Spotify vs. Taylor Swift and Taylor Yorke – Music Business Research

Spotify vs. Taylor Swift and Taylor Yorke – Music Business Research

Spotify has been constantly criticized for underpaying designers while still collecting about 30 % of its profits from music streaming. The two Radiohead vocalist Thom Yorke and Taylor Swift’s unsuccessful efforts against Spotify, which led to decades of their superstars boycotting the site, attracted significant media attention. This site article attempts to answer the question of what the boycott eventually ended up accomplishing by bringing attention to the causes of this conflict.

Part 11 of The Music Streaming Economy: Taylor Swift and Thom Yorke vs. Spotify

Thom Yorke, singer of the American rock group Radiohead, summed up the issue of Spotify’s rewards to audio creators as follows:” Make no mistake, fresh artists you discover on Spotify will not get paid. In the meantime, owners will soon be rolling in it. Simples”. [1 ] Yorke was ultimately proven correct even though Spotify only became widely known five years later. The song degrees who had secured shares in the company were not the painters who benefited from the Investor. Thom York removed all the stuff from his single job and the group job” Atoms for Peace” from Spotify as a show of opposition. And in a series of posts on Twitter in mid-July 2013, he and his manufacturer, Nigel Godrich, followed fit:” ]N] gross artists get paid ass all with this model”. ]2 ] By” this model”, Godrich was referring to the business model of music streaming, which he believes generates less revenue than radio airplay royalties. To the issue in a post that” Pink Floyd” and” The Eagles” had also made their songs available on Spotify, Godrich responded:” It’s funds for old wire… But making fresh recorded songs needs funding. Some records may be made in a computer, but some have musician and experienced technicians. These items cost money. It makes sense to put Pink Floyd’s library on a streaming site since it has already made billions of dollars for the artist ( not necessarily the group ). However, I doubt that the film “dark area” would have been produced if people had been listening to Music rather than purchasing data in 1973. It would just be very expensive”. ]3 ]

Thom Yorke followed this up with an appointment for the Mexican site Sopitas, in which he described Netflix as” the final desperate laugh of a dying dead.” ]4 ] The critic was directed less at the Swedish music streaming service, which Yorke saw as a symptom of an undesirable development, than at the “old” music industry:” I feel like as musicians we need to fight the Spotify thing. What is happening in the mainstream, in my opinion, is the last of the ancient market in some ways. And it is dominated by the music disciplines, whose business model Yorke immediately attacks:” But because they’re using old song, because they’re using the majors … the majors are all over it because they see a way of re-selling all their old products for free, make a fortune, and hardly die”. Yorke, who describes Spotify as the “handmaiden of the music majors,” says that the way that new music and young musicians are marketed in the streaming era is all about how people change their ways of listening to music, how technology develops, and how conversational it is with one another regarding music, and a lot of it could be incredibly fucking bad. ]5 ]

Additionally, other music industry stars expressed disapproval or even hostility toward Spotify and music streaming. The Beatles ended their streaming boycott on Christmas Day 2015 by announcing on Twitter that their entire music catalog would be accessible to stream on Spotify, Apple Music, Amazon Prime Music, Tidal, Deezer, and four other providers starting at 0 am on December 24th, 2015. [6 ] The Australian heavy metal cult band’s recordings were not made available on music streaming platforms until the end of June 2015. ]7 ]

The biggest stir, however, came from US superstar Taylor Swift, who announced on November 3 that she would no longer be releasing her recently released album” 1989″ on Spotify, removing her entire back catalogue from the service. She stated in an interview with Time magazine that the Swedish streaming service’s ad-supported free model was devaluing her music and that it was “increasingly important” that art belonged in the world of music. I did n’t see that happening, perception-wise, when I put my music on Spotify. Everybody’s complaining about how music sales are shrinking, but nobody’s changing the way they’re doing things. They keep running towards streaming, which is, for the most part, what has been shrinking the numbers of paid album sales”. She stated in the interview that because of its premium tier, her music would still be accessible on Apple and iTunes. ]8 ]

Scott Borchetta, whose Big Machine label released Swift’s albums, made a similar point. In a radio interview on” Sixx Sense With Nikki Sixx”, he criticised the free availability of Taylor Swift’s music on Spotify as disrespectful, pointing out that her songs could still be streamed on paid platforms:” We determined that her fan base is so in on her, let’s pull everything off of Spotify, and any other service that does n’t offer a premium service. You will find her catalogue if you are a premium subscriber to Beats, Rdio, or any of the other services that do n’t just offer a free-only. ]9 ] In an interview with Time Magazine, he calculated that his label, Big Machine, had received just US$ 496, 044 for Taylor Swift’s recordings in the US home market over the past twelve months. That would not equal the revenue generated by the music video streams on YouTube’s hosted ad-funded platform Vevo. ]10] The contradiction is striking. Taylor Swift’s music was removed from both Spotify’s free and paid services, but remained available for free on YouTube via Vevo. Even its founder and CEO, Daniel Ek, who was quoted on the Spotify blog as pointing out that a Taylor Swift superstar could earn US$ 6 million annually worldwide on Spotify, had to react. ]11] The Swedish company also commented on Scott Borchetta’s statements to Time Magazine, calculating that in the twelve months prior to the boycott, US$ 2 million had been paid to Taylor Swift’s label for all streams worldwide, including US$ 500, 000 in label and publishing royalties in October 2014 alone. ]12]

Even if US versus international figures can account for the differences between Borchetta’s and Spotify’s figures, it is still believed that Swift and her label’s major PR campaign was the source of the Spotify boycott. It served as a way to promote the 1989 CD release, which sold 1.7 million copies in just its first two weeks in the US. [13] At the beginning of November 2014, there were also rumors that Scott Borchetta intended to buy his label company for$ 200 million. [14] He may also have stoked the Spotify controversy, which would have troubled his top-stakes collaborator Taylor Swift, who had been hired to make a sixth album for” Big Machine.” Five years later, when Borchetta did indeed sell, the same dispute broke out over the master rights to Swift’s recordings.

