Gah.
So the biggest get bigger and the market gets fractured. Yes, the record industry loves that idea, it's exactly how it's always worked except now you can force it!
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Adele's '25' Won't Be Available On Streaming Services
- Thread starter Angel_DvA
- Start date
- Status
Gah.
So the biggest get bigger and the market gets fractured. Yes, the record industry loves that idea, it's exactly how it's always worked except now you can force it!
Yes, she is. She had the best selling album of the last 15 years, who is bigger?
sales are displaced either way, and it's hard to say what would happen if the free tier dropped out - I don't know the kind of connection people have to the service and where the breaking point would be since it's well-established (interface, accessibility, existing playlists, etc.)
as for comparing movies and concerts... actors actually get paid!
for real though, too much grey area for me to compare especially considering how saturated the music market is
Here's a good read on that, and this was only the consequences of restricting the free tier:
http://www.pias.com/blog/clamp-down-on-free-spotify-now-is-not-the-time-for-knee-jerk-decisions/
Heres a recap: In April 2011, at the behest of certain music rights-holders, Spotify agreed to place severe caps on ad-funded listening in five territories Sweden, Finland, Norway, the Netherlands and Spain.
Less than a year after it was introduced, the plan fell apart and these limits were lifted.
Why? Because it was a disastrous move.
Before this point, the listening and revenue curve of Spotify was going up really nicely for [PIAS] and many other companies in Spain a market where piracy had previously destroyed legal musics financial worth like an angry swarm of digital locusts.
Finally, it seemed, we were on the road to recovery.
Then Spotify agreed to clamp down on Spanish consumers. Most jarringly, free users could only listen to individual tracks five times before they were left unplayable.
(In addition, they could only listen for a maximum of 10 hours ad-funded Spotify per month after a set period a further restriction that was eventually dropped in December 2013.)
Can you guess what happened?
Thats right: streamings magical, encouraging growth curve in Spain fell off a cliff. It took revenues 12 months to recover.
Interestingly, we now generate significant subscription as well as ad-funded revenues in Spain.
Whilst ad-funded remains higher, Im convinced that the existence of ad-funded streaming is a reason for paid subscription growth: free use is part of the journey to paid use.
Todays whispers of Universal and others putting pressure on Spotify to repeat the same mistake is scary stuff.
Spotify and streaming is not the enemy of artists, the enemy is the same one it's always been.
The one which profits off them the most.
Is that the same 0.1% who appeared on stage and demanded you use their streaming service instead? I've forgotten its name.
Around the same time here in the UK, this was quietly announced:
http://www.prsformusic.com/aboutus/...um-music-funds-exclusive-digital-partner.aspx
What a disgusting company with no regard for artists or the value of music.
They should have got a Drake exclusive instead.
That revenue neutral study for the EU is quite a complex thing, but here's a good overview of it:
http://recode.net/2015/10/28/how-can-spotify-shrink-and-grow-the-music-business-at-the-same-time/
Edit: Oh, it doesn't actually know Spotify is what's responsible for the lost revenue. Billboard thinks it's junk:
http://m.billboard.com/entry/view/id/145682
So all it's proved is Spotify's killed piracy, yeah I think we knew that.
http://recode.net/2015/10/28/how-can-spotify-shrink-and-grow-the-music-business-at-the-same-time/
Edit: Oh, it doesn't actually know Spotify is what's responsible for the lost revenue. Billboard thinks it's junk:
http://m.billboard.com/entry/view/id/145682
So all it's proved is Spotify's killed piracy, yeah I think we knew that.
NHarmonic.
Member
I'd argue Swift is, tbh. A lot of successful albums, #2 most watched video in youtube ever, 1989 a full year and more on the charts (considering the state of the industry), etc.
Then afterwards she lets out her trademark cackle.
No wonder we've been hearing so much crap about Spotify, the correct battle was already going on! Sony is being sued for dictating terms with Spotify that suited itself instead of artists.
And it's a label suing them.
http://m.billboard.com/entry/view/id/130479
That deal with the devil we were talking about, and an industry playing games with itself, may be undone after all.
Fascinating read. Sony and the other major labels called streams "sales" or "distributions". Like a record shop, even though the business model is different. When they should have been termed "transmissions" which requires an even split with artists and means handing over substantially more.
