Feeds

back to article Labels to get, count them, 0.13 cents per play on Apple iRadio

Apple has begun telling music labels exactly how much money they can expect to earn from their new iRadio service - and it ain't gonna be very much. The fruity firm will hand over just 0.13 cents per play, along with 15% of their advertising revenue, according to reports. If the record label manages to survive a year on those …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Silver badge

Dear Apple

under no circumstance can you play any of my music on your iRadio.

5
3
Anonymous Coward

Re: Dear Apple

No problem, if you don't want to expose your music to potentially millions of buyers, whilst getting paid for this advertising, then feel free to withhold it.

6
7

Re: Dear Apple

That is your right to chose to receive something, or nothing.

Just remember the same applies to patents when one choses not to license use to others.

0
0
Silver badge

ReRe: Dear Apple

There are many many ways to get music to potentially millions of buyers and most of them dont pay me less that it will cost to get my accountant to deal with any monies I should get and better still will not fund this increasingly avaricious monster.

3
1

This post has been deleted by its author

Apple screws Musicians -- Shocker!!

This is a non story.

Apple's entire business model is about shafting everybody from users to suppliers.

11
4

This post has been deleted by its author

Bronze badge
Thumb Up

Re: Apple screws Musicians -- Shocker!!

"Apple's entire business model is about shafting everybody from users to suppliers to every country's Tax Office."

There...fixed it for you.

5
0
jai
Silver badge

Re: Apple screws Musicians -- Shocker!!

BUT at least their screwing them slightly less than Pandora.

Also, it's not like this model (at least in the US) is paying artist less than before.

http://theunderstatement.com/post/53867665082/pandora-pays-far-more-than-16-dollars

"Even more importantly, FM/AM paid him NOTHING for the performance of the song. Unlike most industrialized nations, terrestrial radio stations in the US have never paid performers anything."

So without Pandora/iRadio, US radio stations can play your song as much as they like, and you-get-nothing-good-day-sir

At least this way you're getting some revenue back from people listening to your music.

3
3
Paris Hilton

@ jai - Re: Apple screws Musicians -- Shocker!!

>...

Even more importantly, FM/AM paid him NOTHING for the performance of the song. Unlike most industrialized nations, terrestrial radio stations in the US have never paid performers anything

...<

Erm, just let me get that right: US radio stations pay no royalties? So for every song that they 'broadcast', they deprive the studios of a quarter million bucks? And get away with it? Isn't that just piracy?

8
0
Pirate

Re: @ jai - Apple screws Musicians -- Shocker!!

They do pay the composer and publisher, just not the performer

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Apple screws Musicians -- Shocker!!

SHOCKER !

Music companies have been screwing consumers over for decades.

4
1
Silver badge

Re: Apple screws Musicians -- Shocker!!

No Apple screws the record labels, the record labels are doing a good enough job of screwing the musicians already. I expect the musicians will be lucky to see 0.013 cents.

2
0

Re: @ jai - Apple screws Musicians -- Shocker!!

Not true. They pay both the performer and the composer, just not the studio.

0
0

Re: @ jai - Apple screws Musicians -- Shocker!!

US terrestrial radio stations pay what are known as mechanicals, which are payments to the song composer(s)/publisher. They also pay license fees the major recording societies (ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC) which in turn are distributed to the artist. Unlike the UK, they do not pay the studio any payment for the recording as it has long been agreed that the studios gain far more in record sales from the promotion of the song on the radio. As terrestial radio becomes less and less important in record promotion, this may change.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Apple screws Musicians -- Shocker!!

"Apple's entire business model is about shafting everybody from users to suppliers."

Apple made it possible for me to make a very good living as an independent developer by selling apps. If this is getting shafted by Apple, then please sign me up for some more.

0
2
Joke

How much will Pandora have to pay Apple?

Surely Apple will shortly have patented the concept of pay-per-listen internet radio before anyone else, making them all future infringers on their soon earlier invention.

N.B. : This time travel grammar really messes up my brain . . .

6
0
Silver badge

RIAA are you listening?

0.13c per track for Apple - $250,000 per track for pirates

16
1
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: RIAA are you listening?

Well, precisely.

Piracy has meant only business models with a user price near enough to zero can provide an appealing alternative to piracy to your average freetard.

Let's suppose thieves take one of your kidneys without your permission (are we getting empathetic now?) - and also a kidney from everyone in the UK, likewise. Or perhaps just from everybody involved in the film and music industries in any way. Everyone who previously needed a kidney can get one cheap because there are so many available, which their new owners didn't have to invest their lives into producing. It is so easy to get a kidney that only those who price at next to nothing can make a sale. The price of a kidney becomes $0.0013. Does this mean that the damage the thieves caused could be quantified at $0.0013?