Anyway, Taylor Swift and Thom Yorke have both agreed to work with Spotify, and they can now stream their music there. When her five studio albums could be streamed on the platform once more, four of which immediately entered the Billboard 200 albums chart and generated US$ 500, 000 in streaming revenue, Taylor Swift gave up her resistance to Spotify two and a half years after the boycott was declared in June 2017. The singer and her management team were aware that the streaming service is a key component of a star’s commercial success and that the promotional power of Spotify cannot be underestimated. In December 2017, Thom Yorke had his two singles as a solo artist,’ The Eraser ‘ ( 2006 ) and ‘ Tomorrow’s Modern Boxes’, as well as the album ‘ AMOK’ by his band project ‘ Atoms for Peace’, placed on Spotify, but without commenting on Twitter, he referred to critical Twitter posts by Geoff Barrow of the band Portishead, in which he complained about the low payouts from music streaming. ]16] But even Thom Yorke had to accept Spotify’s market power.


Endnotes

]1 ] The Twitter posts have since disappeared from Thom York’s account and can only be reconstructed indirectly through quotes cited in the media., e. g. in The Guardian,” Thom Yorke blasts Spotify on Twitter as he pulls his music”, July 15, 2013, accessed: 2024-08-27.

]2 ] Nigel Godrich’s Twitter post can be read on Business Insider,” Radiohead Singer Thom Yorke Pulls His Music From Spotify, And Blasts It On Twitter”, July 15, 2013, accessed: 2024-08-27 and on his Twitter/X account ( @nigelgod ).

]3 ] Ibid.

]4 ] Cited in The Guardian,” Thom Yorke calls Spotify ‘ the last desperate fart of a dying corpse ‘”, October 7, 2013, accessed: 2024-08-27.

]5 ] Ibid.

]6 ] The Guardian, “AC/DC becomes latest act to get on the streaming bandwagon”, June 30, 2015, accessed: 2024-08-27.

]7 ] Twitter,” The Beatles Now Streaming”, December 23, 2015, accessed: 2024-08-27.

]8 ] Time Magazine,” Taylor Swift on 1989, Spotify, Her Next Tour and Female Role Models”, November 13, 2014, accessed: 2024-08-27.

]9 ] Cited in Billboard,” Big Machine’s Scott Borchetta Explains Why Taylor Swift Was Removed From Spotify”, November 8, 2014, accessed: 2024-08-27.

]10] Time Magazine,” Taylor Swift’s Spotify Paycheck Mystery”, November 12, 2014, accessed: 2024-08-27.

]11] Ibid.

]12] Ibid.

]13] Billboard,” Taylor Swift’s ‘ 1989’ Spends Second Week at No. 1 on Billboard 200 Chart”, November 12, 2014, accessed: 2024-08-27.

]14] New York Post,” Taylor Swift’s label on the block for over$ 200M”, November 1, 2014, accessed: 2024-08-27.

]15 ] Forbes,” Why Did Taylor Swift Really Rejoin Spotify”?, June 27, 2017, accessed: 2024-08-27.

]16] MNE,” Radiohead’s Thom Yorke still is n’t a fan of Spotify”, December 29, 2017, accessed: 2024-08-27.


BMG Purchases BMG Music Catalog Throughout Tina Turner

BMG Purchases BMG Music Catalog Throughout Tina Turner

Spotify in The Pirate Bay – Music Enterprise Analysis

Spotify in The Pirate Bay – Music Enterprise Analysis


Spotify is by far the world’s main music streaming service. This success was something however pre-programmed, and except for the advertising and marketing abilities of its two Swedish founders, it was primarily likelihood that introduced Spotify to this place. Spotify has its roots within the P2P file-sharing neighborhood and owes its rise to some extent to the lawsuit in opposition to the creators of the torrent tracker The Pirate Bay, which made worldwide media headlines in 2008 when Spotify was launched. This a part of the weblog sequence traces the event of Spotify throughout the The Pirate Bay trial and the early years that laid the foundations for its success.

The Music Streaming Financial system – Half 8: Spotify in The Pirate Bay

On 7 October 2008, Spotify introduced the launch of operations in Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Norway, Spain, Sweden and the UK with a Fb put up titled “We’ve solely simply begun!”, a Nineteen Seventies marriage ceremony hit by The Carpenters,[1] and shortly after opened places of work in London, Berlin and Madrid.[2] The timing was good. On 31 January 2008, Swedish prosecutors filed prices in opposition to torrent tracker The Pirate Bay,[3] which had turn out to be probably the most in style P2P file-sharing networks. For months, media consideration had been targeted on the forthcoming The Pirate Bay trial, which was lastly set to start in Stockholm on 16 February 2009. Supporters and opponents of the favored P2P file-sharing community had been slinging mud at one another for months within the run-up to the trial, so it comes as no shock that the announcement of a authorized music service on the Web, which was even be free, attracted lots of consideration not solely in Sweden however far past. Daniel Ek even admitted in an interview that The Pirate Bay was the supply of inspiration for the creation of Spotify.[4]

Nevertheless, the true purpose for Spotify’s official launch initially of October 2008 was signing of licensing offers with the 4 music majors of the time – Common Music Group, Warner Music Group, Sony-BMG and EMI – in addition to with the indie labels’ music licensing company MERLIN, for the usage of their music catalogues. It might appear shocking that the 4 greatest music corporations on the planet have been doing licensing offers with a small software program firm from Sweden. The Pirate Bay additionally performed an vital position. In 2008, document corporations have been nonetheless underneath huge financial stress and blamed file-sharing for his or her financial issues. Because the quickest rising service, The Pirate Bay was a first-rate goal for the music majors, who have been desperately searching for another. Spotify was the perfect associate. With music streaming, not like music downloads, the rights holders didn’t lose management over music distribution, and so they have been additionally in a position to make Spotify depending on them by licensing their music catalogues. Even the CEO of Sony-BMG Sweden, Per Sundin, admitted in an interview that with out the chaos The Pirate Bay had brought on within the document market, the majors would have felt little stress to enter into shaky licensing offers with an underfunded start-up.[5]

The e-book “Spotify Teardown” from 2019 due to this fact doesn’t discuss concerning the launch of Spotify in October 2008, however concerning the legalisation of the music providing.[6] The music streaming service, which was registered on 23 April 2006 by Daniel Ek and Martin Lorentzon as a software program firm known as Spotify AB in Stockholm, was primarily based on a P2P file-sharing protocol to be able to save the prices of digital music distribution and on the identical time have the ability to faucet into the additional bandwidth of web customers.[7] Daniel Ek, who had dropped out of KTH Royal Institute of Expertise in Stockholm, had briefly labored as CEO of μTorrent, the supplier of the file-sharing programme of the identical identify for the BitTorrent protocol, in 2006. The software program was developed by Ludvig Strigeus, who offered his firm to BitTorrent Inc. in December 2006 to hitch Spotify, which had simply been based by Ek and Lorentzon. Strigeus’ experience in P2P file sharing was wanted to develop the technical foundations for the streaming service. This consisted primarily of a P2P community.[8]