What a bunch of cunts.
And it's a label suing them.
http://m.billboard.com/entry/view/id/130479
That deal with the devil we were talking about, and an industry playing games with itself, may be undone after all.
Fascinating read. Sony and the other major labels called streams "sales" or "distributions". Like a record shop, even though the business model is different. When they should have been termed "transmissions" which requires an even split with artists and means handing over substantially more.
What a bunch of cunts.
BLACK AMERICAN PSYCHO
Junior Member
Lol, Adele will beat Taylor's sales in a month or 2. She is already about to do 2 million first week.
Oh wow, it gets better:
http://www.hypebot.com/hypebot/2015...ny-spotify-deal-a-breach-of-moral-trust-.html
Why no talk about this Taylor! Adele? Anyone would think it's an industry trying to drown something out.
http://www.hypebot.com/hypebot/2015...ny-spotify-deal-a-breach-of-moral-trust-.html
Why no talk about this Taylor! Adele? Anyone would think it's an industry trying to drown something out.
Ninja Scooter
Member
Bob Seger still isn't on any streaming services. Fuck you Bob Seger give me my Hollywood Nights!
Hip Hop
Member
You sure? Not that these articles guarantee it, but this record will be big regardless. The meager "sales" they will lose on not having a streaming option will be heavily outweighed by sales. People here acting like the record label will be losing something, no they won't.
Adele's '25' Will Ship 3.6 Million Units in U.S., Could Top *NSYNC's Historic Sales Week
http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/6769320/adele-25-sales-shipping-projections-nsync
The Sales Projections for Adele's '25' Album Are Insane
http://www.complex.com/music/2015/1...to-sell-over-one-million-copies-in-first-week
Sounds like a rational decision. Will she publish her album on Minidisc, Laserdisc, CDi and casette tape as well?
Not sure which is more eyeroll-inducing, Adele's comments or the author of this article's.
Doomshroom
Member
Whatever ill download it on Napster!
NHarmonic.
Member
The sad part is she did, and in only one week :/
Matt_
World's #1 One Direction Fan: Everyone else in the room can see it, everyone else but you~~~
I dunno, I chuckled at this part:
"...lines the walls of her home with CDs, preening them like symbolic little carcasses of the music industry's glory days."
As someone who was coming of age in the early 90's, I don't look back on the CD fondly. Before the big box stores started selling them as loss leaders, they were typically $18 (that's $30+ in 2015 dollars) at the record store, and were more often than not a few good tracks with a half dozen filler tracks.
I'll handle this the same way I handled 1989 not being available on my Spotify premium service... I won't listen to it.
she did make a statement, she broke all sales records since they started counting sales in 1991.
IceDoesntHelp
Banned
Who cares, its a 2/5 tops.
Dreams-Visions
Member
Are you suggesting that most major albums aren't released on vinyl? (they are)
Oppo
Member
the anti-Spotify crowd sort of reminds me of embittered Zune fans.
TIDAL's gonna save us all right?? wait where'd TIDAL go?
somewhat hilariously, as a cord cutter who listens to podcasts mostly, I have not heard this super popular Adele song.
(atually I will cop to streaming Spotify most days, but I got a free sub)
TIDAL's gonna save us all right?? wait where'd TIDAL go?
somewhat hilariously, as a cord cutter who listens to podcasts mostly, I have not heard this super popular Adele song.
(atually I will cop to streaming Spotify most days, but I got a free sub)
Well I will not listen to her album.
I hate how artist do this and how some people defend because it their album. They are not some small artist who are struggling for money, either way there are going to sell millions, a million less wouldn't affect them, its pure greed from the artist and the label and its also like they are receiving a huge load of money from the streaming services.
I hate how artist do this and how some people defend because it their album. They are not some small artist who are struggling for money, either way there are going to sell millions, a million less wouldn't affect them, its pure greed from the artist and the label and its also like they are receiving a huge load of money from the streaming services.
I mean just vinyl dude
outunderthestars
Banned
Yea,god forbid that the artist and the label that financed their work want the actual profits from it instead of letting a streaming company get the majority.