Clue - no.

1
6
Silver badge

They don't work in Canada

So they are not getting any money from my anyway.

"We are deeply, deeply sorry to say that due to licensing constraints, we can no longer allow access to Pandora for listeners located outside of the U.S., Australia and New Zealand."

So the music corporation carving up the world can get stuffed for all I care.

5
0
Anonymous Coward

Devil advocate

So if say they play say somehing like Gangnam style as much as it has been played on YouTuben (current count 1,670,283,753) then you roughly getting $2,171,368.

Not bad eh, then add in advertising oh and then add in the millions you may get from impulse buys "click to buy this track" and it could be a nice little earner.

It may come as a shocker to many, but a song being played on a Radio is an advert to get someone to buy the song. If you don't belive me, why are the record companies so desperate to get airplay?

If it is so shit a deal, lets see the record companies refuse to work with them.

5
1
Silver badge

Pull out the calculator

> just 0.13 cents per play

Sounds like a good way to make money.

When you work out the number of minutes in a year and reckon that the average tune lasts 3 minutes, you can squeeze over 175,000 plays into a year (more in a leap year). At $0.0013 per play that earns you $227/yr

And you can always start releasing shorter tunes to get more plays per year, when times get tight. I can foresee the equivalent of server rooms full of iToys continually piping music out into the void, while metering up small but significant royalties for each play.

Sure beats bitcoin mining.

4
1

Re: Pull out the calculator

Absolutely correct. This means that for EVERY song one listens to on Pandora EVERY TIME they listen to that song, there is a $.0013 payout. This cannot be compared with radio stations since ONE PLAY on a radio station can be enjoyed by a vast number of listeners. That is why radio stations do NOT pay direct royalties. Rather they pay specially calculated royalties on a periodic basis to ASCAP and BMI which are the intermediaries for the artists. There is absolutely no way to compare radio with services like iTunes and Pandora, although, as I understand, from the data which can be extrapolated, it would appear that artists themselves are actually getting a better deal with ITunes/Pandora in the end.

1
0
Silver badge
Alien

Pandora explains

Worth a read. Did Pink Floyd get it wrong?

1
1
Boffin

There is always a rational explanation

" listen to a series of songs punctuated by adverts"

I know there's one born every minute but this suggests that the amount of moron* in the world is reaching a critical level

* Moron - atomic number 2.0

Unlike its near neighbour boron in the elemental table pure moron is actually very easy to produce as it is very difficult for any other element to gain a foothold once the moronification has started.

There are various allotropes of moron including the amorphous troll moron in which the bonding is completely random and is likely to show up anywhere where there is an audience (or even a vacuum into which to project its random gibberings) and crystalline moron of four main phases known as MS, GA, iA and LX. Any two or more of these phases might both coexist at certain ambient conditions. Amorphous troll moron and crystalline moron are an extremely boring dangerous combination and if you find yourself in the presence of such a combination you should shut down your internet connection and go for a walk in the fresh air.

Elemental moron is used as a dopant on internet forums to reduce any potential build-up of the element intelligentsium.

Moron is found in massive quantities around shiny things and in particular smartphones of all religious persuasions. It is used in the IT industry to test out new campaigns in the following formula

(U + S)*H = Y

where U is the utility value (always Zero), S is the shiny value, H = the cost of the advertising and Y is the outcome measured in Yachts. The value Y assumes a median value for each moron atom and is a function of the total amount of moron produced by the object in question for the given amount of H.

Worryingly for the future of the human race although values of H required to produce the same level of Y have been falling steadily since the interwebs were discovered the advent of the iPhone saw these values drop off a cliff. It is now possible for many shiny things to actually produce more Y even where H is a negative value.

Indeed - with the advent of in-game purchasing no H or S value appears to be required at all. Moron appears to spontaneously grow wherever a games console internet connection is detected.

10
1

It may not as good as the past

But realistically anybody who wants to make a success in the music industry is hard pressed to do it alone (sure there are exceptions) but one way or another you need a connection to large distribution and as with the app store, this is the same... the lack of income can be seen as the fee to be publicised on this particular media.

0
1
Silver badge

Re: It may not as good as the past

Most bands seem be on the verge of making a success of it when signed up - i.e. they have done the ground work and have built up the basic fan club selling them CD's at £5 a go at gigs and making £4.50 per CD. They are then signed up and make £0.70 a cd before expenses - or fuck all minus legal fees.

