Billy Bragg and Beggars Group Rethink YouTube & Streaming… | MusicAlly

We wonder if this is the future of music and artist revenue streams?

While Wheeler was positive about subscription streaming services, he opened both barrels on YouTube. “If YouTube launches a subscription service and it eats Spotify and Rdio, you’ll look back at these times as great days,” he cautioned. “They want to eat all the other music services and our business. That’s their plan.” He said the record industry was “caught out” in the early days of YouTube and didn’t realise the video site would become so big, initially thinking it was just about licensing music for a video of “a cat on a skateboard and then it became the biggest music service in the world”.

Bragg backed him up by saying, “If you want to talk about artists getting angry about the use of their music, YouTube is the place we should be looking at.”

Wheeler concluded, “We got caught out and that needs addressing. Otherwise they will eat our dinner.”

READ THE FULL STORY AT MUSICALLY:
http://musically.com/2014/04/07/beggars-group-recalibrates-50-streaming-payment-to-artists-and-attacks-youtube/

RELATED:

Exclusive: ‘YouTube Music’ Is Launching This Summer… | Digital Music News

#SXSW REWIND : Venture Capitalist Admits Artists Can Not Make A Living On Streaming Royalties…

What YouTube Really Pays… Makes Spotify Look Good! #sxsw

The Internet Empowered Artist? What 1 Million Streams Means To You! #sxsw

Is this the future of music? We continue to explore artist revenue streams.

Here’s what 1 million streams looks like from different revenue perspectives on the two largest and mainstream streaming services.

Service  Units Per Unit  Total  Notes 
Spotify 1,000,000 $0.00521 $5,210.00 Gross Payable to Master Rights Holder Only
Spotify same million units as above $0.00052 $521.00 Gross Payable to Songwriter/s & Publisher/s (est)
YouTube 1,000,000 $0.00175 $1,750.00 Gross Payable for All Rights Video, Master & Publishing
YouTube CMS Master Recording (Audiam / AdRev) 1,000,000 $0.00032 $321.00 Gross Payable to Master Rights Holder Only
STREAMING TOTALS  3,000,000 $7,802.00 TOTAL REVENUE EARNED FOR 3 MILLION PLAYS ON SPOTIFY AND YOUTUBE 
Itunes Album Downloads 1,125 $7.00000 $7,875.00 Gross payable including Publishing

Here are some compelling stats on the break down of what percentage of videos on YouTube actually achieve breaking the 1 million play threshold, only 0.33%

CHART OF THE DAY: Half Of YouTube Videos Get Fewer Than 500 Views | Business Insider

Some 53% of YouTube’s videos have fewer than 500 views, says TubeMogul. About 30% have less than 100 views. Meanwhile, just 0.33% have more than 1 million views.

That’s not a huge surprise. But it highlights some of the struggles Google could have selling ads around all those unpopular videos, despite the money it has to spend to store them.

An artist needs to generate THREE MILLION PLAYS on the two largest and most popular streaming platforms to equal just 1,125 album downloads from Itunes. This is an important metric to put in context. In 2013 only 4.8% of new album releases sold 2,000 units or more. So if only 4.8% of artists can sell 2,000 units or more, how many artists can realistically generate over four million streams from the same album of material?

in 2013 there were 66,565 new releases, only 3,237 sold more than 2,000 units = 4.8% of new releases sold over 2,000 units

in 2013 there were 915,482 total releases in print, only 14,856 sold more than 2,000 units = 1.6% of ALL RELEASES in print sold more than 2,000 units.

This is even more important when you start to consider that many artists feel that growing a fan base of just 10,000 fans is enough to sustain a professional career. Note we said solo artists because these economics probably need to be multiplied by each band member added for the revenue distribution to remain sustainable. So a band of four people probably need a sales base of 40,000 fans to sustain a professional career for each member of the band.

Each 10,000 albums sold on iTunes (or 100,000 song downloads) generates $70,000 in revenue for the solo artist or band. To achieve the same revenue per 10,000 fans in streams, the band has to generate 30 million streaming plays (as detailed above) if they are distributing their music across the most common streaming services including Spotify and YouTube.

In 2013 the top 1% of new releases (which happen to be those 620 titles selling 20k units or more) totaled over 77% of the new release market share leaving the remaining 99% of new releases to divide up the remaining 23% of sales.

This appears to confirm our suspicion that the internet has not created a new middle class of empowered, independent and DIY artists but sadly has sentenced them to be hobbyists and non-professionals.

Meanwhile the major artists with substantial label backing dominate greater market share as they are the few who can sustain the attrition of a marketplace where illegally free and consequence free access to music remains the primary source of consumption.

