1/ Spotify, YouTube, Pandora and others all pay artists for their free tiers and trials. It's the right thing to do.
-
-
2/ Swift took her new album off Spotify not because she's not paid, but because she feels their free service "devalues music"
244 retweets 139 likes -
3/ Swift never pulled from YouTube which is the most popular free service and certainly devalues music if Spotify does.
297 retweets 184 likes
4/ Swift's career was built on terrestrial radio play, which is a free service AND doesn't pay recording artists a dime.
-
-
5/ Apple isn't getting rid of its long free trial, but is now going to pay artists. This simply puts it at parity with all other players.
197 retweets 90 likes - View other replies
-
6/ Reminder: Apple uses music to make billions off hardware. Artists see nothing from this.
187 retweets 107 likes - View other replies
-
7/ Swift's letter and Apple's response is mostly theater. Nothing here to suggest Apple treats artists more fairly than anyone else.
288 retweets 185 likes - View other replies
-
8/ My point is this: there is too much animus between artists & Silicon Valley. We shouldn't herald this move as progress. It's status quo.
116 retweets 116 likes - View other replies
-
@tconrad <Not "status quo" >artist that were NOT going to be paid for the first 3 months of Apple Music will now receive payments.TY TaylorS0 retweets 0 likes - View other replies
-
@judeeflick no reluctance to applaud Swift for what she did. My point is that Apple isn't an artist hero for doing what everyone else does.1 retweet 2 likes -
@tconrad <I applaud Apple for recognizing the power of@taylorswift13 and the PR nightmare they were about to face.0 retweets 1 like -
-
-
-
@tconrad Not True Tom!! radio stations pay BMI ( to pay artists) in fees per listener performance approximately twice what Pandora does!0 retweets 0 likes - View other replies
-
@LolTolhurst Both pay a percentage of revenue. Pandora a higher percentage. As Pandora revenues grow they will pay more than terrestrial.1 retweet 0 likes -
@tconrad I will believe that when I see it! Meanwhile young artists are struggling on the crumbs given them whilst " Revenues Grow"!0 retweets 1 like - View other replies
-
@LolTolhurst this hard 140 characters at a time. I suspect you and I share more common ground than it appears.0 retweets 1 like - View other replies
-
@tconrad Indeed!It just matters to me that new artists especially are not squeezed out of the equation by someone elses" business model!"0 retweets 1 like - View other replies
-
@LolTolhurst All I care about is an environment where all artists can be discovered and compensated.2 retweets 0 likes
-
-
-
@sgordon70@om correct, but Apple, Pandora, Spotify, etc all pay her twice: once as songwriter and once as performer.3 retweets 2 likes - View other replies
-
@tconrad@sgordon70@om If I have my own label, my song needs to be streamed 140 times to earn 98 cents with music streaming.0 retweets 0 likes -
@nektariosmusic@tconrad@om which why ticket prices and merch cost so much. Making up for lost revenue.0 retweets 0 likes - View other replies
-
-
@nektariosmusic@tconrad@om technology won't allow for it.The masses are screaming for cheaper, more free resources. And paying $$$ 4 shows0 retweets 0 likes - View other replies
-
@sgordon70@tconrad@om Sadly... Music streaming takes cheap music to a new level. 1000000 streams will get you about $7000.1 retweet 0 likes - View other replies
-
@nektariosmusic but an audience of 1,000,000 is about the same as two plays at drive time on FM in NYC. $7000 not a bad payday for that?1 retweet 1 like - View other replies
- Show more
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
Tom Conrad
Judee Flick
lol Tolhurst
Scott
Nektarios