What’s the Joe Rogan thing?

[yoga-like_abana]

Its easy to complain when someone else is doing really well.

[DQ12]

At the end of the day, if the absence of spotify/super cheap streaming created a larger profit pie to distribute between the record companies and artists, wouldn't both parties opt to stay off spotify? 

I don't know if the pool is necessarily larger without spotify. The dollars per artist that "makes it" is probably larger though. But like you said it's harder to "make it" in the old system. It's a really complicated issue.

And in light of this detour I'll reiterate that I don't think it's a stretch for artists to complain about Joe Rogan making 100s of millions peddling bullshit while artists (who really are the foundation of spotify) get crap on for the most part. Also I don't know the tweet, but a lot of artists don't have the power to pull their music off spotify in their current contract situation. Neil's pulling work for a lot of folks.

i don't think it's a stretch either.  if they want to complain about their value relative to Joe Rogan, they should.  the economics are really apples and oranges though. 

Between 1/21 and 1/27, rogan released 4 episodes totaling 12 hours. each episode is averaging 10 million some odd streams. Even if you assume that the average listen is just 50 percent of each episode that's still 60 million streaming hours in less than a week week of people listening to spotify.  Spotify's most streamed song ever is Ed Sheeran's shape of you, which is a ~4 minute song that has just north of 3 billion listens (after 5 years), and (generously assuming that each listen is to 100% of the song) equates to about 200,000,000 hours - which Rogan reaches in about a month, every month.  In that respect, it's pretty easy to understand why Spotify is giving a king's ransom to Rogan.

Doing some napkin math, let's assume that that .003/stream model equates to spotify's valuation of 3.5 minutes of spotify streaming. That equates to about $0.0515/hour of streaming.  Applied to a monthly average of 200,000,000 hours, Rogan would be earning about $10,285,000 per month if he was on a $.003/3.5 minutes deal.   and that's not even including the back catalog.  all of a sudden, a raw $100 million dollar deal (assuming no other streaming royalties) looks like a pretty good bargain for spotify. 

like i said, it's apples and oranges, and there are a lot of assumptions above, but it shows how much raw time people are spending on spotify listening to rogan each week.

[wetwillie]

You don’t have to pay premium for Rogan, they aren’t making money on subs for his listeners.  It’s a play to get people hooked on music and then pay a sub.

[michigancat]

At the end of the day, if the absence of spotify/super cheap streaming created a larger profit pie to distribute between the record companies and artists, wouldn't both parties opt to stay off spotify? 

I don't know if the pool is necessarily larger without spotify. The dollars per artist that "makes it" is probably larger though. But like you said it's harder to "make it" in the old system. It's a really complicated issue.

And in light of this detour I'll reiterate that I don't think it's a stretch for artists to complain about Joe Rogan making 100s of millions peddling bullshit while artists (who really are the foundation of spotify) get crap on for the most part. Also I don't know the tweet, but a lot of artists don't have the power to pull their music off spotify in their current contract situation. Neil's pulling work for a lot of folks.

i don't think it's a stretch either.  if they want to complain about their value relative to Joe Rogan, they should.  the economics are really apples and oranges though. 

Between 1/21 and 1/27, rogan released 4 episodes totaling 12 hours. each episode is averaging 10 million some odd streams. Even if you assume that the average listen is just 50 percent of each episode that's still 60 million streaming hours in less than a week week of people listening to spotify.  Spotify's most streamed song ever is Ed Sheeran's shape of you, which is a ~4 minute song that has just north of 3 billion listens (after 5 years), and (generously assuming that each listen is to 100% of the song) equates to about 200,000,000 hours - which Rogan reaches in about a month, every month.  In that respect, it's pretty easy to understand why Spotify is giving a king's ransom to Rogan.

Doing some napkin math, let's assume that that .003/stream model equates to spotify's valuation of 3.5 minutes of spotify streaming. That equates to about $0.0515/hour of streaming.  Applied to a monthly average of 200,000,000 hours, Rogan would be earning about $10,285,000 per month if he was on a $.003/3.5 minutes deal.   and that's not even including the back catalog.  all of a sudden, a raw $100 million dollar deal (assuming no other streaming royalties) looks like a pretty good bargain for spotify. 

like i said, it's apples and oranges, and there are a lot of assumptions above, but it shows how much raw time people are spending on spotify listening to rogan each week.

yeah pretty interesting numbers. Rogan also has the freedom to negotiate rates directly with spotify, which I doubt many (if any) musicians can do due to historical distribution deals and infrastructure.

[Kat Kid]

Rogan also sells ads in the middle of his podcast which most musical artists don’t do.

[DQ12]

Rogan also sells ads in the middle of his podcast which most musical artists don’t do.

could be a profitable new revenue stream in the post-album music age

[michigancat]

there's tons of product placement in music videos!

[star seed 7]

Rogan also sells ads in the middle of his podcast which most musical artists don’t do.

Does he? He used to have them loaded at the start and it was easy to skip past them. I can't remember if there are still ads since the move to spotify but I'm leaning towards no?

[MakeItRain]

4.  apropos of nothing really, I love spotify and think it's (along with its predecessors/peers) one of the best things that's ever happened to music.  completely revolutionary.  the entire world's catalogue of music available at your fingertips.  what a world.

They are crooks who rip off artists as bad, if not worse, than record companies.

I disagree.

They pay their artists significantly less than all the streaming services for no other reason other than they can. I think maximizing corporate profits at the expense of artists is the pinnacle of greed.

