Hello,
Lately I have been reading up on music streaming services that is rapidly becoming the consumer's choice for getting music such as Spotify, Apple Music and so forth....
I was reading also the following thread about how music is so discouraging when trying to make a living out of being a musician and hardly making money...
The Music Industry Has 99 Problems. And They Are... - Digital Music NewsDigital Music News
I was wondering as to why record labels aren't waking up and fighting this issue ?
Why can't the major labels and major producers and the like open up their own streaming website (for example purposes let's call it Musica) and get the word around that all musicians that let Musica host
their music will rightfully receive the well deserved royalties.
For example, consumers that wish to stream or download from Musica, would pay something like 10.99$ per 20 streams max. or 99 cents per download. And not 10.99$ per month for unlimited streams such as some of these new and unfair emerging services are doing.
Musica would have one ultimatum and that is the artists must respect that their songs would only be available on Musica and cannot have their songs hosted anywhere else.
So for example, if I am an artist, and wish to host my music on Musica, I would have to remove any of my music from any other service such as YouTube, sound cloud, Spotify ect....
Here's why the model would work:
The incentive for an artist (new or popular) for doing this would be that if the consumers want to hear the music, THEY MUST pay the price set by Musica which means more money for me "the artist".
Many artist would want to put their music on Musica and remove themselves from othe music sites to avoid users to download there music for free or fractions of a penny....
Users, would eventually have no choice but to download from Musica and rightfully pay for their music the way it should be.
Any competitor to Musica lowering the prices per download would fail since this would mean less money paid back to the artist and therefore most artists wouldn't host there.
The only competitors to Musica would be services which would attract the artists by offering greater monetary royalties paid to the artists. This means that Musica competitors would be competing to get the most artists into their service by paying them more than Musica pays out.
Which is a win win situation for both the artist and the web sites hosting these types of services. Eventually this completion would level off and come to a fair payout to the artists.
What do you guys think!!!
Would this work.... let me know what could potentially be the downfall to this business model.
thanks
Lately I have been reading up on music streaming services that is rapidly becoming the consumer's choice for getting music such as Spotify, Apple Music and so forth....
I was reading also the following thread about how music is so discouraging when trying to make a living out of being a musician and hardly making money...
The Music Industry Has 99 Problems. And They Are... - Digital Music NewsDigital Music News
I was wondering as to why record labels aren't waking up and fighting this issue ?
Why can't the major labels and major producers and the like open up their own streaming website (for example purposes let's call it Musica) and get the word around that all musicians that let Musica host
their music will rightfully receive the well deserved royalties.
For example, consumers that wish to stream or download from Musica, would pay something like 10.99$ per 20 streams max. or 99 cents per download. And not 10.99$ per month for unlimited streams such as some of these new and unfair emerging services are doing.
Musica would have one ultimatum and that is the artists must respect that their songs would only be available on Musica and cannot have their songs hosted anywhere else.
So for example, if I am an artist, and wish to host my music on Musica, I would have to remove any of my music from any other service such as YouTube, sound cloud, Spotify ect....
Here's why the model would work:
The incentive for an artist (new or popular) for doing this would be that if the consumers want to hear the music, THEY MUST pay the price set by Musica which means more money for me "the artist".
Many artist would want to put their music on Musica and remove themselves from othe music sites to avoid users to download there music for free or fractions of a penny....
Users, would eventually have no choice but to download from Musica and rightfully pay for their music the way it should be.
Any competitor to Musica lowering the prices per download would fail since this would mean less money paid back to the artist and therefore most artists wouldn't host there.
The only competitors to Musica would be services which would attract the artists by offering greater monetary royalties paid to the artists. This means that Musica competitors would be competing to get the most artists into their service by paying them more than Musica pays out.
Which is a win win situation for both the artist and the web sites hosting these types of services. Eventually this completion would level off and come to a fair payout to the artists.
What do you guys think!!!
Would this work.... let me know what could potentially be the downfall to this business model.
thanks
Last edited:
