Spotify Is Coming For Your Royalties in 30 Days

Подписаться 231 тыс.

Просмотров 82 тыс.

50% 1

Spotify has announced some BIG news this week.
The streaming giant plans to introduce a threshold dictating that artists have a minimum number of annual streams before royalties are generated.
While this will act as a gatekeeper and discourage 'hobbyists' and fraud, it's likely to have a significant impact on smaller and emerging artists.
Today we'll explore how these policy changes will affect you. Let us know your thoughts in the comments below!
-------
Serious? Let’s go.
📈 FREE 20 Day Plan For Your Next Music Release: training.dk-mba...
⚡️ Don’t know where to start? Join The Roadmap To 1 Million Streams: www.dk-mba.com
🌎 1-1 Consultations: damiankeyes.com...
🎥 Work On Your Socials With My Agency: dk-social.com
LET’S GET SOCIAL:
📲 Instagram: @damiankeyes1
📲 TikTok: @damiankeyes
✉️ Email: hello@dk-mba.com
🌐 Website: damiankeyes.com
ESSENTIAL VIDEOS TO RELEASE YOUR MUSIC:
🎬 How To Release A Single In 2024 - • How To Release A Singl...
🎬 10 Ways To Get Your Music Heard In 2024 - • 10 Ways To Get Your Mu...
🎬 I Got This Artist 1M Views In 7 Days And Here’s How - • I Got This Artist 1M V...
📚 MY BOOKS:
Stop Selling Music: amzn.to/2YGWI9
Rule Breaker’s Guide To Social Media: amzn.to/2N1bwtV
👇 ABOUT ME:
Hey! I’m Damian Keyes and I've worked with musicians every day of my life for the past 20 years. The internet is de ply untrusting understandably and here is my background so you can have the full picture.
When I was 18, I was signed to a major label and at 23 I co-founded a Music University in Europe called BIMM (valued at $300M). I’m also a bass player, I’ve played for a number of artists including Eric Clapton, Alanis Morrisette and Billy Cobham. I initially retired at 30, but realised that life gets boring if you’re not building!
I have always been in-between the music industry and education which is how I ended up building my RU-vid channel - I’ve been teaching artists how to release music long before it was a ‘niche’! I now educate artists around the world with my Academy, RU-vid channel and Social Agency.
It’s great to meet you and looking forward to working together on your music!

Опубликовано:

28 сен 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 818

@juliekrol 11 месяцев назад

I think the labels did a back door deal to secure their dominance in the industry because too many indie artists were generating more than a label would have gotten them. BS if you ask me!

@UmbraWeiss 10 месяцев назад

Exactly, labels feel the danger of indies... the biggest names come from there, because it's easier to make music nowadays, and learn how to do it like ever.... And Indies have the balls to do new things, big labels do the same garbage for 20years now, and expect people to buy it.

@theyounglovescene 10 месяцев назад

there’s a good article in wired about exactly what happened

@eileencritchley4630 9 месяцев назад

Yes the big artist who refuse to pay to be in created lists but have amazing streams on Spotify are hated by Spotify and Spotify will filter their streams we see it happening every day. The Biggest group in the world with the biggest music fan base on planet have called out Spotify more than once even getting them to apologise and replace removed streams as we had Spotify Corrupt trending worldwide with screen shot's from spotify itself. Spofity got caught out and made up some lame excuse but apologised and replaced the streams. I'm referring to BTS and the fan base ARMY took on the might of Spotify because we can unlike the tiny small artists. Artist who pay to be in created lists really aren't doing themselves any favour's as that might get them so accidential streams but it won't build them a dicated fan base that will pay for concert tickets, buy albums it's more for the odd casual listener. Media hype is just that media hype.

@eileencritchley4630 9 месяцев назад

yes they want to make money out of those who refuse to do payola (pay for play)

@LakeyPL1 11 месяцев назад

Spotify deffo working with labels for this one, so independent artists struggle more… smh

@DamianKeyes 11 месяцев назад

Yeah the labels have been calling for it. While I don't believe Spotify are deliberately trying to hurt independent artists, it will hurt a lot of them sadly

@LakeyPL1 11 месяцев назад

@@DamianKeyes business is business, if they are gonna earn more money through the labels way - they are not gonna think twice.

@sqlb3rn 11 месяцев назад

we are living in some kind of dystopian society where musicians are scrapping over tiny fractions of a penny.

@MajorMoment 11 месяцев назад

not sure how I feel about the threshold. the what they call “working musicians” situation really needs to improve, and the money has to come from somewhere. I’d suggest that if we’re setting up a threshold for the minimum of streams (claiming those are hobbyists that are not serious enough to promote their own music), there should also be one for max, let’s say 10M streams, after which the rate drops in favor of those still climbing up and trying to pay their bills. but of course, every hater under the sun that knows nothing about business is gonna suggest the money should rather come out of Ek’s personal wealth. 🙄

@DamianKeyes 11 месяцев назад

Interesting!! It throws up so many conversations as yeah, if there’s a minimum why shouldn’t there be a maximum

@Jz2CoolDude 11 месяцев назад

Agree! I've been saying this to anyone who would listen for years. It makes total sense to have the payment rates scaled as the streams get larger, just like everything else in consumerism where it's cheaper when you buy in bulk. So in fact, why shouldn't the rate be higher for streams at the lower end and subsidise it by the streams for those pulling over 10m or over 100m. Putting a gate on emerging artist is the worst possible scenario IMO and leading down a very slippery licensing slope!

@HURRY-UP-N-BUY 11 месяцев назад

either way it goes the GAME is COOKED..if u think any of these Platforms are gonna share what them and there CTO discuss on Parameters and Metrics changes withing there Algorithms, then your sadly mistaken, even Big Artist have no way to tell how many (STREAMS) They've done..it's all on what the streaming Platforms want them to believe and they can cook the numbers any way they want to...there needs to be a OVERSITE TEAM,but thats going down another rabbit hole, because then all they would do is treat them like the TEAMSTERS UNION..n pay the people at the top to GO-ALONG-TO-GET-ALONG! & that would be...never mind

@maknoxx 11 месяцев назад

you just suggested socialism lmaoooooooo

@MajorMoment 11 месяцев назад

@@maknoxx no, not really. those artists that are more popular would still earn a lot more, there’s still a huge incentive for artists to be successful.