This allowed Spotify to save lots of on server assets and related prices, which was important for a start-up. When Spotify customers streamed a music on their desktop computer systems, it was extremely doubtless that it was not coming from the corporate’s personal server, however from different customers who had unwittingly turn out to be a part of the file-sharing community. Requested by TorrentFreak’s Ernesto Van der Sar about Spotify’s know-how, firm spokesman Andres Sehr mentioned: “Spotify makes use of a hybrid p2p system the place music is delivered each by our servers and utilizing P2P. (…) This enables us to ship the lengthy tail of music which will not be highly regarded, in addition to shortly serve up the most recent hits that almost all of customers take heed to. P2P permits us to each enhance the velocity that we ship music and in addition decrease the price of streaming it.”[9]

It was not till 2014, six years after the operational launch of Spotify, that the P2P file-sharing know-how was regularly migrated to a purely server-based mannequin. Till then, Spotify, which had efficiently positioned itself as a substitute for music piracy, was primarily based on the identical know-how because the frowned upon and legally prosecuted torrent tracker ‘The Pirate Bay’. Nevertheless, not like the same old file-sharing providers, Spotify was simple to make use of, freed from malware and nonetheless allowed free music consumption.

Spotify had confirmed that it was attainable to construct a enterprise mannequin round file sharing. This was thanks to 2 advertising and marketing specialists, Lorentzon and Ek, each of whom had beforehand constructed profitable advertising and marketing businesses. Lorentzon co-founded affiliate internet marketing company TradeDoubler in 1999, which went public in 2005. In March 2006, TradeDoubler used recent capital to purchase Advertigo, a small advertising and marketing firm based by Daniel Ek that specialised in contextual advertising and marketing on the web. That is how Ek and Lorentzon met and determined to depart TradeDoubler to begin Spotify.[10] At launch, Spotify was a community of corporations: The software program firm Spotify AB, primarily based in Stockholm, Spotify Expertise Gross sales Ltd. and Spotify Expertise Holding Ltd., which holds the patent and trademark rights, primarily based within the tax haven of Cyprus, which in flip are a part of the holding firm Spotify Expertise SA, primarily based within the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, which can be identified for its experience in tax optimisation.[11]

So in October 2008, the entire company construction nonetheless existed when the licensing agreements with the music majors and MERLIN have been signed. The ink was barely dry when beta customers found they may not entry lots of their playlists. Spotify had pre-emptively eliminated a lot of the unlicensed music from its service, and within the spring of 2009 extra music titles disappeared as a result of country-specific copyright restrictions.[12] The one innovation within the official launch of the streaming service in October 2008 was the introduction of a premium subscription mannequin, which remodeled Spotify from an ad-supported free service to a freemium mannequin. A freemium mannequin consists of constructing it engaging for customers of a restricted free service to modify to a premium service that is freed from promoting however for which they should pay. Initially, customers may select between two pricing choices: a day cross for EUR 0.99 and a month-to-month subscription for EUR 9.99.[13] Nevertheless, evaluation of consumer numbers (fig. 1) by market analysis agency Analysys Mason reveals that Spotify’s ad-supported free service was initially the preferred.

Determine 1: Spotify’s consumer numbers, 2008-2011

Supply: Analysys Mason cited in Selvakumar, Ekambar et al. (2012).

The two million consumer mark was damaged for the primary time in April 2009, though lower than 2 per cent of those have been paying subscribers. The proportion of premium customers continued to fall till August 2009, and it was solely when the Spotify app turned obtainable for iPhone and Android cell phones that the proportion of paying customers started to rise, though by March 2011 solely just below 10 per cent of customers have been paying to stream music on Spotify.

Along with the supply of Spotify on smartphones, which have been launched in 2007,[14] and the engaging free service, the bundling of the Spotify app with TeliaSonora’s choices was a key success issue. In 2009, Spotify signed a two-year unique take care of the Swedish telco, which built-in Spotify into its cell, broadband and IP-TV providers and promoted the streaming service closely. An identical deal was struck with TeliaSonora in Finland in 2010, and a yr later the partnership with TeliaSonora in Sweden was prolonged for an additional two years.[15] It was a win-win scenario for each companions. The telcos have been ready so as to add a hip music service to their providing, and Spotify gained entry to tens of millions of telco clients who have been additionally underneath the impression that the music service was free.

Nevertheless, the enlargement into different markets additionally led to a speedy enhance in Spotify’s consumer numbers. Spotify was already obtainable in the UK initially of 2009,[16] adopted by the Netherlands in Could 2010,[17] the USA in July 2011,[18] Denmark, Belgium, Austria and Switzerland in October and November 2011[19] and, after prolonged negotiations with the music rights organisation GEMA, Germany in March 2012, making Spotify obtainable in 13 international locations.[20]

However, Spotify’s monetary scenario and financial survival have been removed from safe. It wanted traders to cowl the prices of launching the service and, particularly, the licensing offers with the labels. In a primary funding spherical led by Swedish enterprise capital agency Northzone, Spotify US raised US $20 million in alternate for an 11.9 per cent stake within the firm and a seat on the board. Nevertheless, this was not sufficient to begin operations.[21] Not solely did Spotify conform to pay royalties, however it additionally needed to make advance funds to the document corporations (i.e. the labels) that may very well be offset in opposition to future streaming revenues to make use of the music catalogues in any respect. One such contract between Spotify and Sony from 2011 was leaked. It reveals that the streaming service needed to pay Sony Music Leisure an upfront charge of US $42.5 million over three years, with US $9 million due within the first yr, US $16 million within the second and US $17.5 million in an elective third yr.[22] It’s doubtless that the opposite three main labels and MERLIN have comparable offers with Spotify, leading to an upfront cost of between US $160 million and US $200 million. It’s clear {that a} financially weak start-up like Spotify couldn’t simply shoulder this expenditure and due to this fact paid for not less than a part of it with shares within the firm.

It was later revealed that Common, Warner, Sony, EMI and the licensing company for impartial labels, MERLIN, held a mixed 18 per cent stake in Spotify in 2008 (see fig. 2).

