OK, here are five or so key questions I think all of us want to know the answers to in Part II. Ask him to come prepared to answer how much of that 9 billion was paid out to unsigned artists. Ask if Spotify acknowledge that there is an industry BIGGER THAN EVER, growing every year, generating hundreds of millions of dollars, which Spotify have not been successful in re- ducing, where actual certified Spotify Editorial curators now engage with payola pitchers who are receiving money from artists and labels in order to push their pitched tracks in front of the list to end up on an Made For You personalised editorial owned and curated by Spotify. And since such an industry exists and is generating record revenue, how does Spotify not admit it isn't a level playing field for those who aren't paying $300 - $750 US per pitch? Also ask them how sustainable it is to keep punishing independent artists who end up victimised when their successful tracks end up being placed on bot- ted playlists by no action of their own, when they don't enforce the same penalties on major label signed artists who are literally on almost every single botted playlist on the platform without repercussions...We don't want a lecture about not buying playlisting. We know that already. Yet playlisters still fill up botted playlists full of innocent artists every day in order to make them look legitimate, and the result is us artists getting our releases flagged and removed. Does Spotify acknowledge this is not a viable solution? What better tools are Spotify giving artists to remove our own music from third party personal playlists we do not want to be associated with and why isn't this a control that has already rolled out? I'm sure I speak for plenty of your viewers when I say I am sick of Spotify and distributors doing nothing but passing the buck to each other and gaslighting us artists. We are not morons, we know precisely what is going on regarding the extent to which clickfarm phonerack botted playlists are destroying the industry for all of us. Punishing the artists is not the answer. Finally, ask him why certain features like Marquee and are locked out to artists unless they meet success eligibility criteria such as having an unspecified threshold of followers, % of followers active or unspecified threshold size of active audience segments, within 28 days of a release date. Doesn't this largely go against the whole idea of Marquee being used to aid artists trying to break in? It's basically Spotify artificially limiting the feature to ensure Marquee looks like it's a successful introduced tool.
@@IndieMusicAcademy what are Indies exactly. Indie labels? Or truly independent artists who aren't signed? Big, important difference especially considering about 9/10 indie labels are subsidiaries of a major. If it's truly $4.5bn to unsigned artists then that's actually great.
@@Spectoral_on_SPOTIFY you hit the nail on the head. There’s a ton “indie artists” that aren’t actually indie they have a partnership deal with majors. As an indie distributor and label owner I am very familiar with this.
The follow up interview is a great opportunity to ask him about the fake artists that dominate the Spotify editorial playlists. There have been many articles the last days in Sweden about "Johan Röhr" a Swedish composer who is behind 650 fake artists on Spotify and has accumulated 15 billion streams. All in editorial playlists, for example "Peaceful Piano". The big issue with this is that indepentent artists are sold the myth: "Apply to editorial playlists, and you can be included". But in reality it is close to impossible for many genres (like background music). Because Spotify will instead choose music from their "friends" who has accepted a lower royalty payment.
Wow, mind-blowing insights on Spotify royalties and streaming revenue. The evolution of Independent Artists on the platform is truly inspiring. Stay authentic and passionate!
I thought the interview was pretty cool. Wasn't a tutorial on how to blow up as an Indie Artist but it good to get knowledge about Spotify and how streaming works etc.
This interview annoyed me. As others have said, you gave this guy an easy ride, no push backs, no hitting him with stats. He's a fan of your channel, yeah right, from that moment you were in his pocket and you stayed there. Didn't feel like you were pitching for the indie artist. This guy is just a shill and you facilitated it/him. Be better, much better.
Hi Ryan, I am an artist manager, in regard to the artist metrics portion of this video I have a question. You mentioned Spotify removing followers if they deem them to be fake, one of my artists just had 100 followers removed from their profile, but we have never purchased followers in any form. Do you know why they could be removing those followers, and will this affect our account?
Thanks for this interview! I wonder if it's impossible to get on an editorial playlist if you didn't apply for it before its release. It would be nice if it could be demystified as well.
For sure. The Spotify perspective won’t be as potent as an experienced marketer. I have videos I’ve made that are more tactical here on the channel that might be more useful for actually following a step by step plan!
I learned a whole lot of nothing from this marketing schill. Towed the company PR line the whole time. No one cares about becoming the next Kate Bush by landing our legacy track in Stranger Things. Why these guys always talk about their billion dollar top tier artists as if it is at all applicable to the everyday indie artist is beyond me. It's like saying "just look at Elon Musk that's how your small business could go". Just pat themselves on the back for paying out the vast majority of that $9Bn to Universal and Warner music thanks to their lucrative agreements? That doesn't apply to us at all. What % of that $9Bn went to unsigned artists. Bet he "doesn't have the data" on that. And this channel didn't pull him up on any of that. Oh and here we go with the whole "just use Spotify for Artists Pitch tool" which everyone knows is a lie, behind thst black box is a whole industry of pitchers with personal relationships with curators, telling the curators to focus on certain pitched tracks out of the 100,000 they received that week. You can literally payola your way into a Personalised Editorial. I have, many times. Again, no push back no challenge. Just utter PR bs.