@musicbysazid 11 месяцев назад

00:12 🎵 Spotify plans to change its royalty model, aiming to generate an extra $1 billion for artists in the next 5 years. 01:06 📜 Spotify is introducing a new minimum length for tracks to avoid gaming the system, potentially impacting artists with shorter tracks. 02:30 💰 Spotify will implement a minimum annual stream threshold for artists to receive royalties, affecting independent artists and potentially removing $40 million in revenue. 05:25 🚫 Spotify plans to penalize labels, artists, and anyone promoting fraudulent activities to level the playing field. 08:12 🎶 Spotify aims to prioritize quality over quantity, but these changes may inadvertently affect independent artists' motivation and progression.

@logigmusic6458 10 месяцев назад

And thats true but it may also affect small labels who exist on signing many artists and skimming 10% of their income but now that income has gone. This could potentially destroy the music industry.

@8Adonay8 8 месяцев назад

@logigmusic6458 As a small publishing company and Artist I think the music industry is saturated with noise and it already hurting. Not everyone is going to make it in the music industry only the strong will survive. Artist like Snoop Dog hit 1 billion streams and got 45k that does even help with his break even budget to promote his Artist. It not fair for Artist and Label that high put in money to produce quality content and have huge traffic.

@ClarkColborn 11 месяцев назад

Hey Damo, thanks for this video. I guess my problem with the "working artist" concept, is that I might be out gigging every weekend, selling a few dozen of my CDs at every show, but totally *suck* at promoting myself on Spotify. To an outsider I would still appear to be a "working artist," but Spotify might look at my sub-par plays & say "Nope. This guy is not a working artist." I'm working on fixing this, lol, as you know, but there might be a lot of what you & I would call "working artists" out there who won't fit the Spotify profile. But, it is their sandbox, and they get to set the rules. I'll be interested to see how this all shakes out.

@ClarkColborn 11 месяцев назад

@@lespaul2550 Awesome extrapolation of the sandbox analogy! I like it!

@wormsali 11 месяцев назад

Thank God 🙏🏾 This should be a wakeup call. Any serious artist should work harder

@jul3249 11 месяцев назад

If the threshold to be considered a "working artist" isn't too high (Like above 100 monthly listeners or 200 streams on a song) and if they use the money that makes them save to reinvest in the "working artists", AND if you get paid retroactively once you hit the threshold, then it all makes sense and I'm for it. An artist with less than 50 monthly listener doesn't care about the .5 cents Spotify would owe them, but on the whole that could be enough money to help artists who count on this for a living.

@DamianKeyes 11 месяцев назад

Really like this view

@DomTristram 11 месяцев назад

I don't think anyone would care if they held onto payments until some threshold was reached (most distributors do this with the payments anyway) but my take is that they are suggesting not paying out at all. Happy to see anything suggesting otherwise. It doesn't matter how few streams you get - if someone streams your song and is paying Spotify for it then you deserve your cut, however small.

@jul3249 11 месяцев назад

@@DomTristram I agree in theory that everyone should get paid their due, no matter how small. But with the view I suggested above, you do get paid every cent if you meet the threshold, and if you don't, well you weren't serious to begin with. (Ofc the threshold has to be reasonable. I think 1000 streams is reasonable. By applying yourself a little bit, I think everyone can attain 1000 streams onto every track on your album after a year.) The way I see it is that since music production has become more accessible than ever, a lot of the 100k songs that are being uploaded every day really aren't serious and that's ok, let people have fun! But we need to protect people who actually put their neck out and their livelihood on the line. Also we need gatekeeping from potential abuse like AI music uploading 5000 songs a day and collecting micro royalties, sucking money for the pool of real artists.

@Chronade 11 месяцев назад

Get well soon, Damian 🌿 If I need a certain number of streams to be monetized on Spotify, I'm prepared to run SOCIAL MEDIA Ads to get there...

@LILGHETTI 11 месяцев назад

I swear spotify should make adjustments with their label deals! Spotify is the only platform that paid me and now that's being compromised 😢

@warhoofd74 11 месяцев назад

It’s ridiculous … beside from the shitty deals that you can get into as an independent… now Spotify is gatekeeping who gets paid … are they also making the payments ‘decent’ once you get paid. We are close to entering the age of idiocracy (also in music) and the ‘death’ of true art ….. I’ll just go back to releasing on cd’s and cassettes

@joelarets 11 месяцев назад

Tbh it doesn't sound that bad at all. Even the minimal amount of streams (depending on how large of course). If that minimum is set at 1000 streams per song let's say, youre losing cents.

@MixedkidFridaysOfficial 11 месяцев назад

If your song is played you should get paid. That’s BS. Recording is not cheap and if someone even one person listens to a song you put out Spotify should not have the right to say sorry not enough streams so no money. And the working artist is probably major labels trying to get more money.

@hawsrulebegin7768 11 месяцев назад

Just another squeeze on the small artists. I’m so tired of things being on the labels benefits.

@Veypurr1 11 месяцев назад

You need to address the fact that Spotify is actively trying to make sure you only listen to the same 25 songs over and over.

@westernjaguarmusic 11 месяцев назад

All music has value. Plain and simple. Who is anyone to say my song does not have any worth and someone else’s does have worth? Doesn’t sit right with me in any way.

@sf0101 11 месяцев назад

Nothing beats real talk. Thank you Damian. ❤

@DamianKeyes 11 месяцев назад

Thank you so much, I appreciate that 🙂🙂

@tonecaster8102 11 месяцев назад

I quitt Spotify some months ago because of their "Universal, Sony, BMG" secret contracts - that are not paying the average Artist! Im on Tidal for now. Curious if Spotify really gonna change something...

@AndrewThiriot 11 месяцев назад

Thanks Damian for keeping it real, but still caring about the small independents.

@DamianKeyes 11 месяцев назад

Thanks Andrew, that really means a lot 🙏

@luuminousx 10 месяцев назад

What about brand spanking new artists? Do we only get paid after a year since uploading the first song even if we receive over a 1000 streams or immediately after a 1000 streams? Confused about that concept. I'm looking into marketing my music only with a Spotify link but not sure if it's worth it now.