Determine 2: The document corporations’ share of Spotify in 2008

Firm Variety of shares Share in %
Common Worldwide Music BV 97,827 5.0%
Sony BMG Music Leisure Worldwide Ltd. 117,392 6.0%
Warner Music Luxembourg S.à.R.L. 78,261 4.0%
EMI Data Ltd. 39,131 2.0%
Merlin BV 19,565 1.0%
Complete 352,176 18.0%
Complete variety of Spotify shares 1,956,531 100%
Supply: After Music Enterprise Worldwide, “Right here’s precisely what number of shares the key labels and Merlin purchased in Spotify – and what these stakes are price now”, Could 14, 2018, accessed: 2024-08-04.

From the labels’ perspective, the deal was additionally dangerous. Spotify wouldn’t have been the primary streaming service to close down prematurely. The music corporations would have needed to write off their losses, though they’d have been manageable.

The following a part of the sequence will take a look at the lengthy highway that Spotify needed to journey to go public in 2018.


Endnotes

[1] Spotify press launch, “We’ve solely simply begun!”, October 7, 2008, accessed: 2024-08-04. Nevertheless, the announcement to make Spotify obtainable in Germany and Italy needed to be withdrawn shortly afterwards as a result of the native music accumulating societies had not but agreed to a licence deal. Spotify solely launched in Germany in March 2012 and in Italy nearly a yr later in February 2013. See Maria Eriksson et al., 2019, Spotify Teardown. Contained in the Black Field of Streaming Music, Cambridge, Mass. und London: The MIT Press, p 45.

[2] Music Enterprise Worldwide, “Spotify. Streaming Service”, n.d., accessed: 2024-08-04.

[3] Wired, “Pirate Bay Future Unsure After Operators Busted”, January 31, 2008, accessed: 2024-08-04.

[4] The interview with Daniel Ek happened on the Nice Escape Pageant in Brighton in Could 2009 and was performed by Paul Brindley for MusicAlly: “Spotify was ‘impressed by the Pirate Bay’”, Could 18, 2009, accessed: 2024-08-04.

[5] The interview was initially revealed within the Swedish newspaper Breakit and quoted on TorrentFreak: “How The Pirate Bay Helped Spotify Grow to be a Success”, Could 19, 2018, accessed: 2024-08-04.

[6] Maria Eriksson et al., 2019, Spotify Teardown. Contained in the Black Field of Streaming Music, Cambridge, Mass. und London: The MIT Press, p 45.

[7] Ek and Lorentzon opened their first workplace at Riddargatan 20 in Stockholm’s previous city in August 2006, the place they developed the beta model of the Spotify software program, see ibid., p 42.

[8] See TorrentFreak, “Spotify Begins Shutting Down Its Large P2P Community”, April 16, 2014, accessed: 2024-08-04.

[9] Cited in TorrentFreak, “Spotify, An Various to Music Piracy”, January 2, 2009, accessed: 2024-08-04.

[10] Spotify Teardown, 2019, p 41.

[11] Ibid., pp 41-42.

[12] Ibid., p 45.

[13] MusicAlly, “Daniel Ek talks Spotify, social options and ISP partnerships… again in 2008”, March 26, 2012, accessed: 2024-08-04.

[14] Wikipedia, “Smartphone”, within the model of February 22, 2024, accessed: 2024-08-04.

[15] Ekambar Selvakumar et al., 2012, p 6.

[16] Billboard, “Spotify Opens To U.Ok. Public”, February 11, 2009, accessed: 2024-08-04.

[17] Billboard, “Spotify Launches In Netherlands, Gives New Providers”, Could 18, 2010, accessed: 2024-08-04.

[18] Billboard, “Spotify Lastly Launches within the U.S. — Full Particulars Right here”, July 14, 2011, accessed: 2024-08-04.

[19] Billboard, “Spotify Launches In Denmark, Its Ninth Nation”, October 12, 2012, accessed: 2024-08-04 and Futurezone, “Spotify in der Schweiz und Belgien gestartet”, November 16, 2011, accessed: 2024-08-04.

[20] The Hollywood Reporter, “Spotify To Launch in Germany Tuesday”, March 12, 2012, accessed: 2024-08-04.

[21] Spotify Teardown, 2019, p 46.

[22] The Verge, “This was Sony Music’s contract with Spotify”, Could 19, 2015, accessed: 2024-08-04.

Deezer – Music Enterprise Analysis

Deezer – Music Enterprise Analysis


As we’ve got seen, Spotify was not the pioneer of music streaming. Different companies, resembling RealNetworks/Rhapsody or MOG, had been round for a very long time when Spotify arrived. The French music streaming service Deezer additionally went on-line earlier than Spotify and briefly labored its approach as much as change into the second largest music streaming service on this planet, however was solely in a position to set up itself because the market chief in France. This a part of the weblog sequence recounts the historical past of Deezer and analyses its position within the worldwide music streaming market.

The Music Streaming Economic system – Half 4: Deezer

In September 2006, nevertheless, Deezer was nonetheless referred to as BlogMusik.internet and was based by college dropout Daniel Marhely[1] as an internet platform the place customers may add their music MP3s for streaming.[2] BlogMusik.internet quickly got here to the eye of the French music gathering society SACEM as a result of the platform was not paying royalties for its repertoire. In February 2007, BlogMusik.internet went offline underneath strain from SACEM and started licensing negotiations. On 22 August 2007, BlogMusik.internet was renamed Deezer.com and a press launch introduced that, following profitable negotiations with SACEM, the world’s first on-demand music web site with out DRM restrictions can be obtainable without spending a dime and legally through an Web browser.[3] Deezer wished to make a “revolutionary” contribution to battle in opposition to unlawful music consumption, in response to its announcement. Deezer boasted that it was already obtainable in 16 totally different languages and in lots of international locations, the place customers may entry a whole bunch of hundreds of tracks without spending a dime due to promoting and handle their content material through playlists. The press launch additionally introduced that Deezer was already in negotiations with the music majors to make clear the grasp rights to the recordings.

