Axel must realize the way for the modern musician to make money is to tour, and to use the data from streaming services to determine where your fans are and your best routes for the tour, I'd say he's also lazy and doesn't want to or can no longer perform live.
That is actually a great idea, I wonder if the Artist actually figure this out. If I was an artist and streaming services wanted my songs, I would make it a requirement when they make the fraction of a penny royalty payment they also include the regions of where those payment originated from. That is why the "The Hoff" hangs out in Germany, they are the only one's who like his music.
It may almost certainly have to do with earnings. Since Jimmy Iovine gave up the music streaming perspective and the Apple Music business case in particular, the gap between artist income and Apple's proficiency is only widening. That's then Tims responsibility, who always lauded artists and music to be "in Apple's genes" He probably forgot to add "if it isn't too much of an effort" Sorry, just a wild guess...
I can't tell what point you're trying to make. When did Iovine "give up" streaming? I don't get it.
Wow a whole bunch of ignorance in this thread. First off it is well known that the streaming services are screwing over the artist. Apple is one of those services.
Second; being a CEO means having the ability to demand things that people may not want to do. While Trump may be more forward, his behavior is a trait all CEOs have to an extent. Dont confuse a public image with a CEO's ability to be a real bastard at work.
Finally it is the CEO's responsibility to work in the best interest of his company! This means milking your suppliers for all they are worth. Remember Cook is known for supply chain management and in the case the musicians are the suppliers.
Axl Rose seems an odd person to make a complaint, since his music was still reasonably relevant in the time of Napster, KaZaa and LimeWire. Rose should wake up to the reality that people still pirate media content, and consumers will immediately switch back to this behaviour if pricing goes back to the bad old days. (A $30 "album" which was nothing more than 1-2 good tracks padded with banal filler.)
No matter how one tries to frame it, Apple dragged the music industry out of a death spiral and into the 21st century.
Hey Axl, you're alive (and still on drugs by the look of it)! I liked your screamed songs way back, before I matured my taste (or some would say, developed a taste).
No person, company or service is perfect, but going after the best paying service for music streaming and downloading makes you appear even more out of touch with reality (one of the side effects of drug abuse). Besides, I'd wager that Tim Cook isn't the hands on executive on the deals Apple have with music labels, that would be Eddy Cue.
So keep to your strongs man! Soon there'll be another Rock'n Rio for you to cackle to a big audience again. Some of them will even like it!
You need to tweet this. I am sure he is never going to see this post.
Alas, too long to tweet! But I've looked at his feed on Twitter, he'll get the gist!
Wow a whole bunch of ignorance in this thread. First off it is well known that the streaming services are screwing over the artist. Apple is one of those services.
Second; being a CEO means having the ability to demand things that people may not want to do. While Trump may be more forward, his behavior is a trait all CEOs have to an extent. Dont confuse a public image with a CEO's ability to be a real bastard at work.
Finally it is the CEO's responsibility to work in the best interest of his company! This means milking your suppliers for all they are worth. Remember Cook is known for supply chain management and in the case the musicians are the suppliers.
Be careful not to confuse "efficiency", spreadsheets, "maximization", etc. with overall ends and reality. No, CEOs don't have to be that way or 'milk suppliers for all they are worth' etc. That kind of behavior might end up looks good on the books short-term, but could do long-term damage to crucial relationships (employees and/or external).
Yes, the CEOs job is to work in the best interests of the company, instead of say, the best interests of a particular employee. But, those best interests are a huge, complex beast that often escapes CEOs who's heads are buried in spreadsheets or who act like an a-hole to their best resources (a.k.a. employees).
Yes, some well known CEOs have gotten away with things... but that doesn't mean they wouldn't have done even better w/o some of their character flaws.
to be honest, artists instead of being greedy, they should be thanking the likes of Apple and others who have brought this way of obtaining songs n videos to people’s devices, because their labels had zero interest in going this way they were dragging their feet the whole process they didn’t want the cd market to collapse. they were not investing millions/billions into this kind of delivery system... artists should be barking up the tree of their labels and complaining to them why they aren’t getting a bigger cut. their labels are essentially the strong man, they contribute nothing to the delivery or data servers they just collect the money and keep a good chunk
A method of delivery (I mean the internet in general as well as music services) that has allowed many artists to dump the Label, have greater direct interaction with fans with direct patronage by fans. Even allowed them to take on younger artists and help promote them directly on their own labels.
To Forgoneconclusion: you remember vaguely but correctly — there was a ruling last year regarding royalties for streaming on songs prior to 1974. IIRC, Apple was already paying this, while Spotify wasn’t — one of the reasons for their recent larger losses.
