Am I seeing something wrong in this story?

[Lutherf]

Mariah Carey’s record-breaking day shows how little musicians make from Spotify

https://qz.com/1507361/mariah-careys-record-breaking-day-shows-how-little-musicians-make-from-spotify/

Yet, relatively speaking, the Christmas jingle won’t make that much money from this record-breaking day. Spotify pays whoever holds the rights to a song anywhere from $0.006 to $0.0084 per play. The rights “holder” can then split these earning between the record label, producers, artists, and songwriters, which means splitting pennies between many parties.

...

Assuming the popular song is paid at the highest price of .0084 cents per stream for 11 million listens, the rights holder or holders will earn $92,400 before splitting the earnings. It’s not a terrible take for a single day, but it’s also not a lot of money given just how much people seem to love Carey’s Christmas jingle and its enduring appeal. Between them, the parties could all split a luxury car to share rides. Individually, they could maybe each buy a Toyota.

So, in that first paragraph I pulled it says the person who owns the rights to the song gets $0.0084. I read that as 0.84 cents per view.

The second paragraph I pulled says .0084 cents and uses that figure for the rest of the calculation. Isn't that a difference of a factor of 100? I mean, if the first paragraph is correct than the $92k should actually be $9.2M, right?

Farther down the article it cites the song as earning $60M for $100M copies which is $0.60 a copy so knocking that down by a factor of 100 for streaming would seem reasonable but not knocking it down by a factor of 10k!

 

[<alt>doxygen]

Mariah Carey’s record-breaking day shows how little musicians make from Spotify

https://qz.com/1507361/mariah-careys-record-breaking-day-shows-how-little-musicians-make-from-spotify/



So, in that first paragraph I pulled it says the person who owns the rights to the song gets $0.0084. I read that as 0.84 cents per view.

The second paragraph I pulled says .0084 cents and uses that figure for the rest of the calculation. Isn't that a difference of a factor of 100? I mean, if the first paragraph is correct than the $92k should actually be $9.2M, right?

Farther down the article it cites the song as earning $60M for $100M copies which is $0.60 a copy so knocking that down by a factor of 100 for streaming would seem reasonable but not knocking it down by a factor of 10k!

It's how the business works now. Artists don't get crap from streaming services. They only get exposure. There are some well known artists that don't allow the streamers to use their music. The money is in concerts and merch.

If I really like an artist I will buy a CD or vinyl copy. It gets me better quality sound and allows me to support them.

 

[NeverTrump]

Mariah Carey’s record-breaking day shows how little musicians make from Spotify

https://qz.com/1507361/mariah-careys-record-breaking-day-shows-how-little-musicians-make-from-spotify/



So, in that first paragraph I pulled it says the person who owns the rights to the song gets $0.0084. I read that as 0.84 cents per view.

The second paragraph I pulled says .0084 cents and uses that figure for the rest of the calculation. Isn't that a difference of a factor of 100? I mean, if the first paragraph is correct than the $92k should actually be $9.2M, right?

Farther down the article it cites the song as earning $60M for $100M copies which is $0.60 a copy so knocking that down by a factor of 100 for streaming would seem reasonable but not knocking it down by a factor of 10k!

$0.0084 is barely a penny. $0.84 is almost a dollar. Article says artists get barely a penny. Yes the deal is just as ****ty as it sounds. That's why the beatles fought Steve Jobs and Apple soooo long.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Mariah Carey’s record-breaking day shows how little musicians make from Spotify

https://qz.com/1507361/mariah-carey...shows-how-little-musicians-make-from-spotify/



So, in that first paragraph I pulled it says the person who owns the rights to the song gets $0.0084. I read that as 0.84 cents per view.

The second paragraph I pulled says .0084 cents and uses that figure for the rest of the calculation. Isn't that a difference of a factor of 100? I mean, if the first paragraph is correct than the $92k should actually be $9.2M, right?

Farther down the article it cites the song as earning $60M for $100M copies which is $0.60 a copy so knocking that down by a factor of 100 for streaming would seem reasonable but not knocking it down by a factor of 10k!