Nevertheless it wasn’t as straightforward as Deezer founders Daniel Marhely and Jonathan Benassaya had imagined. Though they managed to strike licensing offers with digital music distributor Imagine and a few French indie labels, the majors have been nonetheless reluctant to present their blessing to the brand new on-line music service. Negotiations with Common, Sony, Warner and EMI dragged on till a suitable consequence was reached two years later.[4] In the meantime, Deezer was at risk of failing financially. The corporate’s restricted repertoire of indie music and the majors’ monetary calls for have been placing a pressure on its funds. French investor Xavier Niel kick-started the challenge in June 2007 with EUR 250,000 in seed funding, however the cash was rapidly used up. In January 2008, the Rosenblum brothers’ Dot Corp Fund purchased a 24 per cent stake within the firm for EUR 4.8 million, guaranteeing Deezer’s survival in the meanwhile.[5]

Nonetheless, even this funding was solely simply sufficient to pay the advances to the music majors for catalogue use within the quantity of EUR 2.5 to three million, as reported by the French newspaper Le Figaro in 2010. As well as, Deezer needed to pay a further 1 to 1.5 eurocents to the main labels for every music observe performed.[6] Considering the settlement with SACEM to pay 8 per cent of annual turnover in royalties, there was hardly any cash left over to run the enterprise, as Deezer co-founder Jonathan Benassaya admitted in an interview with Le Musicodrome in October 2009. The Deezer CEO complained that round EUR 6 million a yr was going to the rights holders alone.[7] Deezer additionally wanted to boost new enterprise capital rapidly as promoting revenues weren’t as robust as anticipated, regardless of the creation of its personal promoting company. In October 2009, the CM-CIC personal capital funds of the main French financial institution Credit score Mutuel and AGF Personal Fairness supplied EUR 6.5 million. A month later, Deezer additionally needed to abandon its free music technique and from November 2009 supplied a month-to-month subscription of EUR 4.99 for PCs with Deezer HQ and EUR 9.99 for smartphones with Deezer Premium. However with solely 14,000 paying subscribers within the first three months, the swap to a freemium mannequin value Deezer CEO Benassaya his job.[8]

Deezer’s lifeline was a cope with French cell operator Orange, introduced by the brand new administration in June 2010.[9] Accordingly, Orange acquired an 11 per cent stake in Deezer and merged it with its music service WorMee, which was based in 2009.[10] Orange bundled Deezer into its cell tariffs, which meant that as an alternative of some thousand extra subscriptions per 30 days, greater than 100,000 subscribed. In the summertime of 2011, Deezer surpassed 1 million paying customers for the primary time.[11] Very like Spotify, which was in a position to acquire a foothold available in the market by working with Scandinavian cell operators, Deezer was in a position to obtain a turnaround with the assistance of Orange.

With Orange as a associate, Deezer, which was solely obtainable in France, Belgium and the UK in 2011, now may broaden internationally. In November 2011, the corporate introduced its intention to function in 130 international locations – however not within the US.[12] In Could 2012, Deezer signed a licensing cope with indie label rights administration company MERLIN,[13] which meant that indie catalogues from outdoors France might be included within the streaming service. This made Deezer a completely licensed international music streaming service that might compete with Spotify and the tech corporations’ choices.

Deezer’s monetary state of affairs improved additional in 2012 when the business and expertise conglomerate Entry Industries, which was additionally the bulk proprietor of the Warner Music Group, invested US $130 million in Deezer in October.[14] In 2012, Deezer was in a position to look again on a profitable yr through which it additionally managed to realize greater than 3 million paying customers for its streaming service.[15] And the success continued the next yr, when 5 million subscribers have been reported.[16] Using this wave of success, Deezer entered right into a strategic alliance with German personal broadcaster ProSiebenSat1 in June 2014, through which Deezer acquired the streaming service Ampya, which had been based solely a yr earlier, and ProSiebenSat1 acquired a stake in Deezer. Deezer additionally teamed up with cell phone large Vodafone in an in the end unsuccessful bid to overhaul market chief Spotify in Germany.[17]

After Germany, Deezer’s focus turned to the US market, the place the streaming service was launched in September 2014.[18] To strengthen its market place in North America, Deezer purchased music streaming supplier Muve from US cell phone firm Cricket, a part of the AT&T group, in early 2015. Muve customers’ knowledge was taken over and, after a free trial interval, the useres may determine whether or not to change into Deezer prospects. With its growth into the US, Deezer turned the second largest music streaming service on this planet, behind Spotify, and introduced its IPO on Euronext in Paris in October 2015. It got here as an enormous shock when officers cancelled the IPO three days earlier than its scheduled launch on 28 October, which might have raised an estimated EUR 300-400 million for the corporate.[19] The financial state of affairs and the poor inventory market setting have been cited as unconvincing causes for the withdrawal. Tim Ingham from Music Enterprise Worldwide, however, noticed different causes for the failed IPO:[20] Within the first quarter of 2015, Deezer needed to report a lower of the variety of subscribers by greater than 500,000 to six.34 million customers, greater than half of whom weren’t paying customers however had solely signed up without spending a dime trials. Ingham calculated that the variety of paying subscribers in 2015 was 3.79 million, 90,000 fewer than within the earlier yr. It was additionally important that Deezer had solely been making losses since 2012, and was once more within the crimson within the first half of 2015 with round €9 million. This was on account of extraordinarily excessive advance funds to rights holders for the usage of their music catalogues. Within the first half of 2014, these prices accounted for 86 p.c of whole revenues, and one yr later they nonetheless accounted for 76 p.c. Most of Deezer’s income from streaming music needed to be paid on to the labels. To make issues worse, Orange France stopped bundling Deezer with its cell companies in 2014, which most likely additionally explains the decline within the variety of paying subscribers. With Orange’s contract on account of be renewed in 2016, there was additionally a threat that the cell operator would pull out of its alliance with Deezer altogether, which might have been disastrous for Deezer. In these circumstances, Ingham concluded, the IPO was just too dangerous.[21]

As an alternative of the IPO, house owners Entry Industries and Orange needed to help Deezer with a EUR 100 million money injection in January 2016, with Entry offering the majority of the funds.[22] In consequence, Entry held greater than 50 per cent of Deezer in September of the identical yr and Orange’s share shrank to 10 per cent.[23] This made Entry Industries not solely the bulk proprietor of Warner Music Group, but in addition the world’s second largest music streaming supplier. In 2018, a consortium led by Entry Industries and Orange, with companions from Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Emirate of Dubai, invested an extra EUR 160 million, rising Deezer’s worth to EUR 1 billion.[24] Nonetheless, this laid the muse for a second try at an IPO, which lastly passed off on 5 July 2022 on Euronext Paris with the assistance of the Particular Acquisition Firm (SPAC) I2PO. Surrounded by his fellow board members, Deezer CEO Jeronimo Folgueira rang the opening bell at the beginning of the buying and selling day, as seen within the press images.[25] The IPO additionally revealed Deezer’s possession construction. Unsurprisingly, the most important shareholders have been Entry Industrie with 38.1 per cent and Orange with 8.1 per cent, adopted by funding funds from Saudi Arabia and Dubai with simply over 5 per cent every. A shock, nevertheless, was that Warner Music Group, by means of its subsidiary WEA Worldwide, additionally held 3.2 per cent of Deezer shares.[26] This meant that Deezer, like Spotify, was additionally owned by a music main, albeit to a lesser extent.