What’s worse is that it is Silicon Valley corporate interests and Fortune 500 companies that are exploiting artists and musicians worse than labels ever did. New boss, worse than the old boss, indeed.

So whose feeling empowered?

RELATED:

If the Internet is working for Musicians, Why aren’t more Musicians Working Professionally?

Artists, Know Thy Enemy – Who’s Ripping You Off and How…

Over 50 Major Brands Funding Music Piracy, It’s Big Business!

Artist Revenue Streams : Streaming Marketshare By Volume and Revenue (includes YouTube and Spotify) #sxsw

Is this the future of music? We continue to look at artist revenue streams.

Now that we’ve been blessed with a few data sets we’re going to be digging deeper into cross referencing them in the hopes of building a much better overall view of the marketplace for independent musicians. This is especially true in the area of music streaming rates and royalties.

We hoping to provide as much open and transparent information as we can get on artists revenue streams. Through the release of these posts offering per play rates, relative market share of these companies, and the distribution tiers at different unit thresholds we hope artists will use these tools to model a better understanding of their revenue potential on digital platforms.

Service Market Share Streams Market Share $$$
Spotify 61% 69%
YouTube* 32% 12%
Deezer 2% 4%
Amazon Cloud 2% 0%
Rhapsody 1% 3%
Muve Music 1% 1%
Rdio 0% 1%
Xbox Music 0% 2%
MediaNet 0% 1%
Google Play 0% 2%
Nokia 0% 0%
simfy 0% 0%
MySpace Music 0% 0%
Amazon MP3 0% 5%
eMusic 0% 1%
VerveLife 0% 0%
TOTAL 100% 100%

* These YouTube numbers are not directly comparable to the rest of the numbers as the information comes from a different data set of considerably less titles than the larger data set.

That being said there are still a few important take-a-ways in looking at this data even on a percentage of market share basis. If we doubled the amount of YouTube Streams to match the amount of Spotify streams (48% YouTube Streams and 47% Spotify Streams) the revenue disparity still places Spotify 3x’s higher at 62% of overall revenue market share versus YouTube’s only 21% of market share revenue. Simply said, you have to stream at least 3x’s more on YouTube to equal the same amount of revenue generated from YouTube.

Service  Market Share Streams Market Share $$$
YouTube (x’s2) 48% 21%
Spotify 47% 62%
Deezer 2% 3%
Amazon Cloud 1% 0%
Rhapsody 1% 2%
Muve Music 0% 1%
Rdio 0% 1%
Xbox Music 0% 2%
MediaNet 0% 1%
Google Play 0% 2%
Nokia 0% 0%
simfy 0% 0%
MySpace Music 0% 0%
Amazon MP3 0% 4%
eMusic 0% 1%
VerveLife 0% 0%
TOTAL  100% 100%

Our conclusion is that this is a very compelling reason to remove as much of your music from YouTube as you possibly can and redirect streaming music consumers to Spotify where you will earn at least 3x’s more for the same amount of streams.

Of course, creators and musicians are not given this type of consent over the use of their music on YouTube and the new CMS Services like Audiam exist only to monetize illegal and unlicensed user generated content (UGC) uploads to YouTube, and at significantly lower per play rates than the ones we’ve been tracking that pay 100% of earned revenue.

This just confirms what we’ve known all along. Google not only profits greatly from the illegal and unlicensed uploads of an artists work to YouTube, but artists are more and more powerless over having their work exploited against their will.

Here are some compelling stats on the break down of what percentage of videos on YouTube actually achieve breaking the 1 million play threshold, only 0.33%

CHART OF THE DAY: Half Of YouTube Videos Get Fewer Than 500 Views | Business Insider

Some 53% of YouTube’s videos have fewer than 500 views, says TubeMogul. About 30% have less than 100 views. Meanwhile, just 0.33% have more than 1 million views.

That’s not a huge surprise. But it highlights some of the struggles Google could have selling ads around all those unpopular videos, despite the money it has to spend to store them.

What would be welcomed would be an Audiam like service that also allows artists the ability to use CMS to remove as much of their content from YouTube as they can, and not just have a gun to their head to monetize it or lose the money that is being made from Google monetizing it against their will.

Why does this just feel like just so much more extortion and exploitation?

Only 0.33% of YouTube Videos Generate 1 Million or more views… #SXSW

Only one third of one percent of all videos uploaded to YouTube generate 1m or more views. Tell us again about this internet empowerment…

Half Of YouTube Videos Get Fewer Than 500 Views | Business Insider

YouTube’s most-watched-video lists are full of viral hits and popular music videos. But the majority of videos uploaded to Google’s (GOOG) video site are hardly watched by anyone.