@everyonexist 11 месяцев назад

we secretly produced for over 20 years to release our LP "Water Us Universe 1999 to 2020" in 2023; underground, unknown, and growing. thanks for the updates. - PREXENTS & Spaceoceans Studios

@blakemiller5770 11 месяцев назад

I mean it seems the same as it always has been, right? The labels get the better deal and everyone else picks up the scraps. Even though major labels expect artists to do more work than ever. If someone is on Spotify for any amount of time and listening to your music, you’re keeping them on Spotify and any profit made from that should be split with you, the Artist. It’s like a job telling you if you don’t work at least 6 hours you don’t get paid for any of it. I really don’t think it’ll affect many that much. If you’re making any sort of profit from streaming, I assume you’re making a lot more from merch, Patreon etc.. but it’s the principal, really. Shows where Spotify’s motive are.

@DamianKeyes 11 месяцев назад

The focus has to be on building the fanbase and controlling that process as much as you can in house, as you’re right, powerhouses like Spotify have their motives first and foremost, so artists have to do the same

@blakemiller5770 11 месяцев назад

@@DamianKeyes Absolutely! Nothing more important than doing the most you can as an artist to be self contained or at least have control over where the money goes and how decisions are made. Appreciate your channel a lot for helping to decide what decisions we’re making.

@currentphonograph7487 11 месяцев назад

Sounds like things are moving backwards to where only a few (big) bands get royalties. I am against this

@KristenMcNamara 10 месяцев назад

Spotify has never made a profit because Universal, Sony & Warner Music group take 70%, they’ve always been in the red. So, even us independent artists are still paying the majors whether we like it or not, just to be “findable” to our smaller audiences that we hope to grow. Welcome to the threshold of music hell, haha! I think if you create anything you should be paid for it, even videos. Content and music creators eventually will need to create their own platforms or use blockchain to keep track of their art. RU-vid still leads with payout but I do think it would be powerful if they made the platform less involved with the pirates out there. ❤ At the end of the day we make music because we want to. Where we put it is our choice, I am hopeful the future of independent artists will rule out the bad guys someday. 😊

@SpencerAnnis 11 месяцев назад

Personally, I think this is great for all indie artists. If that threshold is 1000 streams , you’re only missing out on 3$ per song or so and once you work past that threshold (which really isn’t hard to do with a little effort and some marketing) , then you will be super thankful for the increase in royalty payouts that are a product of this change- especially as you scale. I personally am frustrated with how many people are taking money from the pot with no effort at all. I’ve been at this for years with millions of streams and 100,000 monthly listeners and it’s sad that even with all my years of efforts, I’m not even close to this being a full time income. I want better for all of us so that we can get to that point of full time sustainability with our work, and maybe this change will get us closer? Idk just some thoughts. Not trying to argue here- I hear you all. Just wanted to offer another opinion.

@Od3ll_Official 11 месяцев назад

Interesting perspective 🤔

@carstenaltena 11 месяцев назад

My thoughts too. Just released a few tracks (neo classical stuff) a couple of weeks ago. Started promoting last week on socials and paid promotion (not much, less than €50). One of the tracks already has more than 200 streams. >1000 should be feasible in a month.

@carstenaltena 11 месяцев назад

It will take some time to earn back those promotional costs but I believe it will be a good investment in the long run.

@elixxmusic1924 11 месяцев назад

Spotify and other platforms are not paying something near fair to the artists. It's really not fair at all. All the sacrifice some musicians make to have a decent recording so other people make money with their music it really sucks. Someone have to do something. There have to be a way to change the system.

@dougdevenski2362 11 месяцев назад

Also, this will most likely give major labels more control on the market if the aggregators start to lose dollars.

@officialWWM 11 месяцев назад

Spotify is such a ripoff! I am never going to upload to that crap platform again. They get the benefit of a lot of great music and don’t have to pay a cent for it!

@monogramadikt5971 11 месяцев назад

if i was releasing music theres no way i would allow it to be on spotify

@wildcalmxtra 11 месяцев назад

Interesting to hear, Damien. Thank you for posting. Although I made 90p in the past 3 months from streaming, so I’m not gonna lose too much sleep over it all! Hope you feel better.

@DamianKeyes 11 месяцев назад

Thank you! This one has hit me!

@kellypeterson2625 11 месяцев назад

They are currently paying .004 cent per stream. Or something close to that. Who is making any money on it anyway? Maybe a few elites. This is just going from terrible to horrible

@ToneDeth. 11 месяцев назад

I think a few PROs have a minimum threshold too. It's a waste of administrative time. It means they money sits there until it reaches a certain amount. So still generating revenues but they payout doesn't happen until the threshold is reached. Limits the amount of payouts required.

@BillyPryce 11 месяцев назад

So what exactly is a working artist? You spend years or even 10:49 decades writing songs and then finally you get some decent recordings. You put them on Spotify and you get about ten streams? Are you then regarded as junk? I don’t think so. People who cynically and deliberately put out garbage and game the system should by all means be penalized or preferably banned but artists who simply haven’t cracked it? A little support from these companies would be nice.

@mightbefire 11 месяцев назад

This new policy seems fine. Why would I possibly care about the 12¢ I'm not getting? There are so many other big-picture issues to tackle that will actually make or break your career.

@catnip_ 11 месяцев назад

Should I give up? Or should I just keep chasing thresholds?

@legman1476 11 месяцев назад

One of the big statements in Damien's video is how this will affect Distrokid and Cd Baby's bottom line going forward. I'm certain they'll "pass the savings" onto their consumers. Spotify doesn't seem worth the trouble. They keep making the news for the wrong reasons; Finally made a profit this year and oh yeah, we're coming after your royalties now.

@CheapSushi 11 месяцев назад

Yup. These middlemen will still get paid because they're the barrier to entry for small artists without a label. You can't directly upload your music on Spotify and a few of the other streaming sites without a distribution service like Distrokid.