[wetwillie]

Yea it’s why I think new tech will likely disrupt their model

[yoga-like_abana]

Rogan also sells ads in the middle of his podcast which most musical artists don’t do.

Pretty common theme for most of the podcasts I listen to.

[catastrophe]

4.  apropos of nothing really, I love spotify and think it's (along with its predecessors/peers) one of the best things that's ever happened to music.  completely revolutionary.  the entire world's catalogue of music available at your fingertips.  what a world.

They are crooks who rip off artists as bad, if not worse, than record companies.

I disagree.

They pay their artists significantly less than all the streaming services for no other reason other than they can. I think maximizing corporate profits at the expense of artists is the pinnacle of greed.

Disclaimer: I haven’t thoroughly researched all available streaming services.

However, my impression was that Spotify “can” pay less to artists because it’s the most used app, and that it’s the most used app because it has the widest available amount of free content. I don’t think it’s fair to characterize Spotify as greedier than any other major app.

Their model is just different. I can think of any other platform that has even close to the same variety of free music, which obviously the artists are effectively subsidizing in this case for the sake of consumers.

[Trim]

I still buy whole albums on CD whenever possible.  Very ethical.

[michigancat]

I still buy whole albums on CD whenever possible.  Very ethical.

I buy cassettes or LP's AND stream on spotify. I'm really the ethicalest

[DQ12]

4.  apropos of nothing really, I love spotify and think it's (along with its predecessors/peers) one of the best things that's ever happened to music.  completely revolutionary.  the entire world's catalogue of music available at your fingertips.  what a world.

They are crooks who rip off artists as bad, if not worse, than record companies.

I disagree.

They pay their artists significantly less than all the streaming services for no other reason other than they can. I think maximizing corporate profits at the expense of artists is the pinnacle of greed.

they pay their artists less because that's the deal they've negotiated with the artists/label and have been able to "sustain" (while, not for nothing, never having turned a profit).  it sucks that a lot of artists aren't really in control of their music, but if someone (i.e. the label) is making a "bad" deal with spotify on the artist's behalf, then i'd place the primary blame on the label who made the bad deal -- not on spotify who apparently made an awesome deal.

theoretically, i'm not even sure what a fair value for a stream is.  if spotify matched Amazon's .004/stream, is that fair? Apple's 0.007?  fwiw, youtube has a music streaming service that pays out .002.  Pandora's at .0013.

[Trim]

I still buy whole albums on CD whenever possible.  Very ethical.

I buy cassettes or LP's AND stream on spotify. I'm really the ethicalest

I've bought some records too that come with free downloads, and I've only listened to the download as I still have to eventually buy a non-toy record player.  And I've used the amazon spotify thing during the summers on the boat but find I pretty much only listen to stuff I've bought hard copies of anyway.

[nicname]

I still buy whole albums on CD whenever possible.  Very ethical.

And buy the cd (along w T-shirt) at the show as often as possible!

[Trim]

I still buy whole albums on CD whenever possible.  Very ethical.

And buy the cd (along w T-shirt) at the show as often as possible!

[Trim]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/01/entertainment/india-arie-joe-rogan-spotify-race-cec/index.html

[MakeItRain]

Disclaimer: I haven’t thoroughly researched all available streaming services.

However, my impression was that Spotify “can” pay less to artists because it’s the most used app, and that it’s the most used app because it has the widest available amount of free content. I don’t think it’s fair to characterize Spotify as greedier than any other major app.

Their model is just different. I can think of any other platform that has even close to the same variety of free music, which obviously the artists are effectively subsidizing in this case for the sake of consumers.

they pay their artists less because that's the deal they've negotiated with the artists/label and have been able to "sustain" (while, not for nothing, never having turned a profit).  it sucks that a lot of artists aren't really in control of their music, but if someone (i.e. the label) is making a "bad" deal with spotify on the artist's behalf, then i'd place the primary blame on the label who made the bad deal -- not on spotify who apparently made an awesome deal.

theoretically, i'm not even sure what a fair value for a stream is.  if spotify matched Amazon's .004/stream, is that fair? Apple's 0.007?  fwiw, youtube has a music streaming service that pays out .002.  Pandora's at .0013.

Like I said Spotify made a conscious choice to low-ball artists for their music.

Miss me with the never turned a profit line. They are a publicly traded company. At the time of their IPO launch they were at $36 a share, today they closed at $203.62.

[MakeItRain]

I still buy whole albums on CD whenever possible.  Very ethical.

Me too, precisely the reason I haven't heard a new Kanye West album in over a decade.

[sys]

don't know crap about spotify (obviously), but i heard some dude on the radio last night talking about how they're moving into podcasts as the future of their business.  like way moreso than music.

[star seed 7]

don't know crap about spotify (obviously), but i heard some dude on the radio last night talking about how they're moving into podcasts as the future of their business.  like way moreso than music.

This was posted on another bbs

Spotify as a music streaming platform, which was its legacy use case and business model, was wildly succesful and cool.

But as it grew, due to having to pay out performers/royalties, it's gross margins plateaud at 25% (again, artist royalties are variable costs that scale every time more people use the product (listen to music).

Branching out into podcasts helps the business grow because Spotify is building a dynamic audio ad marketplace. By doing this, Spotify’s gross margins can get up 40%

[wetwillie]

They need some of that middle out compression algorithm to reduce their backend streaming costs

[nicname]

Joe Rogan, Spotify, Neil Young, Amazon, Blackstone and lots of money.