Some 53% of YouTube’s videos have fewer than 500 views, says TubeMogul. About 30% have less than 100 views. Meanwhile, just 0.33% have more than 1 million views.

And here’s another interesting stat, music is the #1 category accounting for over 30% of all views.

Inside YouTube Videos : Exploring YouTube videos and their use in blogosphere | Sysomos

Main highlights:

Music is the most popular category with 31% of all analyzed videos, followed by Entertainment (15%) and People & Blogs (11%).

There is no clear correlation between the rating of the video on YouTube and how often it is viewed. Videos with a rating more than 4 out of 5 usually have fewer views than those with medium rating score between 2 to 3.

Average length of a YouTube video is 4 minutes and 12 seconds.

The average number of views for the YouTube videos we analyzed is 99,160.

If there is an authoritative source of more current stats than these please let us know in the comments.

Streaming Price Index : Now with YouTube pay rates! #SXSW

Is this the future of music? We continue to look at artist revenue streams.

If you’re heading out to any panels at SXSW this week, you might want to keep this handy when you’re being told how much money you can make… And if the services at the top of the list like Nokia, Google Play and Xbox Music can pay more per play, why can’t the services at the bottom of the list like Spotify and YouTube?

We’ll give you a hint, the less streams/plays there are the more each play pays. The more plays there are the less each stream/play pays. Tell us again about how these services will scale. Looking at this data it seems pretty clear that the larger the service get’s, the less artists are paid per stream.

So do you think streaming royalty rates are really going to increase as these services “scale”? No, we didn’t either.

SERVICE AVG PER PLAY PER 1M PLAYS
Nokia $0.07411 $74,110
Google Play $0.04573 $45,730
Xbox Music $0.03212 $32,120
Simfy $0.01626 $16,260
Napster $0.01578 $15,780
Media Net $0.01140 $11,400
Rhapsody $0.01122 $11,220
Muve Music $0.00875 $8,750
Deezer $0.00754 $7,540
Rdio $0.00692 $6,920
SPOTIFY $0.00521 $5,210
YOUTUBE* $0.00175 $1,750
Myspace Music $0.00094 $940
Amazon Cloud $0.00012 $120

* YouTube payment includes gross payable to single party uploader claiming 100% of rights including video, master and publishers. There should also be additional PRO money earned however we haven’t been able to get any reporting to date.

Our YouTube pay rate calculations can be found here:

What YouTube Really Pays… Makes Spotify Look Good!

Reality for Indie Artists : Zoë Keating’s Annual Music Sales & Streaming Data @SXSW #SXSW

Zoë Keating released her Annual Music Sales & Streaming Data Spreadsheet a little bit ago and we stayed out of the fray, although we did also publish an update of the Music Streaming Price Index for 2014 as well.

This quote from Zoë in a follow up post about her open and transparent sharing of information on Hypebot got our attention.

I want you to know that I don’t release these numbers as a marketing tool. I’ve always tabulated stuff as part of doing my annual accounting and last year I decided to make a portion of them public. Music commentators were saying, over and over, that artists are not making a living selling music, they make all their money touring, etcetera etcetera. I noted that in my case that wasn’t true and never had been. In the commentary I wasn’t seeing a lot of actual numbers from artists and thought I’d offer some details of how it all works for me: a non-labeled artist whose career has existed entirely in the internet-age.

It’s curious to us that someone would insinuate the motivation behind sharing information in an open, human and transparent way was an attempt at self serving marketing. Shame on those who have made such comments. Zoë should be celebrated for doing what the interweb companies claim to do, and ask others to do, but do not do themselves.

We also found the following statement to be true of our experience of the vast number of artists we hear from who report similar experiences with streaming services ranging from Spotify to YouTube. These services only financially serve the very large artists and the very large labels. In other words, Spotify, YouTube and the like have not empowered artists towards financial freedom and very well appear to be achieving the very opposite.

Meanwhile yes, the big money is to be made at the top of the tail…and therein lies the promise of commercial music streaming services. It will be financially valuable to those who make hits and those who aggregate legions of artists. For a single artist like me commercial streaming will never be more than promo. I accept that. But will keep talking about it until streaming companies do more to make that promo more useful (i.e data).

But there appears to be more to this story. In this recently posted video clip by “Unsound” documentary  filmmaker Mikeal Eldridge, Zoë reveals that she has dug a bit deeper into the realities of streaming economics noting that the more streams that are served, the less the artists makes per stream. Again, this is consistent with her observation that “the promise of commercial music streaming services… will be financially valuable to those who make hits and those who aggregate legions of artists.”