@jvyzen 11 месяцев назад

i just started actively putting out music every week and this is definitely discouraging me from putting out music again. i’ll just stick to selling beats again

@themerrillmiller 11 месяцев назад

I've thought about sidestepping Spotify for my next release, but it's also a balancing act because I view Spotify as a marketing cost. But a tangent on the fraud thing. I wholly agree that buying streams is shortsighted and doesn't actually yield any progress. But my thought is what if there's a hater or a competitor who wants to mess with the success of another band and hires bots to get them fined? I don't have any vocal haters, but as someone in the "not-CCM, but still Christian niche", I can see someone privy to the game doing something like that, as much as I hate to say it.

@Mississippi_Martian 11 месяцев назад

Greed ruins everything... as if it's not hard enough being a musician these days.

@FreddyKBassman 11 месяцев назад

I do not mind for Spotify to clean the "what from the chaff" but not at the expense of the artists.

@raymonminton2658 10 месяцев назад

Spotify pays my band more than any other platform. The stream threshold is allegedly only 1000 streams and if an artist can't get that many streams it's simply because they didn't promote. we are completely independent and I did all of our promo myself. You're just adding fuel to a fire because you know it will get attention.

@marcelruetters 11 месяцев назад

Hard times for indie musicians. Even bandcamp now died.

@deepspaceocean 11 месяцев назад

So far I haven't heard anyone mentioning copyright law. What Spotify wants to do may be illegal. They target the unorganized DIY artists and hope no one looks into it.

@Mirron 11 месяцев назад

Interesting, I wonder how much of these unpaid micro royalties will go towards the people that reach the working artist threshold? Or will this mostly go to Spotify as a way of trying to avoid making a net loss? Also how will this fare legally?

@PhantomStrange 11 месяцев назад

I'm guessing they will pocket it

@jaydeedaley8158 11 месяцев назад

I think the only cap should be if tracks are listened to for less than 30 seconds. Full royalties should be paid if the track is listened to all the way through. Creating a black hole is unfair.

@lenkeesee5038 11 месяцев назад

The world would be a better place if we would encourage 100 amateur artists instead of one millionaire.

@spike8683 11 месяцев назад

bro when you do that zoom and sudden stop on the same shot it makes me feel like i'm trippin, its not great editing. Keep it slow zooming or keep it still, dont stop the zoom without cutting away, great content though

@josephsanchez3795 10 месяцев назад

i have putting out a music few years and spottily is talking about banning me when i haven't made any money off of them. i'm gonna plan to promote myself on other platforms. There not the only station out there. we work hard to put our music and its a shame how greed comes into play. there accusing of using bots to promote myself. First i have no idea of how to do that. 2nd i don't like spotify that much anyway.

@gullydeluxe 11 месяцев назад

At this point, touring is the only way to really get monetized for your art. All of these services should be considered as marketing/advertising.

@caseyjones3522 11 месяцев назад

yeah fuck that. Touring bands barely break even.

@PJRidolfi 11 месяцев назад

Major labels artists are the most buyer for fake streams on Spotify, and blocks won't happen in their accounts 🤣

@buzzmusic7039 11 месяцев назад

Time for a change guys. I don’t have the answer but artists need paying fairly.

@glorialopez2605 11 месяцев назад

How are they gonna penalty their playlists editors? They are using bots the most🤔

@lawrence8428 11 месяцев назад

I never thought I would be the one saying this considering how many years I've struggled as a musician. BUT I'M WITH SPOTIFY ON THIS ONE. Streaming has incentivized musicians to make horrible shit just to get volume and boost the total streams. The only way to beat these barriers is to make exceptional music. The net effect of these policies will be good music.

@CountJayeAndTheHardBeats 11 месяцев назад

Every play/stream should be counted and paid.

@kenmasuda7696 11 месяцев назад

You're a good man Charlie Brown

@nabeellakhanimusic 11 месяцев назад

Hopefully they help by pushing the music better once we hit that threshold

@PhantomStrange 11 месяцев назад

unless it makes them money I can't imagine why they would, seems like they would keep you under that threshold and just keep all the money

@nsarecord 11 месяцев назад

They don’t bro only for labels

@bonolosolomon 10 месяцев назад

I hate the fact that independent artists get caught in the cross fire, but this is another sign that we as artists need to come up with new ways to monetize our art.

@somedude1901 11 месяцев назад

Royalties is a bad business model for music. Revenue streams are long overdue for a revamp. It’ll take another 5-7 years before the public is ready for it, but the future of revenues will be blockchain driven, i.e. artists selling NFT’s for shares of their music to crowdfund. Music rights will split into fractions and traded like collectors items. Owning them gets you special fan perks, and could also provide the benefit of it appreciating in value. That revenue stream makes music 10000x more valuable than everything arguing over peanuts right now.

@JamesRamboPearce 11 месяцев назад

Will this impact things like Groover and Submithub - would these be considered fraudulent?

@budgetkeyboardist 10 месяцев назад

I'm definitely going to pull all of my music off of Spotify and I hope every indie artist they're about to rip off does the same thing. Stick around and watch Spotify make money from your music, give you nothing, and give a big fat cut to the artists on labels? The big labels own 20% of this company. They love this, no doubt. Even if you meet the cutoff now, who's to say they won't increase it again in 6 months? Then what? Spotify whines about money and the people running it are filthy rich. All of the pocket change they're about to screw small artists out of could add up to 40 million per year. Hopefully Amazon and Apple don't do this. They can look like the good guys, while Spotify looks like the big company screwing small artists.

@redcurrantrecords 11 месяцев назад

I understand the quality over quantity, but many smaller indie artists produce some quality tracks, and just because they don't have the marketing budget to get the really high stream count they shouldn't be penalised, their small fan base is still paying a subscription fee, and therefore the artist should get their cut.

@wormsali 11 месяцев назад

Because that "cut" is so tiny it can't even reimburse the processing fees. This should be a wakeup call. Any serious artist should work harder

@redcurrantrecords 11 месяцев назад

@@wormsali Sure that might be the case this time, but if they raise the bar in the future to say 100k streams per track, or even 1M before you get paid, then maybe this really would impact some fulltime artists.

@francisbriotv 10 месяцев назад

Real talk

@logigmusic6458 10 месяцев назад

Exactly and thanks

@budgetkeyboardist 10 месяцев назад

@@wormsali Not the case. They don't actually do anything when one song makes .007 cents, aside from tracking the data, which with today's server horsepower is free.