@@IndieMusicAcademy ask him to come prepared to answer how much of that 9 billion was paid out to unsigned artists. Ask if Spotify acknowledge that there is an industry generating hundreds of millions of dollars where actual certified Spotify Editorial curators engage with pitchers who are receiving money from artists and labels in order to push their pitched tracks in front of the Pitch list to end up on an Made For You personalised editorial owned and curated by Spotify. And since such an industry exists how does Spotify not admit it isn't a level playing field for those who aren't paying $300 US per pitch? Also ask them how sustainable it is to keep punishing artists who end up victimised by being placed on botted playlists by no action of their own, when they don't enforce the same penalties on major label signed artists who are literally on almost every single botted playlist on the platform without repercussions. What better tools are Spotify giving artists to remove our own music from third party personal playlists we do not want to be associated with?
@@IndieMusicAcademy Ask him to come prepared to answer how much of that 9 billion was paid out to unsigned artists. Ask if Spotify acknowledge that there is an industry BIGGER THAN EVER, growing every year, generating hundreds of millions of dollars, which Spotify have not been successful in reducing, where actual certified Spotify Editorial curators now engage with payola pitchers who are receiving money from artists and labels in order to push their pitched tracks in front of the list to end up on an Made For You personalised editorial owned and curated by Spotify. And since such an industry exists and is generating record revenue, how does Spotify not admit it isn't a level playing field for those who aren't paying $300 - $750 US per pitch? Also ask them how sustainable it is to keep punishing independent artists who end up victimised when their successful tracks end up being placed on botted playlists by no action of their own, when they don't enforce the same penalties on major label signed artists who are literally on almost every single botted playlist on the platform without repercussions. We don't want a lecture about not buying playlisting. We know that already. Yet playlisters still fill up their shitty botted playlists full of innocent artists in order to make them look legitimate, and the result is us artists getting our releases flagged and removed. Does Spotify acknowledge this is not a viable solution? What better tools are Spotify giving artists to remove our own music from third party personal playlists we do not want to be associated with, and why isn't this a control that has already rolled out? I'm sick of Spotify and distributors doing nothing but passing the buck to each other and gaslighting us artists. We are not morons, we know precisely what is going on. Finally, ask him why certain features like marquees and discovery are locked out to artists unless they meet success eligibility criteria such as reaching 20K monthly listeners within 28 days of a release date. Doesn't this largely go against the whole idea of Spotify Discovery Mode and Marquee being used to aid artists trying to break in?
@@IndieMusicAcademyOK, here are five or so key questions I think all of us want to know the answers to. Ask him to come prepared to answer how much of that 9 billion was paid out to unsigned artists. Ask if Spotify acknowledge that there is an industry BIGGER THAN EVER, growing every year, generating hundreds of millions of dollars, which Spotify have not been successful in re- ducing, where actual certified Spotify Editorial curators now engage with payola pitchers who are receiving money from artists and labels in order to push their pitched tracks in front of the list to end up on an Made For You personalised editorial owned and curated by Spotify. And since such an industry exists and is generating record revenue, how does Spotify not admit it isn't a level playing field for those who aren't paying $300 - $750 US per pitch? Also ask them how sustainable it is to keep punishing independent artists who end up victimised when their successful tracks end up being placed on bot- ted playlists by no action of their own, when they don't enforce the same penalties on major label signed artists who are literally on almost every single botted playlist on the platform without repercussions...We don't want a lecture about not buying playlisting. We know that already. Yet playlisters still fill up botted playlists full of innocent artists every day in order to make them look legitimate, and the result is us artists getting our releases flagged and removed. Does Spotify acknowledge this is not a viable solution? What better tools are Spotify giving artists to remove our own music from third party personal playlists we do not want to be associated with and why isn't this a control that has already rolled out? I'm sure I speak for plenty of your viewers when I say I am sick of Spotify and distributors doing nothing but passing the buck to each other and gaslighting us artists. We are not morons, we know precisely what is going on regarding the extent to which clickfarm phonerack botted playlists are destroying the industry for all of us. Punishing the artists is not the answer. Finally, ask him why certain features like marquees and discovery mode are locked out to artists unless they meet success eligibility criteria such as reaching 20K monthly listeners within 28 days of a release date. Doesn't this largely go against the whole idea of Spotify Discovery Mode and Marquee being used to aid artists trying to break in?