The music industry is a special kind of parasite that is not good for the vast majority of musicians or the vast majority of music buyers. If enough producers and customers refuse to pay the danegeld everyone will be better off: The musicians, the audience, the small venues like local pubs etc, The music industry will be several times larger than it is now - it just wont be controlled by a few big companies.

2
1
JDX
Gold badge

Do the math before trotting out the dumb comments

Radio1 pays about £100 per play on the prime slots, to an audience of ~5million listeners. Even if we say only 10% of listeners are listening, that's about 15,000cents for 500,000 people = 0.03 cents per listen.

5
1
Bronze badge
Boffin

I just want to be clear on this is this 0.13¢ (i.e. Thirteen Cents) or less then 0.1¢?

0
2
Anonymous Coward

0.13c is less than a cent. 13 cents is $0.13

1
0
Bronze badge

So that would be 0.0.13¢

$0.

.0¢

0.0.13¢ what Apple is actually paying for.

0
0
Silver badge

0.13¢ for the label

After subtracting commission, expenses, and promotion (provided by the label owners brother) how much does the performer owe the label?

2
0

Pandora second coming?

If Apple is allowed to launch iTunes Radio in the UK then there can be no reason to block Pandora any more can there? I would rather see Google launch before Pandora, but fairs fair.

0
0

I wonder how much the record companies are regretting their past attitude.

Sony, Warner and all the other big studios fought a foolish and eventually futile battle against technology and as can be seen today they have lost, Just think if they had been more progressive about the technology they could have been dictating the price to Apple today from a position of strength as they could have had a nice streaming player with adverts themselves and been receiving 100% of the advertising revenue and 99 cents per track.

Instead they need 100 plays of a specific track just to make 13 cents and they get under 20% of the advertising revenue, assuming of course that Apple radio does not offer a paid for advert free service as well as the advert controlled one. Even if one track was played 480 times in 24 hours (i.e. continuously for a day) they would still only get 62.4 cents for that track and as Apple is coming late to the market there are question marks over exactly how many plays they can commit to on their service versus, say Pandora.

3
1
Silver badge
Headmaster

>Labels to get, count them, 0.13 cents per play on Apple iRadio

Erm, what?

0
0
h3
Bronze badge

Nokia Music has some pretty good Techno stuff on it (From people who I have never heard of).

I don't see what the problem is for artists. (Stuff on there that I have really liked has gone to I will buy if I see the vinyl available from I would buy it if I heard it properly and it looked good).

Spotify is a bit different because you can choose what you want to listen to so people might never buy anything.

My grandfather records a lot of stuff from Radio 3 off iplayer and puts it on cd. (Kind of weird really because all though he is in many ways someone who sticks to the law extremely vigorously he cannot see the reason why that is not 100% ok.) Dunno what I think about it but it is not an issue for me because there is nothing I want to listen to on the Radio. (Anything the BBC has done to try and replace John Peel has not been accompanied with the amount of power that he had within the BBC).

0
0
Thumb Up

@ h3 - your grandfather

>...

he cannot see the reason why that is not 100% ok.

...<

Good. He's OK, your granddad is.

3
0
Bronze badge
Thumb Down

The only innovation I see here -

- is with greed.

That's all.

2
0
Anonymous Coward

So the labels get $0.13 per track played and a percentage of the advertising dollars. So how much does the artist actually get? That is much more relevant in my opinion. I bet the labels and the RIAA take most if not all of that $0.13 and the advertising dollars they get.

1
1
Silver badge

Erm.....those royalties are absurdly HIGH, not low. Think about this for a second. They're paying .13 cents per play. Take that times 360 songs per day (very roughly, milage will vary - that's based on the fact that I average about 30 songs in a 2 hour set of DJing) and that's $46.8 per day. Very piddly yes.

Now consider that each listener has a unique playlist and factor that in. Let's go with a modest 10,000 listeners (realistically we know that iRadio will have at least 6 figures, and probably 7, at any given time) That's $468,000, near half a million dollars, every day. And on top of that they're offering 15% of the advertising revenue, which will easily pop the figure up to several million dollars per day.

Forgive me if I find the condemning tone and assertion that we should feel sorry for the labels offensive, but I've done internet radio. When you stream music online you get reamed. The labels are raking in an absurd amount of money from a market where only the biggest players can manage to not operate at a loss as is.

0
1

.13 cent != $ 0.13

The error in your calc is $ 0.0013 * 360 = $ 0.468 not $46.80

suddenly your $ 468,000 a day is $ 4,680 for the label... How much gets to the artists, composers etc?

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.