@Isaiahmathew 11 месяцев назад

Sounds like a Spotify boycott is in order

@DamianKeyes 11 месяцев назад

I really wish it would make a difference but it would only hurt the independents who are boycotting. Sadly for now Spotify has the power

@danmcbmusic 11 месяцев назад

Or a class action lawsuit. Basically they are saying "not gonna pay you".

@PhantomStrange 11 месяцев назад

i cancelled my sub this morning

@PhantomStrange 11 месяцев назад

@@DamianKeyes ya, but they also now don't have my monthly money

@tjt_88 11 месяцев назад

Can’t wait for something better to emerge that is FOR artists not for a bunch of CEO’s and stakeholders. Royalties are deserved whether or not it’s 100 or a million streams. The reason Spotify exists is because of the music, it is the reason the product exists.

@glorialopez2605 11 месяцев назад

If your song gets streamed even once, you deserve to get paid. Remember that.

@dougdevenski2362 11 месяцев назад

I agree but I also believe there needs to be some sort of bar when having music on major platforms.

@mattbielasiak9599 11 месяцев назад

@@dougdevenski2362nah

@MarcoPolux 11 месяцев назад

@@dougdevenski2362 that shouldn´t be the bar. That money should go to a fund maybe, or be retained until the artist pass the threshold.

@peace7482 11 месяцев назад

100%

@Marcelofsdmf 11 месяцев назад

that makes sense but it is only being streamed because there's a platform which does so and on top of that there's your personal choice of such platform. You can only opt out, but you decide to use a streaming service to promote, yes, your music. If you're a tiny artist you should be thankful for it, as many years ago you wouldn't stand a chance in this fiercy market

@ZamphattaNeptune 11 месяцев назад

All artists deserve their royalties. No matter how much or how little. I can easily see someone bringing a lawsuit over unpaid royalties. That's already happened in multiple cases over the decades in other situations. Spotify surely knows this already. So how do they expect to get away with not paying someone just because they're earning a little bit and not some arbitrary minimum amount?

@DamianKeyes 11 месяцев назад

Agreed - there’s going to be a lot of grey areas here

@E.T.musics 11 месяцев назад

İ think it will also push people to fraud to get to those treshold numbers. Spotify should collect that extra money from the "content" of the sounds submitted. Music and sound recording or book reading types of submission can be evaluated separetly . Maybe it is already i dont know for sure

@danmcbmusic 11 месяцев назад

Exactly. Next time you get a bill for ◇$1.23 try not paying it because it is too little.

@tracydyson3144 11 месяцев назад

This sounds like spotify really wants everyone to pay for their service. Artist and listeners alike. The more you pay as an artist for spotify promotion through them, the more they give you a kick back/royalty on your music, maybe? and listeners pay more so they can keep their advertisers/record labels happy with botted payola streaming from Spotify themselves to the record labels artists and the company own pocket. It really sounds like a no-win for artists and listeners alike. Only the advertisers/paying record labels and spotify wins. Spotify is a payola platform that relies on playlisting and the old radio format that clear channel made in the early days. They are really not that important, and there are so many other places to stream music. All social media platforms want you to pay for being on them, especially if you are an artist or content creator. They want you to pay for views, clicks, likes, and listeners, or they suppress everything. The new style of social marketing now is just a big pay to play scam 😂.

@sonnyporemba1962 11 месяцев назад

Couldn’t agree more!

@vox42 11 месяцев назад

You said it, those little payments are actually heartwarming for us small artists and contribute to fuel the motivation we need to not give up... It's sad that they're taking that away. I can live without my 5€ a month sure but I was a little proud of being able to create something that was giving me some money back. Something... worth something. I know making music is not about money and that shouldn't be the only reason I'm doing this (and it isn't ofc) but still... Why Spotify why?

@desertbuzzard3531 11 месяцев назад

Because the majors are trying to corner the market. These platforms are easy manipulated just like the old radio stations were back in the day by the majors. Hands get greased so that they’re artists will get favored. There’s no way around it. That’s exactly why the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. It’s always been that way and it will always be that way.

@rathovgodthaklassklown5787 11 месяцев назад

Yeah I felt that part big time

@HOLLASOUNDS 11 месяцев назад

I give up, I dont even want to make music anymore, what's the point of making music only you will hear? The point of making music is your creating something for people to hear and enjoy, if that's never going to happen then its pointless.

@dameongeppetto 11 месяцев назад

@@desertbuzzard3531 I hate to break it to you, but the majors own Spotify (they are collectively over 50% of shareholders). They don't just have influence, it is their investment product to continue their monopoly over music production.

@wormsali 11 месяцев назад

So you think that 4¢ a month is a big ego boost ? You're worth so much more bro. There's more realistic ways to monetize music

@VictoriaWhitlock 11 месяцев назад

For years I tried to ignore when people said Spotify is greedy, but they’re getting harder to defend imo. Taking away small independent artists right to get paid royalties because they aren’t getting enough attention…

@HOLLASOUNDS 11 месяцев назад

That's why I haven't bother getting My stuff on there.

@UncleBenjs 10 месяцев назад

Those people saw where it was going, you enabled Spotify to take it there by ignoring

@DAEMENENCE1 10 месяцев назад

@@HOLLASOUNDS dat what im talking about but who has good royalty payout

@HOLLASOUNDS 10 месяцев назад

@@DAEMENENCE1 Exactly, And also who else has the included music protection that Distro has for low price? Alot of producers sell sound packs and samples because theres more money in that that actually selling or streaming there own music.

@BBstyleYT 11 месяцев назад

I hate to see the rich getting richer just for being rich and the small creators getting penalized just for being small.

@keynotez 11 месяцев назад

It doesn’t matter the major labels will continue to manipulate their streaming numbers and receive payouts. It's a complex web of deceit. Take for instance, G-Eazy; his label was exposed for fraudulent practices, yet all of his songs remain accessible on Spotify. If an independent artist were in the same situation, their songs would likely be promptly removed from the platform. It’s all a game payola since the beginning of time !

