Undercutting rival Spotify and others in the industry, SoundCloud is offering consumers music for $4.99 a month. This price is 50% lower than what Spotify offers, according to Bloomberg News.
Yet with both SoundCloud and Spotify being in the red, some are insisting that the lower $4.99 charge could be key for SoundCloud and Spotify to attract more paying users and to make money.
Read Article: Investopedia
Moving forward, the problem for YouTube is one of size. Its page views and unique users make it the second highest ranked website in the world after Google. It surpasses Facebook.
In this context, the music recording and publishing industries are no longer prepared to stay on the sidelines and just gratefully acknowledge YouTube’s role in promoting music and, often, new talent. As YouTube’s ad earnings grow in tandem with its popularity it is being perceived as a beneficiary of proprietary sound recording and musical compositions that demand more consideration at a time when consumers of music are demonstrably paying more for it and are expected to continue doing so in the future.
The reform of longstanding safe harbor provisions, and their relationship to music making, are in the end a discussion about how the shares of recorded music product should be distributed over the Internet. So far the spoils have gone to the colonists, i.e. the technology companies and, particularly, YouTube.
Read Article: Music Business Journal
The way we listen to music is changing fast, and the business of music is struggling to keep up.
Constantly shifting business models affect performers and songwriters, producers and publishers, promoters and live music venues.
As streaming music has taken hold in the music ecosystem, a larger audience is listening to more music by more creators than ever.
But even as the music spreads fast and far, the business of music is not rewarding all contributors fairly.
Read Article: Forbes
I’m sitting in a darkened, smoky room drinking with the dons of the music publishing mafia. OK, it’s not really smoky because you can’t smoke in London pubs anymore and they aren’t really the mafia. They’re rather nice people actually. But the five men and two women around this table, drinking gin and real ale, do run the most important aspects of the music industry.
That would be the publishing and performance royalties paid to artists around the world.They’re industry veterans in senior roles at some of the larger western Performance Rights Organizations (PROs). That’s a critical link in the notorious global infrastructure that apparently causes “artists to lose up to 86 per cent of the proceeds” paid to musicians for their work.
On-demand music streaming is a terrible business to be in. It’s crowded and unprofitable. But that’s not stopping Pandora.The world’s largest internet radio service on Tuesday unveiled its latest offering: a Spotify-like on-demand product called Pandora Premium. It looks a lot like Rdio, the little-used but beloved streaming service that Pandora bought (for key assets) and shut down just over a year ago.
It will cost $10 a month, like Apple Music and ad-free Spotify; there’s also a previously announced, limited $5-a-month subscription radio option that will arrive early next year. The trouble with on-demand music streaming is that the way the music label contracts are set up, the economics don’t really make sense, and it’s an increasingly crowded field.
Source: VICE News
With the rising popularity of music streaming platforms such as Spotify, Apple Music and Google Play, there are now fewer reasons to purchase songs and albums individually. This is to the dismay of several artists who claim they are being robbed of the total revenue they deserve for their work. Their argument is similar to the following analogy: you do not go into a clothing store and pay an entrance fee to then collect all of the items you want. This is what they feel listeners are doing when they pay a monthly fee to use services like Spotify Premium and Apple Music. They also think it is not fair to other fans who go out and buy their CDs when others just wait to listen to it for free online.
Source: Fordham Observer
The larger question is: are albums necessary anymore? If fans are consuming music on streaming services and mostly listening to playlists, does it even make sense to release full albums and build campaigns around their release, instead of simply releasing tracks as they are finished and running on-going campaigns to break artists?