It’s subsequently no shock that the previous long-term CEO of Warner Music Worldwide, Stu Bergen, was elected Chairman of the Supervisory Board of Deezer on the finish of February 2023. This most likely additionally has to do with the truth that though Deezer has been in a position to enhance its income since its IPO, it’s nonetheless working at a loss and needed to report a unfavorable consequence from working actions (EBIT) of EUR 166.7 million for 2022.[27] Nonetheless, the variety of subscribers fell by 2.1 per cent to 9.3 million in March 2023, which is especially on account of an erosion of person numbers outdoors of France. And that is exactly the issue for Deezer, which is the undisputed market chief in its residence market of France and generates 61 per cent of its whole income there, however lags far behind its opponents outdoors the nation.[28] This pattern continued in 2023, when the annual report for the primary half of the yr recorded an extra decline in subscribers outdoors France to 2 million, whereas the variety of paying customers in France elevated from 3.3 million to three.6 million. This lowered the half-year loss to EUR 42.5 million, however that is nonetheless a excessive determine, primarily because of the excessive value of income, which amounted to 88 per cent of whole revenues.[29] We are going to see that this can be a structural downside for the music streaming companies, which need to pay excessive upfront charges to the labels to realize entry to the music catalogues within the first place, which shall be analysed intimately in a later a part of this sequence.


Endnotes

[1] Wikipedia, “Daniel Marhely”, model of March 3, 2021, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[2] TechCrunch, “Unique: BlogMusik To Go Legit; Launches Free & Authorized Music On Demand”, August 22, 2007, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[3] Deezer.com press launch, “Deezer.com libere enfin toutes les musiques”, August 22, 2007, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[4] INA World, “Deezer: Profitability Down the Line?”, August 18, 2011, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[5] The Wall Road Journal, “Deezer’s Growth Plans Get a Enhance”, October 8, 2012, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[6] Le Figaro, “Musique: les websites de streaming menaces”, March 4, 2010, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[7] INA World, “Deezer: Profitability Down the Line?”, August 18, 2011, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Billboard, “Orange Companions With Streaming Service Deezer”, July 23, 2010, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[10] L’Categorical, “Musique: Deezer va fusionner avec WorMee d’Orange”, July 21, 2010, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[11] ZDNet, “Axel Dauchez, Deezer : ‘Le cap du million d’abonnés payants sera passé cet été’”, March 9, 2011, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[12] Billboard, “Deezer To Launch In 130 Worldwide Markets, U.S. No Time Quickly”, November 3, 2011, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[13] Music Enterprise Worldwide, “Merlin licenses Deezer throughout the globe”, Could 10, 2012, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[14] Billboard, “Deezer Raises $130 Million: Report”, October 6, 2012, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[15] Billboard, “Deezer Reaches 3 Million Subscribers, Launches Free Service, Provides Options”, December 19, 2012, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[17] Wirtschaftswoche, “Ampya und Deezer schmieden Allianz gegen Spotify”, June 10, 2014, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[18] Billboard, “Deezer Lastly Coming to America on Sept. 15”, September 10, 2014, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[19] New York Occasions, “Deezer, French Music Streaming Service, Postpones I.P.O.”, October 27, 2015, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[20] Music Enterprise Worldwide, “Deezer scraps IPO that might have raised $400m – right here’s 5 the explanation why”, October 28, 2015, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[21] Ibid.

[22] Music Enterprise Worldwide, “Deezer absorbs €100m funding from Orange and Entry Industries”, January 20, 2016, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[23] Music Enterprise Worldwide, “Len Blavatnik’s Entry Industries takes ‘unique management’ of Deezer”, September 7, 2016, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[24] Music Enterprise Worldwide, “Deezer raises $185m as new funding values firm at over $1bn”, August 2, 2018, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[25] Music Enterprise Worldwide, “Deezer goes public: Spotify rival makes inventory market debut on Euronext Paris”, July 5, 2022, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[26] Ibid.

[27] Music Enterprise Worldwide, “Deezer generated over $470m in 2022, with a $175m working loss, and simply named Stu Bergen as a Director on its Board”, February 28, 2023, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[28] Music Enterprise Worldwide, “Deezer’s revenues grew 6.2% YoY in Q1, however its whole subscribers fell 2.1% to 9.3m”, April 24, 2023, accessed: 2024-07-07.

[29] Ibid.

The Worldwide Music Streaming Growth – Music Enterprise Analysis

The Worldwide Music Streaming Growth – Music Enterprise Analysis


Twenty years in the past, the Worldwide Federation of the Phonographic Trade’s (IFPI) On-line Music Report first talked about music streaming as a doubtlessly related income for the phonographic trade, which on the time was nonetheless dominated by recorded music gross sales. Nevertheless, it was not till 2010 that music streaming grew to become commercially related, and within the years that adopted it grew to become virtually the one income for the file trade. This weblog collection traces the historical past of the music streaming financial system and its main gamers from the Nineties to the current day. Within the first half, the income growth of music streaming within the worldwide phonographic market is summarised in figures and analysed in additional element.

The Music Streaming Financial system – Half 1: The Worldwide Music Streaming Growth

In January 2004, the Worldwide Federation of the Phonographic Trade (IFPI) took a better have a look at the digital music enterprise for the primary time with its On-line Music Report.[1]  That is no coincidence. In 2003, Apple opened its iTunes music obtain retailer to the general public, first to its Mac prospects and later to PC customers. The IPFI report subsequently focuses on the obtain enterprise. Nevertheless, it additionally mentions music streaming providers corresponding to Napster 2.0, Rhapsody, MusicMatch and OD2, which will probably be mentioned in additional element later. Nevertheless, the technical circumstances for mass music streaming didn’t exist in 2003. Broadband web was nonetheless in its infancy, 3G cell phone expertise had simply been launched and the smartphone wouldn’t be launched for one more 5 years.