@ColinsCity 11 месяцев назад

EXACTLY, according to spotify all independent artists are responsible for every single stream they get on their song, when they issued this email i stopped promoting my music on spotify, they probably don't give a shit about the mission few thousand monthly plays and i can live without the $15 , but that's what they have done so far, i can imagine what's coming next

@carlshakes6095 11 месяцев назад

I think it's about time we as independent producers and artists start a movement to boycott these streaming platforms and create or join platforms that are digital versions of independent record shops. How can a business justify giving less than 1% of the retail price to the producers of a product whilst they are earning millions in PROFIT!! If this practice was in any other business sector there would be outrage and major discussions in Parliament!! Someone out there must be able to come up with a fairer business model.

@WassupFred 11 месяцев назад

We need to do that bro

@BernardoAnderson 11 месяцев назад

Isn't the problem the labels? From my understanding, the big labels were the ones pushing for this. Ideally, we would target them, not the streaming services.

@ArielX2K 11 месяцев назад

Bandcamp has been pretty exemplary, but recently was sold to a company with different ideas about its artist-friendly business model; they layed off half its staff for starters, then framed their reasons for doing so in the typical corporate euphemisms and platitudes. Maybe they'll recognize a good thing and stick somewhat to Bandcamp's formula or not, only time will tell.

@unstopology 11 месяцев назад

@@BernardoAnderson Streaming services are still agreeing with this. They could just say no, but they're not. It's they're platform so, to me, they're the ones in the wrong.

@BernardoAnderson 11 месяцев назад

@@unstopology I'm not sure it's that easy. They can say no, and lose a large catalog making them not competitive with other streaming services. Ultimately, the large labels are able to control a lot of what they want from streaming services by controlling their catalog. I hate it, but it's the unfortunate reality.

@genuinefreewilly5706 11 месяцев назад

I think they should leave small artists alone. I would say the popular distributors should vet their music more carefully. As I recall from Spotify's early days, Ek was telling artists to push quantity and more regularity.

@8Adonay8 8 месяцев назад

I think they should have a separate platform for independent Artist and once they hit a concern number organicly they can be promoted to the next level. 😉 Oh that is what Spotify going to do. Great. ❤

@ultimatecomeback9645 11 месяцев назад

in all honesty, this is a disgrace. just another case of the people at the top taking money out of the little guy's pocket to make the rich richer. keep in mind that big platforms like youtube, Spotify, etc, still make money from the smaller creators through ads, etc, there are creators with 200 streams getting ads pop up on their tracks. it just means now their earnings go to the bigger artists. imagine working a regular day job and your wages get taken off of you and given to someone that's higher up in the company so they get rich and you go home with nothing. That is basically what this is. Whether it's 200 streams or 2 million streams, you deserve to get paid if the company is profiting off of your work.

@periurban 11 месяцев назад

I've never used Spotify, either as a creator or a fan. I use bandcamp, which so far has been very fair and open with me about sales, and I've discovered tons of great music there. I've not had many sales, but I never have any problem getting the small amounts I've made, and for bigger hitters (like Radiohead, who use it) it seems like a pretty good deal. The solution to the Spotify situation is for artists not to sign the deals that allow this. Retain your copyrights, don't sign them away and fuck the sharks.

@periurban 11 месяцев назад

@@CheapSushi Indeed, but so far it's been good.

@Od3ll_Official 11 месяцев назад

Ya. It's unfortunate.@@CheapSushi

@Buzzkillco 10 месяцев назад

@@CheapSushiTidal is where it’s at, it pays artists much much more than stupid spotify

@TJ-bx5px 9 месяцев назад

We need a open source block chain music hosting and streaming. So the artist who u listen to gets ur money.

@periurban 9 месяцев назад

@@TJ-bx5px I have no idea what that means, but the principle sounds right! Where do I sign? (Joke. I ain't signing anything!)

@eigenstatezero 11 месяцев назад

I might stop using Spotify after this. I put everything I have into my music. It will be detrimental sure, but I don´t care. If Spotify has no respect for the little guys and gals, that´s their choice; I´ll be damn sure not to loose selfrespect.

@riddlebeats 11 месяцев назад

I’m so triggered I had to comment twice 😭 But in regards to “undeserving” or “genuine artists” It’s insane how a bunch of people sat round a table at Spotify probably with degrees in business marketing etc. and not an artistic bone in their body are the ones in position to determine what “genuine” art is. That statement itself is surely a paradox? I smell one big play from the major labels trying to force us smaller/independent artists to become more reliant/dependant on them when we DON’T NEED THEM!

@grahamtaylor6883 11 месяцев назад

Why should Spotify decide who are and which music is worthy of paying? If you're a new artist and Spotify members are listening to your music, then you should get a piece of the pie. People will skip it if they don't like it. I also think all streaming services should pay based on the amount of minutes your tracks are listened to and not one shot after 30 seconds. If someone has a 4 minute song and someone has a 2 minute, it would make sense that the 4 minute one should be paid twice as much, if a person has listened to it for that long. It's time for Spotify to be replaced actually.

@tristankerr3655 11 месяцев назад

yeah this makes total sense

@robertbroadwayauthentic 11 месяцев назад

I agree.It’s time for indie artists to do sumthin different.

@ChrisGriffiths-t9y 11 месяцев назад

It's interested hearing people comment about artists "scamming the system" when Spotify exists purely off the back of stealing artist's work in the first place. I feel like it's more like reclaiming what is rightfully theirs in the first place. Spotify as a platform needs to be completely re worked, the creators need to be taking home the vast majority of the revenue and that should not be in question.

@AdrianEarnshawMusic 11 месяцев назад

Thanks for the insight Damian. Sadly it's a race to the bottom. How cheaply can we get music out of the artist and pay peanuts as they keep moving the bar.

@DamianKeyes 11 месяцев назад

It definitely also brings up the question of “what is art” too

@secretarchivesofthevatican 11 месяцев назад

If my music is on there, they are earning from it, therefore I should be paid a royalty. The new arrangement could mean new artists can literally never be successful because you need to be on there to get known. This is pay-to-play resurrected. I have tracks that do very much go past the 1,000 streams but I have better ones that do a few hundred. Numbers do not necessarily equal quality. If we accept the nonsense that numbers are what matters, then Spotoify will be full of nothing but predictable easy-to-market hip-hop, mainstream pop and mainstream rock. There are hundreds of other genres and non-genre music that wouldn't ever be heard. This is disastrous for many musicians I know or follow.