Seems like the author is math challenged. All I know is, Spotify pays 0.0084 per play. That's not eight cents.
If it was eight cents, it would read 0.08 so it is one-tenth of that.

0.0084 times 11,000,000 = 92,400 - - radio airplay used to be almost triple that or even five times that figure depending on the era, and actual record or disc sales is well over ten times that figure. Spotify and the rest of the streaming services are making a killing at the expense of the artists. If you're Mariah Carey you will probably do okay but the number of Mariah Careys can be counted on less than two hands, so for everyone else, it's a ripoff.

And the thing is, these streaming platforms make enough to afford to pay more without even raising their prices. But they won't unless and until there is significant pressure on them to do so at the risk of losing access to the material.

That is why I do not sell my Leon Russell DVD as a download on iTunes, same reason...they don't pay for crap, so it's not worth it to me.

---But you're the last person in the world I need to teach numbers to, if I remember correctly numbers are what you do for a living.

 

[Rexedgar]

Mariah Carey’s record-breaking day shows how little musicians make from Spotify

https://qz.com/1507361/mariah-careys-record-breaking-day-shows-how-little-musicians-make-from-spotify/



So, in that first paragraph I pulled it says the person who owns the rights to the song gets $0.0084. I read that as 0.84 cents per view.

The second paragraph I pulled says .0084 cents and uses that figure for the rest of the calculation. Isn't that a difference of a factor of 100? I mean, if the first paragraph is correct than the $92k should actually be $9.2M, right?

Farther down the article it cites the song as earning $60M for $100M copies which is $0.60 a copy so knocking that down by a factor of 100 for streaming would seem reasonable but not knocking it down by a factor of 10k!

Isn’t there a rule that CPA’s need to take some time off and rest up before April? Why do you move the first decimal two places?

84 cents is represented as 0.84; 0.0084 is less than a dime ,0.10........and no I did not read the link, sorry.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

When HBO contacted me to license footage from my 1972 Leon Russell DVD for use in their documentary about Leon and Elton John doing an album together back in 2010, they were paying me almost a thousand dollars a second for the material.

That's HBO, a worldwide cable entertainment service, and this is film footage but you get the point.
ABC also paid me, CBS paid me, TriBeCa Film Foundation paid me, PBS paid me and VH-1 paid me.

 

[Helix]

here are some stats :

https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2017/07/17/artists-touring-revenue/

i remember reading a bit about this back in the day when i wanted to make a living by playing music professionally. the money is in playing live.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

The guy my first wife worked for is a screenwriter, but he is also a musician.

He did the song for the end credits for a Kris Kristofferson movie called "Flashpoint". (1984)
When that movie hit the HBO screens he was getting 1600 bucks every single time that film played on HBO, and that was back in the 1980's and that was just for that one song, he also had another song credit in the movie as well, so another 1200 bucks for that.

He's still getting residual checks but I think they've shrunk some over the years.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

It's how the business works now. Artists don't get crap from streaming services. They only get exposure. There are some well known artists that don't allow the streamers to use their music. The money is in concerts and merch.

If I really like an artist I will buy a CD or vinyl copy. It gets me better quality sound and allows me to support them.

Would you buy a live concert DVD? (Loaded question - LOL)

 

[ecofarm]

0.0084 =/= 0.000084

 

[Rexedgar]

The guy my first wife worked for is a screenwriter, but he is also a musician.

He did the song for the end credits for a Kris Kristofferson movie called "Flashpoint". (1984)
When that movie hit the HBO screens he was getting 1600 bucks every single time that film played on HBO, and that was back in the 1980's and that was just for that one song, he also had another song credit in the movie as well, so another 1200 bucks for that.

He's still getting residual checks but I think they've shrunk some over the years.

That was a good film; Treat Williams was the other border patrol agent. Kristofferson has an interesting biography ....

 

[<alt>doxygen]

Would you buy a live concert DVD? (Loaded question - LOL)

Ummm, live? Is there any such thing in the big leagues these days? When did that die, 1978?

