Some Guy wrote on Feb 19
th, 2025 at 11:23am:
I mentioned this album to a customer/tenant/dude the other day. He called and said he downloaded it, and he had no idea this was out there. He said it was great.
I've shared that experience as well.
The Record companies no longer market albums like they should, or rather, the
way they used to. "I had no idea The Stones had a new album", would never be heard.
You were always "aware" at the very least. The record companies no longer care about sales.
The artist cant depend on sales. Thats why touring is such an expensive option.
<Jumps off his soapbox, catches breath>
[i]Isn't time for a new single to get the treatment????/b][/i]
< Jumps back up onto soapbox >
It certainly is, but is there any incentive for an established band to release new stuff these days?
A simple Google AI search provides the following:
> A song needs at least 1,000 streams in a year to generate royalties on Spotify. This is the minimum number of streams required to be eligible for monetization on the platform
> Spotify implemented this policy to focus revenue on "emerging and professional artists". However, some artists have criticized the policy, calling it a way to devalue long-tail music.
>You can estimate your streaming royalties using the formula:
Royalties = Number of Streams x Average Payout Rate
> For example, if you have 500,000 streams on Spotify and the average payout is $0.004 per stream, your estimated royalties would be $2,000.
Even when you bought music on Apple iTunes at $1 a song, the artist made at least 10 cents or more per purchase.
I believe it was about the same for hard singles (45s or otherwise).
Exceptions and contracted rates, not withstanding.
[b]< Jumps back off...shakes his bones, and walks away into the cold rain and snow >