@DamianKeyes 11 месяцев назад

That is a very good point, numbers do not necessarily equal quality, but the interesting question then is - what does dictate quality if it’s not popularity with what people are listening to?

@secretarchivesofthevatican 11 месяцев назад

@DamianKeyes If it was mass popularity then only RnB, hip hop and predictable mainstream rock could be considered "good". Some of the greatest music in history would not be considered "good" because in some cases it has a very small fan base.

@victoriasimmondsmusic 11 месяцев назад

I hate that they will decide if I am a working artist or not and then just refuse to let me have my royalties. If they do it on the number of followers I'm pretty sure I'll be screwed at the moment. What it does mean is that we have to regroup, They are bigger than us, it will effect every element of our music and they really don't care about independent artists. We need to come up with a different strategy.

@EyesforSkies 11 месяцев назад

number 2 is annoying for sure (since I barely have an audience beyond friends lol), Spotify royalties just about cover distribution costs. This literally takes away all incentive for uploading my music to streaming services :(

@SynnUnsworth 11 месяцев назад

totally agree with you... when youtube brought in the subscriber threshold thing it really killed my motivation and enjoyment of making videos, even though i was only getting pennies it made me try to get better each time, I can see a lot of people getting similar feeling when/if it hits with spotify, getting those small pennies are enough to keep people going and actually see music as a potential business rather than just a hobby (which is also not to say it being just a hobby is a bad thing)

@anthonyvaldez851 11 месяцев назад

True. The YT threshold feels out of reach

@SynnUnsworth 11 месяцев назад

@@anthonyvaldez851 dont get me wrong i dont think its out of reach or unattainable... it was just very disheartening, and if i'm honest i think that was simply because of why it happened and made me personally focus on the wrong things, where having the tiny bit of income made me focus on making better videos and trying to improve things each time (which is realistically what we should be doing)

@Brandon_Renegade 11 месяцев назад

I believe the Spotify stream threshold before royalties come in is bull shit. As an independent artist myself, with a new single releasing on November 3rd, i believe every stream should be counted towards the royalties, despite if it's pennies on the dollar, each stream is from a fan we worked hard to get, I haven't once paid for streams, nor will I ever. So the measly $8.00 I've made with 2,500 streams on Spotify in my first single, still means something to me. Those numbers = fans whom I've helped in one way or another with my music.

@cornflex38 11 месяцев назад

Wait, they want to support the "hard working artists" what??? Lets imagine you got 1000 real songs in your catalog, you get 100 Streams on each, thats a bunch in total, ok... but the threshold is 1000 streams on a song annually. So you have 100.000 streams but nothing in royalties??!! WHAAT? Lets imagine somebody else got 1 song in their whole catalog with 10.000 streams and they get paid for that in royalties??? Am I tripping? Am I wrong? Who of them is the "hard working artist" they try to support. If this is the model they are going for, then they must have lost their mind....

@cornflex38 11 месяцев назад

you better delete your whole catalog then except 1, so people dont distribute their streams on "worthless" songs. tf

@OfficialLeahJude 11 месяцев назад

Some labels are going to fight this. Back catalogs will suffer.

@DamianKeyes 11 месяцев назад

I think some labels will defo fight it but it's something the majors have been calling for (the likes of UMG) as they want more of the pie. It will be interesting to see what happens to the other DSP's to see if they follow suit. 🙂🙂

@OfficialLeahJude 11 месяцев назад

@@DamianKeyesgood point

@reggiereg2064 11 месяцев назад

I dont think so. Ive recently read articles that say 70% of streams and music purchases in the US are from music thats at least 18 months old and that percentage is supposedly increasing.

@OfficialLeahJude 11 месяцев назад

@@reggiereg2064 I just read that article!!! 😂

@kimr45 11 месяцев назад

Spotify looking for more ways to screw over the independent artist....ALL artist deserve their royalties!!!!

@keenimusic 11 месяцев назад

What I kept hearing is the rich are going to get richer. Not going to stop fighting though, I'm in this for life and the industry is notorious for changing and screwing over the little guy. Gotta roll with the punches, keep putting our best foot forward, and one day turn the tables cuz we know what its like to come from the bottom.

@robertfellchannel 11 месяцев назад

Young generations don't know how lucky they are to be able to express their creativity to the whole world without going through Major Labels now. But nothing is for free, Spotify & Co is the price to pay. 🔉

@DamianKeyes 11 месяцев назад

Very true, Spotify are in control

@thesuncollective1475 11 месяцев назад

Technology made that possible not DSP's...I particularly like the fact out 200 countries 150 are playing my tracks

@PhantomStrange 11 месяцев назад

but spotify still charges money and now they keep it when somebody streams your song, unless you are already rich

@caseyjones3522 11 месяцев назад

wrong. Spotify is controlled by the major labels. They control the playlists and which artists get paid the most via the pro rata payout system. So even if you are independent you're still at the mercy of the majors.

@DAEMENENCE1 10 месяцев назад

@@DamianKeyes only if u say so,grease up baby

@laurakelseymusic 11 месяцев назад

So artists pay a fee to distribute their songs to Spotify but now they may not even have a chance to make royalties from the service? Now that Bandcamp is also under new ownership, what is the best option for artists to share their music with hopes of receiving some sort of funding back?

@methodofkolishin 11 месяцев назад

Good question! Amuse allows artists to distribute for free, but it's not a fancy or feature-filled experience!

@DomTristram 11 месяцев назад

There are other streaming services (and they paid artists a lot more than Spotify even before this move)

@goodvibrationseverywhere 10 месяцев назад

No one has to pay a fee to spotify, the fee is for the distributors that charge

@ingvay 11 месяцев назад

Does this really work for smaller independent professionals, or does it just lead to having to invest more money (e.g., in ads) and end up with less in the end...? The German collecting society GEMA operates on a similar principle of apparent relevance. In the end, it keeps the small ones small and makes the big ones bigger. Isn't this another backdoor to funnel more money into Spotify's shareholders (i.e., the major labels)? Why isn't there an equal payment for every stream, regardless of its source? If your music is played, you get paid, no matter who you are - if it's not played, you don't. Wouldn't that be the fairest solution for everyone? (By the way, I find it meaningful to distinguish between noise and music, and I believe that should be algorithmically achievable...?)

