Unless it's commercial radio, most stations do not award mech royalties to copyright holders, as I am sure you know. So considering metal will pretty much never be a radio-friendly genre (unless you're a member of a very small club of bands like All That Remains and FFDP), having your catalog on Spotify ultimately yields a better scenario than hiring a radio publicist and praying to recoup that investment through record sales.

 

[Orion Crystal Ice]

It is also quite the menstrual friendly title for such a service, and a socially progressive person such as myself appreciates that.

 

[MEGALOUD]

Just so everyone knows, LAST FM totally freaking ROCKS on royalties for artists and it's a very cool service as well as networking and social media site, I vote LAST FM for the best choice to listen to music to help your bands and music scene.

 

[TribunalRecords]

>0.00075992

What was this for and why is it so low?

i think you mean why is it the lowest of the three INCREDIBLY low numbers. hahaha, i am not sure. i mean i can go back and grab the specific song it was pulled from. but it's any song in my catalog pretty much.

i am too small a label to rock the boat, but Spotify sucks. there i said it. hate me. hahaha. Just like everyone else on the this board i have bills to pay and i cannot pay them on LESS than pennies. i will say this now before the "data" is compiled and released, but streaming does NOT result in record sales.

i would say torrent and blogspot downloading leads to purchases of legal product, but streaming is for people who don't bother to spend money on a music and are set "in the moment" of life and listen to what hits them. they take away the pleasure from the music, but the labels and bands see no reward. Spotify doesn't make the music it simply whores it out to any ears that will pay to listen.

i am ready for the hate.

again, the venting isn't to people on this board since we are all avid music fans or else we wouldn't be in here. but it's towards the vast majority of people who treat music not as art, but as just another consumer product to be devalued as much as possible. i started my labels because i love music and it pains me to see how much it's been degraded in the last 12 years.

 

[Mardoch]

That's an amazingly miserable pay rate. To me the best point of such streaming services is discovery. I fire up Pandora every so often just for the chance to find new stuff like whatever it is that I'm currently listening to.

I would much rather actually own the products I like though. I rarely even buy digital (though it's likely a better money maker for everyone involved) because I far prefer the physical product. I have a feeling I'm one of the very few in this category these days and that eventually I'll be going digital just to keep buying.

 

[skyrefuge]

Sirius XM is not a service... it's a radio station.

Actually satellite radio is treated differently than terrestrial radio; they're required to actually pay performance royalties. The Washington Post estimated that Sirius pays 1.6 cents per listener per hour, while Internet radio such as Pandora would be forced to pay a higher rate of 2.91 cents per listener per hour (Pandora has since had that rate lowered, though they say it's still higher than Sirius's rate). Those numbers are actually quite close to what Spotify pays. If we assume that $0.0016 per stream average, and go with 4 minute songs, that's 2.4 cents per listener per hour.

Though in terms of fairness you would expect Spotify, an on-demand service, to pay a higher rate than "radio" like Sirius or Pandora, because the latter can claim that they're doing a service for artists, by advertising their music to listeners who would not have been exposed to it on their own.

Neil

 

[Orion Crystal Ice]

again, the venting isn't to people on this board since we are all avid music fans or else we wouldn't be in here. but it's towards the vast majority of people who treat music not as art, but as just another consumer product to be devalued as much as possible. i started my labels because i love music and it pains me to see how much it's been degraded in the last 12 years.

completely with you here. People, as they oversimplify everything in order to continue pointless debate, often gloss over the fact that there is this mindset issue and it is very very much an us VS 'them'. Whether people buy digital, buy physical. A person either 'gets' this statement and that passion and mindset, or they don't, and at the root of things, the tower is rocking violently because the foundation is now made up of too much of the 'them' mindset.

 

[AeonicSlumber]

Actually satellite radio is treated differently than terrestrial radio; they're required to actually pay performance royalties. The Washington Post estimated that Sirius pays 1.6 cents per listener per hour, while Internet radio such as Pandora would be forced to pay a higher rate of 2.91 cents per listener per hour (Pandora has since had that rate lowered, though they say it's still higher than Sirius's rate). Those numbers are actually quite close to what Spotify pays. If we assume that $0.0016 per stream average, and go with 4 minute songs, that's 2.4 cents per listener per hour.

You missed my point. First of all, ALL radio is technically supposed to pay mechanical royalties to artists, since they are technically licensing the song from the label/artist. However, non-commercial radio such as college radio does not have the money to pay artists. So usually, labels will just let college and non-commercial radio play tunes for free as a means of promotion (in fact ironically -- there are boutique labels that have radio departments or hire freelance radio publicity services such as The Syndicate and Skateboard Media for the sole purpose of charting their releases on college and non-commercial radio for said exposure, yet refuse to let Spotify distro their catalogues). Commercial radio on the other hand, pays mechanical royalties. So when you hear the phrase "radio hit," it is a term that applies to a song that charts high on commercial radio. There's alot of money in mechanical royalties from radio hits, so they are a big deal to major labels. However, most commercial stations do not play metal. Suicide Silence or Lamb Of God will never ever ever get on a major radio station, but bands like All That Remains, Five Finger Death Punch, Atreyu, etc HAVE infiltrated commercial radio and have "radio hits."

Secondly, Sirius may pay out in mech royalties, but they're not a distro. Spotify is a digital distribution service like iTunes, Napster, Rhapsody, etc, so I was merely distinguishing the difference between the two.

 

[skyrefuge]

Just so everyone knows, LAST FM totally freaking ROCKS on royalties for artists

This thread started with actual numbers, so that would be sweet if you could simply post what last.fm pays out to you.

The source I use says it's $0.004 per stream. While that's better than Spotify's reported average of $0.0016, it's only 2.5 times better, and it's worse than 3 of the 4 individual Spotify payouts that Matt reported.

Is that (maybe) 2.5x difference really enough to make the difference between "nothing" and "totally freaking ROCKS"? Compared to what you would get from an iTunes download or CD purchase, both of them would look like "nothing". Unless you get a higher rate from last.fm than reported elsewhere.

Heck, Matt thinks all his all his Spotify payout rates are effectively the same (nothing), even though there's a 17x difference *within* them, which is far greater than the difference between Spotify's average and last.fm's reported average.

Neil