We’ve yet to see anyone propose how streaming can actually scale and be sustainable for artists. We love streaming services, what we don’t like are the economics.

92% of Zoë’s recording income is from transactional digital sales. If these streaming businesses are claiming to be the future, the question to ask is whose future?

Downloads Streams Total % Downloads
$75,341 $6,380 $81,721 92%

RELATED:

Music Streaming Math, Can It All Add Up?

Why Spotify is not Netflix (But Maybe It Should Be)

Musicians POV: Spotify Isn’t Good for You – Full Post

On Spotify (and Why I’m not a Conspiracy Theorist After All) | Tape Op

The real reason why the major labels love Spotify | Guardian UK

GEMA wins against YouTube In Germany on “Blocking Screens” | Media Biz

A German court found that YouTube has to stop misleading the public by blocking certain content and publicly shaming GEMA for it (the German association of composers, lyricists and music publishers.) A first step in the right direction.

Heker referred to the decision as “an important and positive signal to the music authors,” because: “It is not the GEMA, which prevents music on the internet you only want to license YouTube, like all other music portals..” Heker sweeps out: “Our concern is that the authors participate in the economic exploitation of their works and can earn their livelihood in the future.”

READ THE FULL POST MEDIA BIZ (GERMAN):
http://www.mediabiz.de/musik/news/gema-feiert-im-streit-um-sperrtafeln-erfolg-gegen-youtube/344107?Nnr=344107&NL=MWBlitz&uid=8514

IN ENGLISH VIA GOOGLE TRANSLATE:
http://bit.ly/1gzOCkT

Google pretends to care about human rights | Vox Indie

It’s not the message, but the messenger–a hypocrite to its very corporate core.  If Google as a company truly believed in “human rights” why does it continue to disregard the rights of artists at every turn?  Perhaps those who doodle for Google might want to review the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 27, paragraph 2) which includes this passage:

(2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

Why is Google so keen on “fair play” and the rights of athletes to compete, but when it comes to artists, not so much?

READ THE FULL STORY AT VOX INDIE:
http://voxindie.org/google-lgbt-olympic-doodle-opportunism

Jean Michel Jarre: ‘Artists are the collateral damage of the tech giants’ | The Guardian UK

The ‘monsters’ of Google, Facebook and the tech giants need to work with musicians, the electronic music star said, to develop new ways of protecting creative property.

Jean Michel Jarre has called on music artists to work with the world’s most powerful technology companies, urging them to explore new ways of making money for their work.

“We are the people creating the future – not manufacturers of computers or cables. We are the extraordinary,” Jarre told the Guardian. “[The lack of enforcement of] intellectual property is not just a problem for artists from Europe and America – it’s a global problem . It’s one of the strongest elements of what democracy is all about.”

READ THE FULL STORY AT THE GUARDIAN UK:
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/feb/05/jean-michel-jarre-smartphone-google-creators

RELATED:

Google, Advertising, Money and Piracy. A History of Wrongdoing Exposed.

Two Simple Facts about Technology and Piracy : iTunes Vs. YouTube

If the Internet is working for Musicians, Why aren’t more Musicians Working Professionally?

The Music Industry’s YouTube Problem | Music Ally

“Google are not music people, and that scares me.” This single quote from Colin Daniels, of Australian independent music firm Inertia, summarised a whole conference worth of anti-Google unrest at this year’s Midem, which spilled over onto YouTube too.

Whenever a YouTube exec appeared in a panel session, they were put on the defensive about the company’s approach to music and creators, often by pointed questions from audience members – and on one occasion, angry heckling.

After the last year of Spotify taking constant flak over streaming’s value to artists, at Midem that company was being praised – “everyone there are music people,” said Daniels before making his Google comment in a session on indie label strategies – while YouTube (and, more surprisingly, Facebook) were being attacked.

Music good, Big Tech evil. We’ve been writing about this clash for years now, but it was more open and more emotional than we remember at any previous Midem. Yet we also found a more positive, if challenging takeaway from this year’s conference: the music industry can shed its victim status and make these Big Tech platforms work better for rightsholders and creators.

READ THE FULL STORY AT MUSIC ALLY:
http://musically.com/2014/02/07/music-allys-midem-recap-the-music-industrys-youtube-problem/

RELATED:

Meet the New Boss: Google’s Kent Walker Shows Us What Monopoly Looks Like

Kent Walker’s Grooveshark Problem

Worshiping the Great God Scale: Google’s Four Great Lies as read to you by Kent Walker