So, yes, if I thought the show AV (both) would be great and it was all really live.

If I missed the load, clue a bro - been a long day, lol...

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Ummm, live? Is there any such thing in the big leagues these days? When did that die, 1978?

So, yes, if I thought the show AV (both) would be great and it was all really live.

If I missed the load, clue a bro - been a long day, lol...

I was talking about a live concert filmed in 1972, it's probably much older than the music you listen to.

 

[<alt>doxygen]

I was talking about a live concert filmed in 1972, it's probably much older than the music you listen to.

I hadn't read the whole thread when I posted that. I now understand. I was just hitting high school in '72, so I grew up with the music of the 60's and 70's.

Sounds like you made a tidy pot off that work. Good for you!

 

[Middleground]

here are some stats :

the money is in playing live.

I believe this to be correct. I remember reading and article that Sarah McLachlan was dead broke trying to pay back her record company even after 3 successful albums. I am not sure what is (was) worse -- record labels or digital streaming. Record labels do not work as they once did -- because of the internet it is much easier to get your name out there. This is why many bands have created their own label -- they can pretty much control what they do for publicity, studio time, direction and whether they will distribute CD, albums or just go digital. As it's always been, artist make the bulk of their money by touring.

 

[ModerationNow!]

It makes me sick to think these overrated, undertalented 'artists' of the music world are only able to make many tens of millions of dollars per year, while being treated like kings and queens wherever they go. But it's even more distressing to know that they may not be able to continue bringing in those same vulgar profits 10-20- 30-40 years after they released those songs, without actually having to lift another finger in the process! Such a sad and depressing world we live in, where one person can keep bringing in checks for work they did long ago, while the rest of us are 'fortunate' enough to ONLY get paid for our labor once!


What should also be discussed, is the fact that they are only able to make $25,000 to $150,000 for singing for 2 hours at a concert, while being FORCED to pay the background singers maybe $500 for singing during that same show. Thank God NOBODY in the mainstream media EVER complains about, or even acknowledges these discrepancies! Maybe if the 'artists' were non-Democratic party supporting CEO's, and the background singers were mailroom workers, then they wouldn't completely omit these issues from their conversations....

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where pimps and thieves run free and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side."

---Hunter S. Thompson

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Marshall Gallagher, also known as "my nephew the rock star".
Produced, arranged, engineered and played on this record, and starred in the music video with the female vocalist.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Lets put it this way

A Spotify Subscription is $10 a month

Assume a person is listening to 20 songs a day, every day. That comes out to $4.8 dollars Spotify has to pay out in royalties. Leaving $5 for running the business (and of course profit). If a person listen's to Spotify all day long and plays 8 hrs of music, Spotify could lose money on that account


Artists for the last decade or so have made the majority of their money from concerts and gear

 

[Middleground]

Lets put it this way

A Spotify Subscription is $10 a month

Assume a person is listening to 20 songs a day, every day. That comes out to $4.8 dollars Spotify has to pay out in royalties. Leaving $5 for running the business (and of course profit). If a person listen's to Spotify all day long and plays 8 hrs of music, Spotify could lose money on that account


Artists for the last decade or so have made the majority of their money from concerts and gear

Many people, including myself, listen for free.

 

[Cephus]

It's how the business works now. Artists don't get crap from streaming services. They only get exposure. There are some well known artists that don't allow the streamers to use their music. The money is in concerts and merch.

If I really like an artist I will buy a CD or vinyl copy. It gets me better quality sound and allows me to support them.

They don't make much off of CD sales either, it all goes to the label. As you said, all of their real money comes from concerts and merch sales.

 

[<alt>doxygen]

They don't make much off of CD sales either, it all goes to the label. As you said, all of their real money comes from concerts and merch sales.

I know. It does show the label they have a following, though, and not everyone tours here or hits a decent venue in the area. I also hate when a band does come around but plays a huge open park festival gig. The sound frequently stinks and it's outside which cuts the ability for light shows to work.