Speaking of Spotify, they are in court again on a different matter — charges that they simply haven’t paid many of the artists, full stop. The suit seeks just over $1 billion in unpaid royalties. I do not know if the case will be successful, but if it is that will be another blow to a company that, for all it’s well-deserved popularity, can’t seem to find a business model that results in profits.
Assuming Rose was attempting to express dissatisfaction with his royalty cheque for streaming music more generally, I fully agree with him that streaming rates suck compared to either radio airplay royalties or (best) CD buying. But someone should take him aside and inform him that a) Apple didn’t invent streaming — Spotify is seven years older than Apple Music; b) Apple Music pays more than any other streaming service; and c) Spotify and AM are both popular because that’s how consumers appear to want to purchase music, not because Apple (or anyone) imposed this on them. I understand both the allure of streaming and its disadvantages, but the big feature (for record companies) of streaming is that it eliminates piracy. If streaming hadn’t grown popular, music piracy would be the huge industry it was just a couple of years ago — only bigger.
Mr. Rose may want to ponder that point, or at least more accurately identify his target and clarify his actual complaint.
Wow a whole bunch of ignorance in this thread. First off it is well known that the streaming services are screwing over the artist. Apple is one of those services.
Second; being a CEO means having the ability to demand things that people may not want to do. While Trump may be more forward, his behavior is a trait all CEOs have to an extent. Dont confuse a public image with a CEO's ability to be a real bastard at work.
Finally it is the CEO's responsibility to work in the best interest of his company! This means milking your suppliers for all they are worth. Remember Cook is known for supply chain management and in the case the musicians are the suppliers.
From most account, music streaming services pays between 70% to 75% of their GROSS revenue from streaming, for the rights to stream music. The remaining 30% to 25% has to pay for the streamers cost to stream music (other than the rights to the music), before there's any profit. There's a reason for why there aren't many companies offering streaming music subscriptions, it's not very profitable unless one is using the subscription service to bolster another part of their business. Like Apple with their mobile devices, Amazon with their Prime membership and Google with their targeted advertising. The largest subscription service, Spotify, is not profitable right now.
It is not Apple (or other streamers) fault that most of that money goes to the music labels that holds the rights to the artist music that they are streaming. If the artist has a beef with how little they are getting paid for their streamed music, they shouldn't have made the deal with the Devil, that entails upfront money and promotion, in exchange for low royalties rights on their music sold down the line.
The artist complaining about the low royalties they're getting for streamed music needs to take it up with their labels. If the music rights are owned by the labels, then Apple pays the labels for streaming their music as contracted and it's up to the labels to pay the artist, as contracted. Except for maybe binding contracts already made with a label, nothing prevents an artist from becoming their own label and contract directly with the streamers on how much they want for the rights to stream their music.
It's no different that authors accepting millions upfront from a publisher, before a single copy of their book is sold, in exchange for low royalty rights on each copy sold. The publisher has to recover the millions they paid upfront, before they turn a profit and the authors then can't cry foul because the publishers, after recovering their upfront money, are making more money than the authors on each copy sold. The publisher took the chance that they might never recover the upfront money they paid to the authors. Not to mention promotional cost.
Maybe this is a complement. Notice Axl didn't say "President Donald Trump". He said "Donald Trump" as maybe to mean the real estate tycoon Donald Trump. That Trump was highly successful in making billions of dollars with real estate and Tim Cook, with Apple, is doing the same with music.
Axel must realize the way for the modern musician to make money is to tour, and to use the data from streaming services to determine where your fans are and your best routes for the tour, I'd say he's also lazy and doesn't want to or can no longer perform live.
It's not just that. Axl has been an idiot for a very long time.
I remember when he lost his shit because The Offspring said their next album was going to be called Chinese Democracy. Axl was livid since that was to be the name of the infinitely delayed follow-up to The Spaghetti Incident. He issued a cease and desist order and was huffing like a dragon till someone told him that the announcement from Offspring was made on the 1st of April.
Axl Rose is the Donald Duck of the iTunes, March 9, 2018... I guess he did not like the money he got on iTunes... Just search for botox prices trends... Guns and Roses last album was on 1991 for me... Chinese Democracy album was nonsense... If you are listening you are probably listening to an album on 90's and no one would buy that album like on iTunes, Axl Rose is lucky for having something like iTunes in the world... Whatever... Do some more botox on your face Axl...
Wow a whole bunch of ignorance in this thread. First off it is well known that the streaming services are screwing over the artist. Apple is one of those services.
