http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/indus...08058242.story

Spotify is worth $3 billion (with 5 million paying subscribers), does that mean that Deezer with 3 million paying subscribers is worth: $3 x 3/5 = $1.8 billion?

LOL.


And unlike Spotify, Deezer is available in 150 countries.

welp!

There will be no music industry if people keep subscribing to these things

you're right. Having people paying $120 a year for music will bring about its demise.








p.s. These subscription service pays 70% of their revenue as royalties. So if they make $1 billion in revenue, they pay the record label/artists/publisher/songwriters $700 million in royalties.

Selling $1 billion in CD will bring in $600 million in royalties....see chart below.

So subscription offer better royalties compare to selling CD. I guess the cost of making the CD, storing the CD, shipping the CD, and the retailer cut all add up more than the digital format.




http://andrewapeterson.com/2007/11/a...-real-numbers/
$0.17 + $0.82 + 1.60 + 1.70 + 2.40 + 2.91 = $9.6

$9.6 / $15.99 = 60%

the other 40% are for Packaging/manufacturing, Distribution, Retail profit and Retail overhead.

Don't forget song/album sales decreasing lately

Is Deezer available in Canada

Spotify is terrible about paying musicians. Is Deezer any better?

Streaming is clearly the future, but it needs to be handled better.

The average person in the USA spend about $23.6 a year on recorded music. (and half of this has 60% royalties)

People in the USA who use Spotify Premium / Rhapsody / Muve / Mog / Rdio pays around $120 a year. (and all of this has 70% royalties).

This is 5 times as much. So the more people that subscribe to subscription service, the better it will be for the music industry. And this is before considering the higher royalties rate that subscriptions service pay compare to CD.




$7.324 billion a year in revenue / 310 million people = $23.6 a year

not avaliabe in my country

If Spotify is terrible at paying musicians, what do you suggest it should pay? Right now it is paying 70% of its revenue...

Should it raise that to 80%? 85%? 90%?

Should it raise its $9.99 monthly price? So instead of paying $120 a year for music, should the consumers pay $150? $180? $200 ?





Deezer pays about the same rate as Rhapsody since they both don't offer free streaming. (Deezer is changing that but the free service from Deezer is only 2 hours a month ...)


http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/perm.../120604youtube

Zune
15,159 plays
Payout = $437.58
$0.028 per song
Ratio = 25:1 iTunes Song Download

Napster
30,238 plays
Payout = $479.07
$0.016 per song
Ratio = 43:1 iTunes song download.

Rhapsody
50,822 plays
Payout = $668.57
$0.013 per song
Ratio = 53:1 iTunes song download.

Spotify
798,783 plays.
Payout = $4,277.39
$0.005 per song.
Ratio = 140:1 iTunes Song Download



If Spotify eliminates the free service (which it is losing a lot of money on), it will be

1) profitable
2) pay about the same rate as Rhapsody at $0.0132 per stream (about 53 streams = 1 Itunes download)

Spotify is keeping the free service even though it is unprofitable because it lure in potential customers. About 25% of free users eventually convert to pay users.

Honestly I just wish either of them could get a team of UX Designers that didn't suck. Spotify by far is the worst offender. If I'm going to move totally into the streaming world I need to be able to use an application that isn't frustrating to move around in, and is avalible on all of my devices.

Rdio is the only one of these services with a UI that makes any kind of logical sense.

Never even heard of Deezer, but I'm assuming it's better since its available in Canada.

Though regardless it kinda sucks how little artists get on either services... I feel bad to endorse it when they only make like a few cents off it

If Spotify 20 million users stream 1 song from Artist X just 1 time, Artist X would get

20 mil x $0.0055 per stream = $110,000