I don't see what is so inherently greedy from wanting people to actually buy your music. Do you get mad when blockbuster movies don't immediately go on Netflix instant streaming?
MisterR
Member
Why in the hell should she have to give you her work for free?
They are getting paid for streaming their music.
outunderthestars
Banned
A tiny fraction of what they would if someone bought their album.
I wouldn't call .00408 per play a realistic model that works for artists.
That's pretty ridiculous. The only people who are expected to just give their work away for free are artists and it makes no sense whatsoever. Do you go to carpenters and say, "you've already made a bunch of money so I demand that you do my work for free"? "Hey guy, the food in this restaurant is delicious but look at all these people paying! I'm just gonna skip on payment cause you clearly have money already."
That's because you're not even attempting to understand the model, especially if you think streaming companies are keeping the majority when they are all handing over 70% of revenue.
I'd say being paid every single time something is played is a very fair model, rather than treating music like a commodity you own, buy once, and then pay zero for years. And the faster that model grows the better.
You aren't on some moral high horse, you aren't defending the artists, someone like Adele doesn't need defending, and read the Billboard article above to see who is really stealing from them.
demosthenes
Member
But don't you get it, they're rich! They don't need anymore money.
I hate and despise this mentality.
I see you haven't been reading anything after all.
Doctor Ironic
Member
I wouldn't care because getting paid for studio music is a battle that artists have already lost. Most artists get paid something like a few cents per album sale, if not straight up being indebted to their record labels, and make the vast majority of their money off of merchandising and concert sales. The only way you can reverse this is if you're so big you can be the ones who bosses your label around, and not vice versa - so in other words, you have to be Taylor Swift or Adele.
For the rest of the artists who (sanely) gave up the prospect of making a profit off of studio music long ago, streaming services are a boon. At this point, the smart move for artists than aren't the top .00001% is to literally use your studio music as an ad for the rest of your portfolio - of course I'd want that advertising spread to as many people as possible.
yeah, it is a boon to give your music for free so maybe someone will come to your concert. What a great deal. You should support artists you like to listen by buying their songs, not just going to concerts (what small artist has global tours so everyone can pay homage?).
Adele just proved how streaming music for free is a flawed concept while YT makes as much sense as radio for promotion.
Sorcerer
Member
Hologram Vinyl is the future!!! This is pretty awesome. If Rush can do it, so should Adele. You should get a show with your Vinyl.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOfe_bwG67I
Yeah, sounds like sour grapes. I like streaming too, but I reject the notion that every artist has to do it.
Their content, they can sell it however the fuck they want. Don't like it? Boycott them or whatever, but do so quietly. I don't think anyone cares to hear anyone moan about an artist choosing to not be on streaming services or anything when their albums are like $11 bucks away. I use a Play Music sub, but as I expected, 25 was right there on the Play store for like 11$ bucks and took 2 seconds to buy.
Bam, right there in my digital repository with the rest of everything 99% of which I am able to stream. This is the biggest non issue in the freaking world to me.
Their content, they can sell it however the fuck they want. Don't like it? Boycott them or whatever, but do so quietly. I don't think anyone cares to hear anyone moan about an artist choosing to not be on streaming services or anything when their albums are like $11 bucks away. I use a Play Music sub, but as I expected, 25 was right there on the Play store for like 11$ bucks and took 2 seconds to buy.
Bam, right there in my digital repository with the rest of everything 99% of which I am able to stream. This is the biggest non issue in the freaking world to me.
LiquidMetal14
hide your water-based mammals
Spotify or bust for me and I used to be a staunch physical supporter. It's convenient and a seconds reach. I pay for the service too. That's the only sub I insist on actually keeping as well so that says something for me. That and Prime.
The average iTunes account spends $12 a year on music. An Adele this time, a Swift last time.
Spending 10 times that a year is not supporting music? And it's supporting ALL of it, not just the biggest getting bigger which is how the industry has always worked to the detriment of everyone else.
And yes, the person who discovered an artist from streaming, goes to a gig and buys a t-shirt has already put more money in their pocket than buying their music would ever do.
Until this new model gets big enough to compensate for all this bollocks, something hindering its growth for short-term profit is not helping with.
- Status