2016 is the pivotal year for the music streaming industry. After years of growth, we can expect a market consolation for the new few months with mergers, acquisitions and insolvencies. Thus, the question arises which music streaming services will survive that consolidation process. I try to assess who will be the winners and losers by analysing the financials of several music streaming companies. In the first part of this series I examine the global market leader in the music streaming market, the Swedish music streaming company Spotify.
Posts Tagged ‘Spotify
Tags: artist income, ASCAP, Believe Digital, BMI, collecting society, composer, content aggregator, copyright, Deezer, Harry Fox Agency, iHeartRadio, income distribution, income of musicians, master right, mechanical right, MRO, music publisher, music streaming, musical copyright, Pandora, performance right, performer, PRO, rdio, Rebeat, record labels, revenue distribution, SESAC, Sirus XM, songwriter, sound recording right, SoundExchange, Spotify, streaming income, streaming revenue, The Orchard
The Rethink Music initiative recently published a report on “Fair Music: Transparency and Money Flows in the Music Industry”. The report identifies barriers in the money flows to artist and states:”[O]nly a small proportion of the money beyond the initial recording advances ultimately makes its way to artists as ongoing revenue.” (Rethink Music, 2015: 3). Especially in the digitized recorded music business the revenue streams are often obscure and non-transparent. And if it comes to music streaming, artists are sceptical about the underlying business model. Based on the report’s finding, the revenue streams from music streaming and the structures behind the business are analysed.
Tags: ad-supported music services, Deezer, freemium, IFPI, iHeartRadio, iTunes, music download sales, music streaming, music subscription, Pandora, physical music market, QQ Music, recorded music market, Recording Industry in Numbers 2014, RIN 2014, SoundExchange, Spotify, Vevo, YouTube
Music streaming is on the rise. In the recent IFPI report “Recording Industry in Numbers 2014” IFPI CEO Frances Moore is cited with “Streaming is now a mainstream part of the modern music industry.” (IFPI 2015: 5) Indeed, global subscription streaming revenue increased by 39.0 per cent and ad-supported streaming revenue by 38.6 per cent in 2014. In 2014, the global music streaming market (ad-supported as well as subscription) has a volume of US $2.2bn, which is even bigger than the single track download market (US $1.9bn) (IFPI 2015: 9). Music streaming, therefore, accounts for nearly a third of the global recorded music market. However, the market share of music streaming differs between countries. Whereas in Sweden the music streaming market share is 70 per cent of the overall recorded music market, in Germany just 6.3 per cent of the recorded music revenue comes from music streaming sources. And Japan, the second largest recorded music market in world, lags behind with meagre 3.1 per cent.
In the following I would like to highlight the economic relevance of the music streaming market segment in an international comparison.
On June 26, 2015, the Internet platform “Debating Europe” of the Friends of Europe and the NGO Europe’s World, which is supported by the European Council and other European institutions the question “What would save the music industry from digital piracy?” was posed. I had the honor of starting the discussion on Skype. Find more here: http://www.debatingeurope.eu/2015/06/26/illegal-downloading/#.VY0gH0ZyfAF
Tags: authors, composers, creators, Deezer, interpreters, major labels, music catalogue, music consumers, music majors, music publishers, music streaming, music streaming portal, music streaming service, music subscriber, music subscription, premium subscription, record labels, record majors, revenue share, revenue split, Spotify, streaming
The recently published Ernst & Young study that was commissioned by the French music industry body SNEP highlights the revenue split of a premium subscription of EUR 9.99 Spotify, Deezer and other comparable music streaming services. The study’s results confirm the conclusions drawn in the blog series “Is Streaming the Next Big Thing?” that – beside the music consumers – the (major) record labels are the main beneficiaries of the current boom of music streaming. In contrast, the musicians get just a small piece of the streaming pie and the streaming services for their part have severe problems to establish a sustainable business model. In the following, I would like to highlight and to comment on the main results of the study.
Tags: ad-supported streaming, audio-only streaming, brand awareness, brand knowledge, consumer study, digital music market, freemium, music consumer, music consumption behaviour, music streaming, music subscription, music user, music video website, Spotify, willingness to pay, YouTube
The question if streaming is the next big thing for the music industry will be eventually answered by the music consumers. Several studies were conducted in past few years – most of them commissioned by music industry bodies – to assess the future potential of music streaming. It is essential for music streaming services and the copyright holders (labels and music publishers) if consumers are aware of streaming services, if they are using them frequently and if they are prepared to convert from Freemium to subscription models. Therefore the results of the studies are important indicators for the future development of the music industry. Although they provide different and even contradictory results – due to a different methodology – they help us nevertheless to understand music consumption behaviour in the digital age. In the following I would like to review some of the studies published in the past three years.
Tags: Artists revenue project, Atoms for Peace, Damon Krukowski, digital sales, Ellen Shipley, Future of Music Coalition, Galaxie 500, income of musicians, music royalty, music streaming, Pandora, physical sales, royalties, SoundExchange, Spotify, Spotify (UK) Ltd., streaming revenue, streaming services, Thom Yorke, webcasting, YouTube, Zoë Keating
In mid of July 2013 Radiohead frontman Thom Yorke caused for controversies when he pulled his song catalogue and those of his band Atoms For Peace from music streaming service Spotify. His straight forward argument was as cited in The Guardian that “new artists get paid fuck all with this model”. Several artists take the same line as Yorke. The co-author of the Belinda Carlisle hit “Heaven is a Place on Earth”, Ellen Shipley, complained that the royalty paid by Pandora to her for more than 3m plays was US$ 40. She accused Pandora, Spotify, YouTube and Google for “(…) the meager, insulting, outrageous amount of money songwriters are being paid” according to Business Insider. In fact some big names are not available on Spotify: The Beatles, AC/DC, The Eagles, Garth Brooks, George Harrison.
Thus, the question arises if and how music streaming services can be valuable for artists? In the following I would like to highlight the pros and cons of music streaming services form an artists’ perspective.