Second; being a CEO means having the ability to demand things that people may not want to do. While Trump may be more forward, his behavior is a trait all CEOs have to an extent. Dont confuse a public image with a CEO's ability to be a real bastard at work.
Finally it is the CEO's responsibility to work in the best interest of his company! This means milking your suppliers for all they are worth. Remember Cook is known for supply chain management and in the case the musicians are the suppliers.
No one is being screwed over. Artists and their labels don’t HAVE to grant a license to stream their music. They do it to remain “visible” and competitive. With so much competition for attention, if your music disappears from sales or streaming it will quickly be forgotten.
Comments
But, when no one can figure out what you meant, or even if it was a positive or negative tweet, there's a problem.
Second; being a CEO means having the ability to demand things that people may not want to do. While Trump may be more forward, his behavior is a trait all CEOs have to an extent. Dont confuse a public image with a CEO's ability to be a real bastard at work.
Finally it is the CEO's responsibility to work in the best interest of his company! This means milking your suppliers for all they are worth. Remember Cook is known for supply chain management and in the case the musicians are the suppliers.
No matter how one tries to frame it, Apple dragged the music industry out of a death spiral and into the 21st century.
Yes, the CEOs job is to work in the best interests of the company, instead of say, the best interests of a particular employee. But, those best interests are a huge, complex beast that often escapes CEOs who's heads are buried in spreadsheets or who act like an a-hole to their best resources (a.k.a. employees).
Yes, some well known CEOs have gotten away with things... but that doesn't mean they wouldn't have done even better w/o some of their character flaws.
Speaking of Spotify, they are in court again on a different matter — charges that they simply haven’t paid many of the artists, full stop. The suit seeks just over $1 billion in unpaid royalties. I do not know if the case will be successful, but if it is that will be another blow to a company that, for all it’s well-deserved popularity, can’t seem to find a business model that results in profits.
Assuming Rose was attempting to express dissatisfaction with his royalty cheque for streaming music more generally, I fully agree with him that streaming rates suck compared to either radio airplay royalties or (best) CD buying. But someone should take him aside and inform him that a) Apple didn’t invent streaming — Spotify is seven years older than Apple Music; b) Apple Music pays more than any other streaming service; and c) Spotify and AM are both popular because that’s how consumers appear to want to purchase music, not because Apple (or anyone) imposed this on them. I understand both the allure of streaming and its disadvantages, but the big feature (for record companies) of streaming is that it eliminates piracy. If streaming hadn’t grown popular, music piracy would be the huge industry it was just a couple of years ago — only bigger.
Mr. Rose may want to ponder that point, or at least more accurately identify his target and clarify his actual complaint.
It is not Apple (or other streamers) fault that most of that money goes to the music labels that holds the rights to the artist music that they are streaming. If the artist has a beef with how little they are getting paid for their streamed music, they shouldn't have made the deal with the Devil, that entails upfront money and promotion, in exchange for low royalties rights on their music sold down the line.
The artist complaining about the low royalties they're getting for streamed music needs to take it up with their labels. If the music rights are owned by the labels, then Apple pays the labels for streaming their music as contracted and it's up to the labels to pay the artist, as contracted. Except for maybe binding contracts already made with a label, nothing prevents an artist from becoming their own label and contract directly with the streamers on how much they want for the rights to stream their music.
It's no different that authors accepting millions upfront from a publisher, before a single copy of their book is sold, in exchange for low royalty rights on each copy sold. The publisher has to recover the millions they paid upfront, before they turn a profit and the authors then can't cry foul because the publishers, after recovering their upfront money, are making more money than the authors on each copy sold. The publisher took the chance that they might never recover the upfront money they paid to the authors. Not to mention promotional cost.
Maybe this is a complement. Notice Axl didn't say "President Donald Trump". He said "Donald Trump" as maybe to mean the real estate tycoon Donald Trump. That Trump was highly successful in making billions of dollars with real estate and Tim Cook, with Apple, is doing the same with music.
He's off his meds again.
It's not just that. Axl has been an idiot for a very long time.
I remember when he lost his shit because The Offspring said their next album was going to be called Chinese Democracy. Axl was livid since that was to be the name of the infinitely delayed follow-up to The Spaghetti Incident. He issued a cease and desist order and was huffing like a dragon till someone told him that the announcement from Offspring was made on the 1st of April.
He's always had his head stuck up his ass.
Axl is saying Tim Cook is the president of the music industry.
with Apples clout, it’s kinda true.
Bunch of ingrates after Jobs saved the industry from pirate meltdown.