I was born at the end of the CD age and in my lifetime, the music
industry has been confronted by many challenges. First, it was piracy sites
like the original Napster, then iTunes downloads and now, streaming services
like Spotify and Google Play Music. To listen some some stars like Thom Yorke
and Taylor Swift, you might think that streaming services are killing the music
industry. Given the numbers, I can understand why the industry is worried.
Music industry revenues have been almost halved in 15 years:
This overall decline has masked some different dynamics. Over
this period, the sales of physical formats have declined but the value of downloads,
while growing, has not made up for all of this decline. As the market for
streaming services is growing, it seems to be at the expense of the download
market. So are streaming services killing the music industry? To answer this
question, you need to look closer at the development of streaming services. The
first point to make is that streaming services were first established as a
legal response to illegal piracy sites which paid artist nothing. Their
business model is based upon migrating people from a limited free service
supported by adverts, to more comprehensive paid-for packages. Let's look more
closely at the market leader, Spotify.
Spotify has been very successful at growing both its free and
paid-for subscriber base:
This growth has enabled Spotify to significantly increase the
amount of money it pays out to music rights holders:
The complaints from musicians suggests that we, the customers,
are getting too much and paying too little for their valuable music. The data,
however, suggests that musicians should be aggressively supporting the growth
of streaming services. It seems that Spotify users spend more money on music on
average than non-subscribers.
Streaming services talk about a business model called 'music as
water' to describe a model where once you have paid a fixed fee, you have
unlimited use. They obviously come for a country that doesn't have water meters
but I get the message! I suspect that the complaints from the music industry
come from the fact that they are caught in the gap between the decline of
physical format sales and the growth of these legal streaming services. How
does this growth feed through to the musicians?
The news stories reduce the arrangement to a 'price-per-stream'
but there is actually a complex algorithm:
The subscriber growth mentioned above has led the average
price-per-stream to increase from $0.006 to $0.0085 but what does this mean for
the typical artist? The figures below refer to real albums but the names have
been generalised:
These are US$ numbers per month. I can't understand why artists,
such as Taylor Swift, would be upset to only receive almost half a million
dollars per month on top of their download and concert revenues. To the extent
these numbers are not enough to satisfy the musicians, the solution seems to be
growing the use of streaming services rather than going to war against them.
Another benefit of streaming services is their ability to expose
users to new artists and music. A key part of the offering of the paid-for
services is promotion of playlists and 'artist radio' stations. I know that
using these services myself has introduced me to a huge number of artists that
I would otherwise, not have discovered. As mainstream radio stations evolve into
a smaller number of styles (Top 40, Classic Rock, Oldies) it is the streaming
services that given music fans the best opportunity to experiment and discover
new music.
It seems like the whole music industry was structured around the
sale of physical units. I don't think that either the demand for music or the
amount of money music fans are willing pay for it has declined as much as the
industry revenues suggest but I believe that the 'water as music' model is the
best business model for the music industry of the future. What we are hearing
from the music industry is the crashing of gears as the industry changes to
adapt to this new world. The good news for us music fans is that one way the
musicians have reacted to the fall in revenue from this period of adjustment is
to focus more on live concerts. The amount of money we spend on concerts and
festivals has more than made up for the decline in music sales revenue. That's
maybe a topic for a future article but in the mean time, don't feel too sorry
for the musicians. From the newspapers and magazines, they still seem to be
living a very affluent life.
Comments
Post a Comment
Comments with names are more likely to be published.