Re: Zoe Keating in NY Times article.@borisfx.com

[mark francombe <markfrancombe@gmail.com>]

I think you missed my point Todd, I am simply saying that what Spotify has done here in Scandinavia is placed a simple model for purchasing out there, that people have accepted, BUT they are not paying the artists, The consumers are now paying for music again, and it will increase. which means more to Spotify NOT artists. However if the cut was fair, maybe we would see some revenue getting to the musicians. It was torrents that killed the music biz, not downloads or streaming, but all models killed the musicians wage. CDBaby and Bandcamp both offer alternatives for online sales that actually are good for artists, So if Spotify has paved the way for the public to pay for music again, they may be happy to pay using other services than the rapists. ( to use Ricks original somewhat unpleasant analogy).

Small correction to Pers comment, the Scandinavian figures are not about musicians wages, they are total music sales, it says nothing about musicians earning more. Just the industry, including Spotify. But it DOES show the markets willingness to pay for music is not dead.

M

Sent from my (advertisement removed)

On 30 Jan 2013, at 22:16, Todd Elliott <toddbert@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 11:57 AM, mark francombe <mark@markfrancombe.com> wrote:

I wont comment on the issues you pointed out on others posts, just mine...

�

�

When people figured out how to (re)distribute it themselves, they decided it wasn't worth as much as the record companies were charging.

Not true, didn't happen like that at all...

Really? Then why did sales enter the shitter?

�

�

When it became easy to get for free, they decided it was free.�

Also not true, they stole when it became easy to steal, decided it was free??? What kind of bollocks is that?

It's exactly what happened. When music became readily available for free, people took it. The morality of downloading music didn't bother them at all; it became free because people didn't pay for it, and could take it (by and large) without consequence. They chose to do so.

�

OK; Heres something interesting.

There IS something good about Spotify actually!

In Norway and Sweden, record sales have been dropping�steadily�since 2001 by 17% per year... Now they didnt manages to start factoring in the sales of Downloads till 2006, but it turns out that for the last 2 years RECORD SALES... stop.. damn force of habit... MUSIC SALES HAVE INCREASED!!! The number of people prepared to pay for music, HAS INCREASED. Why? Because Spotify makes it SO DAMN EASY!!! Yes, IN Norway, people would rathe pay 10 dollars a month for unlimited access to music, than A) Have Adverts, or B) be bothered to track down torrents and steal it.

Ok, so Spotify gets a bunch of money. Do the artists? If I sell a million records, and get two dollars for it (which is basically what the original article said), then who cares that people are 'paying for music'?

�

So Spotify is getting people USED to paying again, thats a good thing!

It's great! If you work for Spotify, or are an investor in it. If you create what they stream, it doesn't matter. Hell, I think I have something on Spotify. Never seen a nickel.�

T

--
http://toaster.bandcamp.com