It’s subsequently not shocking that the gross sales figures for music streaming weren’t even included within the IFPI’s Recording Trade World Gross sales 2003 Report, which was revealed in April 2004.[2] In a brief paragraph entitled ‘Digital Music Gross sales’, it was simply talked about that gross sales of US $30 million have been achieved with music downloads within the USA in 2003, which have been already exceeded in March 2004 with US $50 million.[3] Nevertheless, music streaming was not talked about as soon as in your entire report.

Nevertheless, the US was the primary marketplace for which digital music revenues have been out there. The 2004 annual report of the Recording Trade Affiliation of America (RIAA) reported for the primary time the distributions of the newly shaped SoundExchange gathering society, which collects royalties from non-interactive streaming providers corresponding to Pandora in addition to webcasters and satellite tv for pc radios, within the modest quantity of US $6.9 million. For 2005, the RIAA’s annual report additionally included figures for on-demand music streaming, which totalled $149.2 million, or about 14 % of all digital revenues and 1.2 % of complete revenues. The report additionally included SoundExchange distributions, which rose to $20.4 million.[4]

Within the mid-2000s, subsequently, the music streaming market was nonetheless in its infancy, removed from with the ability to compensate for the downright collapse of gross sales within the US file trade after 2005. The principle cause for this recession within the US music market was the large stoop in CD gross sales yr after yr, as proven in determine 1.

Determine 1: Recorded music gross sales within the US, 2004-2023

Supply: Recording Trade Affiliation of America (RIAA), U.S. Music Income Database, n.d., accessed: 2024-06-11.

Between 2004 and 2008, the yr wherein Spotify was launched in Europe, phonographic gross sales within the USA fell by greater than half from US $11.4 billion to US $5.5 billion, as a result of as a substitute of 767 million CDs in 2004, solely 385 million – half as many – have been bought 4 years later. An analogous image emerged within the different main music markets: France (- 43 per cent), the UK (- 25 per cent) and Japan (- 18 per cent). Germany was the one nation to flee comparatively unscathed with a drop in CD gross sales of 8 per cent between 2004 and 2008.[5]

In distinction, digital revenues within the US grew quickly between 2004 and 2008, from $191 million to round $2 billion, pushed primarily by the booming obtain enterprise. Revenues from on-demand music streaming, however, stagnated at $200 million within the US between 2006 and 2010, accounting for simply 3 % of complete recorded music revenues in 2010. Solely SoundExchange’s distributions from licensing non-interactive streaming providers and satellite tv for pc radios, totalling $100 million in 2008, improved the steadiness sheet barely. Nonetheless, revenues from the obtain enterprise have been 5 occasions greater than these from music streaming. This modified dramatically in 2010, when US streaming revenues grew by 28 per cent. This was adopted by years of excessive double-digit progress in on-demand music streaming revenues, plus funds from SoundExchange.

Nevertheless, the rising use of streaming providers cannibalised music obtain gross sales, which peaked in 2012 after which fell sharply. By 2023, album and single downloads collectively generated much less income than CD gross sales within the US.[6]

Determine 2: Digital music gross sales within the US, 2005-2023

Quelle: Recording Trade Affiliation of America (RIAA), U.S. Music Income Database, n.d., accessed: 2024-06-11.

In the meantime, income from music streaming has exploded. In 2015, paid subscriptions not solely surpassed $1 billion for the primary time, but additionally generated virtually as a lot income as obtain gross sales. When SoundExchange royalties for non-interactive streaming providers and satellite tv for pc radios are added, music streaming within the US has already generated considerably extra income than the obtain enterprise. Since 2015, the on-demand streaming phase has grown by a median of US $1 billion per yr and, at US $10.2 billion in 2023, was by far crucial income driver for the US recorded music trade, adopted by income from vinyl gross sales (US $1.4 billion) and SoundExchange distributions at round US $1 billion. CD gross sales (US $537 million) and obtain gross sales (US $396 million) have been far behind. A comparability of 2010, 2015 and 2023 reveals how dramatically the digital music market has modified.

Determine 3: The digital market within the US, 2010, 2015 and 2023

Supply: Recording Trade Affiliation of America (RIAA), U.S. Music Income Database, n.d., accessed: 2024-06-11.

Whereas obtain revenues (albums and singles) collectively had a market share of virtually 70 per cent in 2010, this had shrunk to round 31 per cent 5 years later and to only 2.7 per cent an extra seven years later. Revenues from ad-supported and paid streaming, however, rose from 6.7 per cent in 2010 to just about 53 per cent in 2015 and greater than 90 per cent in 2023. Solely SoundExchange revenues nonetheless have some relevance in 2023, with a share of 6.8 per cent. Nevertheless, they’re much more vital at 15.3 per cent in 2015 and seven.8 per cent in 2010.

Document gross sales within the US reached a file excessive of $17.1 billion in 2023, properly above the historic excessive of $14.6 billion in 1999. Nevertheless, when inflation is taken into account, the US file trade’s inflation-adjusted income in 1999 was considerably greater at $26.7 billion.  Nonetheless, music streaming has been accountable for the growth within the US recorded music market for the reason that mid-2010s.[7]

In fact, this growth was not confined to the US, but additionally affected all different markets for which the IFPI recurrently collects gross sales figures. Nevertheless, market dynamics diversified from nation to nation. The 2 charts beneath present how shortly the music streaming financial system took maintain in virtually each nation between 2011 and 2019. For every nation, the share of digital gross sales within the complete market and the share of streaming revenues within the digital market phase have been recorded. This reveals wherein nations the music streaming financial system has established itself extra shortly than in others. In 2011, most nations have been nonetheless dominated by bodily gross sales, because the digital share of complete gross sales was lower than 50 per cent. Which means that CDs and vinyl information accounted for greater than half of all gross sales within the recorded music market, together with many European nations corresponding to Germany, the UK and France, which have been the third to fifth largest recorded music markets on the earth in 2011. Nevertheless, the streaming share of the digital market in France was already at 34 per cent, though virtually 80 per cent of complete gross sales have been nonetheless generated by CDs. That is most likely because of the streaming service Deezer, which launched in France in 2007.

