Mickeyboro Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 Why is there this expectation of a continuing royalty/percentile? Because without the creators music would not exist for Spotify to profit off the back of. I see the aforementioned Mr Ek made another $118.8 million selling some of his shares in April. Wonder if he can write a song?😂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickeyboro Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 (edited) Double post😂 Edited June 5 by Mickeyboro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickeyboro Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 (edited) Triple post😂 Edited June 5 by Mickeyboro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickeyboro Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 (edited) Ferchrissake!😂 Edited June 5 by Mickeyboro 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NancyJohnson Posted June 5 Author Share Posted June 5 4 minutes ago, Mickeyboro said: Why is there this expectation of a continuing royalty/percentile? Because without the creators music would not exist for Spotify to profit off the back of. I see the aforementioned Mr Ek made another $118.8 million selling some of his shares in April. Wonder if he can write a song?😂 Royalties pre-date Spotify. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meterman Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 28 minutes ago, NancyJohnson said: This might sound a bit naive, but the whole royalty thing is a bit odd to me and I find it difficult to actually put down in words as to why. As I said earlier, personally I don't expect to be getting a reward for work I did 30 years ago, so why shouldn't the same apply to music/film/books/media creators? They've done the job of creation, so why is there this expectation of a continuing royalty/percentile? Other folks on here will no doubt have better explanations of this than me, but in my case, the first album I had out with a band was in 1993. It got radio play at the time and a couple of tracks were used on TV shows. I received PRS royalties at the time and still do now, albeit much less. Unfortunately the label we were signed to turned out to be wrong’uns and to date, we have never received a penny in sales, despite owning our own masters, and challenging them in court (they went bankrupt to avoid paying any of their artists). So if someone wants to play a track from that album on the radio or use it for a tv sync or whatever, they have to pay us - PRS will collect the fees whether we ask them to or not. If, 30 years on, someone wants to use one of my old songs they can pay me for it, or choose to use some other music. Maybe royalty-free perhaps? Songwriting royalties just work like that. If I was a brickie, or a carpet fitter, or an astronomer then it would be a different story. Their one-off work from 30 years ago is done. But royalties are what they are, and I’m glad of them. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tegs07 Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 2 hours ago, Mickeyboro said: The median estimated compensation for executives at Spotify including base salary and bonus is $240,842, or $115 per hour. At Spotify, the most compensated executive makes $450,000, annually, and the lowest compensated makes $53,000. Estimated salaries. GIVE THE MUSICIANS A FAIR SHARE!! Spotify gets criticised frequently and there is some justification. However it is worth mentioning that before Spotify there was Napster and Pirate Bay who were killing musicians and record companies alike and providing a rubbish service as well. The Playlist is worth a watch. Its a fictional account of Spotify but contains a lot of fact. Ultimately the reason that musicians continue to get screwed over by streaming has a lot more to do with the record labels than the technology or companies providing the streaming service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickeyboro Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 51 minutes ago, tegs07 said: Spotify gets criticised frequently and there is some justification. However it is worth mentioning that before Spotify there was Napster and Pirate Bay who were killing musicians and record companies alike and providing a rubbish service as well. The Playlist is worth a watch. Its a fictional account of Spotify but contains a lot of fact. Ultimately the reason that musicians continue to get screwed over by streaming has a lot more to do with the record labels than the technology or companies providing the streaming service. Fair point. Apparently Spandau Ballet found ‘packaging deductions’ applied to their downloads by the record co! I wouldn’t say the music business as it was worked in favour of musicians, but at least the record companies promoted their acts. Spotify to me is a bit like the venue that wants bands to play cheap/free ‘for the exposure’. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRedX Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 15 hours ago, Mickeyboro said: I wouldn’t say the music business as it was worked in favour of musicians, but at least the record companies promoted their acts. Spotify to me is a bit like the venue that wants bands to play cheap/free ‘for the exposure’. If you are not signed to a record label and taking advantage of their publicity machine (and lets face it these days that's the main reason to be signed to a record label), then it's up to you to do you publicity, or pay some to do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickeyboro Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.