@NicBam 11 месяцев назад

When we start acting like Spotify has done anything good for us as musicians, that’s when we know artists who truly care about their worth are diminishing.

@TheTrooper1878 11 месяцев назад

Sounds reasonable as long as the treshhold isn't too high. I mean, if you upload a song and it gets 2000 listens, do you care that much for the 6-8 dolars that you'll get? But when Spotify pays those 6-8 dollars to millions of small artists, that is just a lot of money wasted. At the end of the day if you are a small artist, you are doing it just out of love for the music and you won't stop uploading with or without the little money theу give you, so why should they waste it? Now if the threshhold is something like 100 000 listens, then those 300 dollars are actuall money so it is an actual problem, so as I said - depends on the threshhold.

@DamianKeyes 11 месяцев назад

I do believe this is a call out for any artist to understand how to improve and build a brand around music to get out of that threshold. The days are gone of throwing something up and hoping for the best. You raise a very good point 🙂🙂

@DomTristram 11 месяцев назад

"do you care that much for the 6-8 dolars that you'll get?" Yes. Why shouldn't I get it? Why would I rather it go to some rich corporation? What sort of thinking is that? It's not like it's going to charity or to do something good. "You are doing it for the love of music". Sure, but who are you or anyone else to tell people that their work isn't worth being paid for just because it's not as mainstream as someone like Taylor Swift? When you are a small artists getting any money *at all* for your art is validating. It's a great push to make you carry on and get better. You've seen some money back and you know it's possible. Gatekeeping the ability to make money from music is exactly the complaint people had about the music industry before streaming came along. My feeling is that all musicians should stop paying for Spotify. Sure, they might have to have their music on there (for now), but we don't have to actively support them in this. There are other streaming services that pay artists much more than Spotify do and it would help artists to support them and reduce Spotify's dominance.

@TheTrooper1878 11 месяцев назад

@DomTristram Well if you want to make money off of music you'll do gigs, won't you? Even a small artist can make 200 bucks with ease. Those 8 dollars won't fix your life and you will live on with or without them and again: would you stop creating music if you don't get the 8 dollars? I doubt it. It makes no sense from a business point of view for Spotify to give so much artists that little amount of money. Nonethelss you can't even buy strings for 8 dollars. The return of your investment from Spotify is insignificant so if you want to make good money as a small artist - play gigs!

@DomTristram 11 месяцев назад

@@TheTrooper1878 I don't do gigs any more. I simply can't due to care commitments. Does this mean I can't earn any money from music? I accept all of the downsides this brings about because even a few quid coming in from streaming each month feels like a validation, and there's always a chance of it taking off. You are speaking from a position of priveledge. You may be happy for the small amount of money generated by people streaming my music going to the pockets of very rich shareholders. I am not.

@TheTrooper1878 11 месяцев назад

@DomTristram Your point is good but you are the exception rather than the rule. No company will keep a policy to waste millions of dollars because 0.1% of the recievers actually need it. It's sad but it is what it is. Also genuine question: What does care commitments mean, I've never come across this term and I am also not a native speaker so I'll be thankful if you tell me.

@brucemillar 11 месяцев назад

Frankly, as an independent artist, I’m just using Spotify and the other online platforms to get my music out there. My numbers are so small I don’t expect to get much in the way of royalties. Then again, you never know. Besides, I believe in my songs, and they’re better off out there where the world can stumble across them, rather than hiding away on my hard drive. Hope you’re feeling better, mate.

@musicjst 11 месяцев назад

Yeah I came here to say pretty much this. I can forgo the £3 per year or whatever it is it currently earns me 🤣 (Totally my own fault as I'm only now trying to learn about promo / advertising / social media in general really)

@meekosaga 10 месяцев назад

I agree

@tootory9506 11 месяцев назад

It's simple if I give Spotify $11 a month and I only listen to one album the entire month... Then, all that money should go to that album ... People are paying Spotify for access to music. So their money should be distributed to whatever artist they listen to! That's it!

@TeeLow 11 месяцев назад

It’s kinda nice for Spotify to do my job for me. I’ve been trying to get the audience that I do have to stream on Apple Music or Amazon and now that they see these headlines it makes it easier to convince them lol

@ariroar8466 11 месяцев назад

During an interview with the black keys they brought up what they thought the structure of spotify should be and I think it's brilliant. If you're paying the monthly subscription and you listen to a variety of different artists that month, that money should be evenly divided among those artists.

@marsexalted 11 месяцев назад

i believe soundcloud is trying to implement this

@secretarchivesofthevatican 11 месяцев назад

The big record labels would put a stop to that. They'd threaten to remove their content and Spotify would totally do what it was told.

@flashgordon2732 11 месяцев назад

@@secretarchivesofthevatican record labels can get paid off ai theyll be okay , its good for the independents

@divLded 11 месяцев назад

@@secretarchivesofthevaticanwell, if they remove their content theyre definitely getting nothing. With doing what op said, they'd still get the same exact streams otherwise, therefore same pay if not more.

@anthonyvaldez851 11 месяцев назад

@@flashgordon2732 Spotify is partially owned by record labels

@Davidthestratman7 11 месяцев назад

I think if it's original music then the artist should get thier royalties period. Doesn't matter if it's good or not. People are listening to it and it's generating money so the artist gets his/her due!!!!

@DAEMENENCE1 10 месяцев назад

datv what im saying,some songs are late bloomers!!

@deethree_orchestra 11 месяцев назад

Thanks for new info. Wish all of you good luck “people” if you're doing music that's come from your heart and, do it for the art...

@EvolKzoo 11 месяцев назад

That is bullshit, if you earned the stream that royalty money shud be yours, not given to a more deserving artist

@BaileyMagikz 11 месяцев назад

i'm a small artist i'll probs be cut even though i'm not gaining the system :/ great (woo spotify has made money they been underpaying everyone now increase and wont give us that profit it will go to the labels..) music is my hobby - royalty helps make more music buy more effects /stuff and so on so never spent anything i made on anything else - ill still make music but if i get cut this will hold me back more