The presence of Spotify as an area streaming service additionally explains Sweden’s main place in music streaming in 2011, with streaming revenues already accounting for over 82 per cent of the digital market, though the digitisation charge of slightly below 50 per cent was not the best on the earth. The scenario was related in Norway, the place WiMP had been out there since 2010 and, alongside Spotify, helped streaming revenues account for round 63 per cent of the digital market in 2011, though virtually half of all revenues have been nonetheless generated by CD gross sales. Though the world’s largest music market, the US, went digital in 2011 with a share of virtually 58 per cent because of iTunes, streaming nonetheless performed a minor position within the digital phase at 18 cent. China stood out in 2011 with essentially the most developed digital market at 73 per cent, excluding the excessive proportion of unlawful gross sales. And virtually 45 per cent of digital revenues have been from streaming. Lastly, there’s an fascinating group of nations whose markets have been nonetheless dominated by bodily gross sales, however the place streaming accounted for 60 to 70 per cent of digital gross sales. These embrace Spain and Brazil, two comparatively giant music markets, in addition to small nations corresponding to Finland, Singapore and Taiwan.

Determine 4: The worldwide music streaming markets 2011

Supply: After IFPI Recording Trade in Numbers 2011.

Determine 5: The worldwide music streaming markets 2019

Supply: After IFPI World Music Report 2019.

Eight years later, in 2019, the scenario was utterly completely different. Practically 80 per cent of all nations had a streaming share of the digital market above 80 per cent, with markets differing solely within the diploma of digitisation. Some markets, corresponding to France, Germany, Austria and South Korea, nonetheless had a major share of recorded music gross sales, whereas within the Scandinavian nations and plenty of Asian and South American nations there have been nearly no CDs bought, with vinyl being the closest factor.

A particular case is Brazil, which has quickly reworked itself from a recorded music market to a streaming market. Whereas the share of bodily gross sales in Brazil was nonetheless properly over 80 per cent in 2011, it had shrunk to lower than 1 per cent eight years later. That is primarily because of streaming gross sales, which already dominated the digital phase in 2011 with a share of slightly below 71 per cent. In 2019, 99 per cent of digital gross sales got here from music streaming.

Nevertheless, there are additionally nations the place the streaming financial system isn’t as dominant, corresponding to Japan, the place music streaming accounted for less than 28.6 per cent of complete gross sales in 2021. With a whopping 58.4 per cent share, Japan was the world’s largest bodily music market in 2021, with $1.8 billion price of CDs and vinyl bought.[8]

South Korea can also be a particular case, having moved quickly in direction of a streaming financial system till 2015, however with a really erratic evolution thereafter. On account of a pointy enhance in bodily gross sales, largely pushed by the superfan phenomenon in Okay-pop, the digital market share fell once more from 2016 to 2018, solely to rise once more in 2019, with downloads hovering in that yr. A yr later, nevertheless, bodily gross sales rose once more, however downloads have been massively pushed again by streaming, catapulting South Korea into the streaming financial system from one yr to the following. By 2021, CD and vinyl gross sales as a proportion of complete gross sales have been falling once more in favour of rising streaming revenues, however the bodily market was nonetheless comparatively giant.

Nevertheless, essentially the most digitised music market is the Individuals’s Republic of China, which already had a big digital market phase in 2011, initially dominated by music obtain revenues. The share of music streaming revenues within the complete market rose sharply till 2014, earlier than one other obtain growth in 2015. After that, nevertheless, China shortly moved into the streaming financial system and by 2019 was virtually solely recording streaming revenues.

Determine 6: Music streaming markets in Brazil, China, South Korea, United Kingdom and US, 2011 to 2021

Supply: Worldwide Federation of the Phonographic Trade (IFPI), 2022, World Music Report 2021, London: IFPI.

The event of the streaming financial system within the US and the UK has been comparatively secure, with the UK’s share of the bodily music market at all times bigger than that of the US. Nevertheless, in 2020 and 2021, there was additionally a development in direction of extra bodily gross sales in each nations, which meant that the digital share of the overall market fell barely. Total, nevertheless, it may be stated that regardless of completely different paths, virtually all main markets, except Japan, have arrived within the streaming financial system and have been capable of overcome the recession within the recorded music trade. Nevertheless, the foundations for this fast course of, with streaming as virtually the one income, have been laid earlier than 2010, in 2008 to be exact, when music streaming appeared economically irrelevant and Spotify, the eventual undisputed market chief, had began its operations in Sweden and several other different nations. This would be the topic of the second a part of the collection.

Sources

Worldwide Federation of the Phonographic Trade (IFPI), 2004a, IFPI On-line Music Report, London: IFPI.

Worldwide Federation of the Phonographic Trade (IFPI), 2004b, IFPI The Recording Trade World Gross sales 2003, London: IFPI.

Worldwide Federation of the Phonographic Trade (IFPI), 2012, IFPI Recording Trade in Numbers 2011, London: IFPI.

Worldwide Federation of the Phonographic Trade (IFPI), 2020a, IFPI Recording Trade in Numbers 2019, London: IFPI.

Worldwide Federation of the Phonographic Trade (IFPI), 2020b, IFPI World Music Report 2019, London: IFPI.

Worldwide Federation of the Phonographic Trade (IFPI), 2022, IFPI World Music Report 2021, London: IFPI.

Wlömert Nils & Dominik Papies, 2015, “On-demand streaming providers and music trade revenues – Insights from Spotify’s market entry”, Worldwide Journal of Analysis in Advertising and marketing, vol. 33(2), pp 314-327.


Endnotes

[1] Worldwide Federation of the Phonographic Trade (IFPI), 2004a, IFPI On-line Music Report, London: IFPI.

[2] Worldwide Federation of the Phonographic Trade (IFPI), 2004b, IFPI The Recording Trade World Gross sales 2003, London: IFPI.

[3] Ibid., p 3.

[4] US figures might be researched from 1973 to the current within the RIAA’s implausible interactive U.S. Income Music Database. Along with the nominal values, you may as well see the inflation-adjusted values: Recording Trade Affiliation of America (RIAA), U.S. Music Income Database, n.d., accessed: 2024-06-11.

[5] The calculations are primarily based on the knowledge offered by the Worldwide Federation of the Recording Trade (IFPI) in its annual studies for 2005 and 2009.

[6] A examine investigating the cannibalisation impact of music streaming on obtain gross sales was revealed by Wlömert and Papies in 2015: “On-demand streaming providers and music trade revenues – Insights from Spotify’s market entry”, Worldwide Journal of Analysis in Advertising and marketing, vol. 33(2), pp 314-327.

[7] Recording Trade Affiliation of America (RIAA), U.S. Music Income Database, n.d., accessed: 2024-06-11.

[8] Worldwide Federation of the Phonographic Trade (IFPI), 2022, World Music Report 2021, London: IFPI, p 161.