Notsofast

gatorguy said:

Notsofast said:

Spotify is in deep trouble as it has always paid among the worst for songwriters and artists,  almost half of what Apple Music pays out to artists. It finally crept above Amazon this past year.   That's why Apple is viewed most favorably by artists. Here's the latest on who pays what to artists.  (*Note, Napster is likely to go under)  **Also note how Google is hosing artists!!

BTW, your source for the chart posted an update the next month which you may have missed:
https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2019/01/30/2018-streaming-music-price-bible/

No, you are looking at the old chart.  It's confusing the way they posted it, but if you look closely, the article I referenced said it was updated for 2019 and that's why Spotify was able to creep past Amazon, when previously they were even lower than Amazon. 

ihatescreennames said:

gatorguy said:

Notsofast said:

Spotify is in deep trouble as it has always paid among the worst for songwriters and artists,  almost half of what Apple Music pays out to artists. It finally crept above Amazon this past year.   That's why Apple is viewed most favorably by artists. Here's the latest on who pays what to artists.  (*Note, Napster is likely to go under)  **Also note how Google is hosing artists!!

Google Play Music at #4 is just one teeny percentage behind Apple Music @#3, .00676 compared to .00735 per stream. But Google is "hosing artists!!" while Apple isn't?

My guess is the reference was to YouTube and lumping it in with Google. Maybe?

Yes, based on Youtube, which accounts is nearly half of all music streaming these days, Google is putting it to artists.  Combine that with their recent opposition to increasing rates,  it's no wonder the artists industry is thanking Apple.

gatorguy said:

Notsofast said:

Spotify is in deep trouble as it has always paid among the worst for songwriters and artists,  almost half of what Apple Music pays out to artists. It finally crept above Amazon this past year.   That's why Apple is viewed most favorably by artists. Here's the latest on who pays what to artists.  (*Note, Napster is likely to go under)  **Also note how Google is hosing artists!!

Google Play Music at #4 is just one teeny percentage behind Apple Music @#3, .00676 compared to .00735 per stream. But Google is "hosing artists!!" while Apple isn't?
BTW, your source posted an update on those rates based on actual royalty reports the next month:
https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2019/01/30/2018-streaming-music-price-bible/

Absolutely.  Youtube music is estimated to account for almost 50% of all music streaming.  From Forbes "YouTube is far and away the most popular option in the world when it comes to streaming music."

Spotify is in deep trouble as it has always paid among the worst for songwriters and artists,  almost half of what Apple Music pays out to artists. It finally crept above Amazon this past year.   That's why Apple is viewed most favorably by artists. Here's the latest on who pays what to artists.  (*Note, Napster is likely to go under)  **Also note how Google is hosing artists!!

crowley said:

color said:

This proposal would also apply to Walmart, Costco, Target, airlines,etc, etc, etc.  Any company of size that has an online presence that sells any product other than its own would have to either:

not sell any of its own products on the site
Or
not have the site.

Warren makes Trump look rational.

Is that so unreasonable/irrational?

running a platform where you sell other people’s products but also your own products presents an obvious conflict of interest. 

I agree.  And I love how you are proposing we finally start applying a conflict of interest standard to business. 

Why does Walmart, Kroger, Target, etc., get to sell their own products in their stores? Walmart is the biggest retailer in the world, and there's a clear conflict of interest for Walmart to sell their brand of baked beans instead of or next to Del Monte's in the grocery aisle.  They shouldn't have any house brands on the shelves.  Break them up now!  Or even better, government stores like in Venezuela where all government approved products compete equally on the shelves.

And why should Amazon be able to sell Amazon products on Amazon. com along with competitors like Anker?   A clear conflict of interest.  Not fair.  And, of course, why should Apple be able to promote Apple software and services on the platform that it took all the risks, and has spent tens of billions of dollars developing and spends billions each year maintaining and improving?   Totally unfair.  And don't get me started on Spotify.  They are unfairly using their platform to push Spotify instead of letting Tidal, Apple, etc., use the platform to reach and service customers.  

The obvious answer is to either have these companies spend all these years and billions of dollars developing platforms so only their competitors can use them, or even better, have the government develop stores and platforms and then let everyone use the platforms.