I would also like to know, what are they doing to make Artists aware of their different royalties, the importance of PROs and Mechanical License Collectives without tagging on ala cart charges? Why do they make you relinquish total control of other rights as the distributor? An Artist should own 100% of their Publication rights (different from royalties), however . . . Based on fine print I last read, this was not the case. Furthermore, how do they connect the Artist with their fan base AFTER leaving their platform? An Artist should own 100% of their fan base as well as that data, NOT the platform. The Artists are the REASON the fan is here!
Viewers, when it comes to getting numbers up NO ONE KNOWS. Marketing is a black box. That guest is head of RELATIONS and PARTNERSHIPS. He’s a salesman and deal maker. NOT a tutorial educator. Keep that in mind
Well said! Viewers need to remember he is head of artist and industry partners. He’s an expert on how Spotify works and manages the artist and industry relationships. So basically if viewers are looking for someone who knows everything about Spotify, this is your guy. If viewers want someone to tell you how to set up a marketing campaign for music, then I have other videos on the channel that show you that.
How about asking him why we have to wait such a long time between pulling a catalog or track from their platform to uploading to a different one? Additionally, how about songs that get flagged that are 100% organic (meaning no samples, no sample packs etc), and taken down for copyright when the Artist is the copyright holder, producer, performer . . . thusly the Artist owns it free and clear yet is penalized but not financially stable enough to register said composition for US Copyright?!
Only 66 000 artists make 10k+. That's pitiful when you consider millions of artists publish on the platform. Meanwhile Spotify raked in over $4bn in profits last year.
Thanks for your comment! I truly appreciate you joining in the conversation, but your stats are incorrect. Spotify did not make $4b in profits, its public knowledge that Spotify has struggled to be profitable and in fact lost -$70m last quarter. Also, it seems you’re forgetting that independent musicians don’t all generate the same amount of traffic to their catalogs. Millions of artists are getting zero streams because they are creating zero social impact with their music. They have zero influence anywhere… so it only makes sense that lack of impact would continue on Spotify (as well as on their website, socials, in venues, etc).
@@IndieMusicAcademy Hey thanks. Yes, they show a loss in the books, but we all know how corporations work. Income was still over 10bn. Also I'm not forgetting not all artists get a lot of streams, but seems the model could better facilitate the emergence and discovery of new talent.
Good info but this was kind not really what I thought it might be. These guys have the ability to identify and eliminate botting beyond anything that 90% of the artists would have yet pass the buck. They don’t even have to prove to you that botting has taken place. There was lot more that I hope happens in part 2.
I’m from Sweden and he’s dialect was a bit hard to understand. I normally have no problem with British but he did speak strange and fast. Gave up after 10 min and after reading the comments I didn’t miss out on anything.
Ryan, is it fair to say spotify has given you the shaft ?, why would you like to interview the people that have done this, unless you have sold out to more revenue with them, or you just wanna expose the madness, there are other streaming platforms, would be good to know which one's are actually indie friendly and paying out fair stream counts and leave spotify in the dark to drown in their 9b of debt? if they can't manage 9b in revenue then they should go out of business, food for thought brother
I love this channel but this interview wasn't very good, you just allowed him to parrot the usual Spotify PR and comms lines unchallenged, gave him a very easy ride
Thanks man, building a corporate relationship takes time. This was my first interview with Spotify ever. More are planned but Spotify clearly is taking baby steps when it comes to stepping out into more topics! Let me know what questions you’d like to see in the next interview?
OK, here are five or so key questions I think all of us want to know the answers to in Part II.
Ask him to come prepared to answer how much of that 9 billion was paid out to unsigned artists.
Ask if Spotify acknowledge that there is an industry BIGGER THAN EVER, growing every year, generating hundreds of millions of dollars, which Spotify have not been successful in re- ducing, where actual certified Spotify Editorial curators now engage with payola pitchers who are receiving money from artists and labels in order to push their pitched tracks in front of the list to end up on an Made For You personalised editorial owned and curated by Spotify.
And since such an industry exists and is generating record revenue, how does Spotify not admit it isn't a level playing field for those who aren't paying $300 - $750 US per pitch?
Also ask them how sustainable it is to keep punishing independent artists who end up victimised when their successful tracks end up being placed on bot- ted playlists by no action of their own, when they don't enforce the same penalties on major label signed artists who are literally on almost every single botted playlist on the platform without repercussions...We don't want a lecture about not buying playlisting. We know that already. Yet playlisters still fill up botted playlists full of innocent artists every day in order to make them look legitimate, and the result is us artists getting our releases flagged and removed. Does Spotify acknowledge this is not a viable solution?
What better tools are Spotify giving artists to remove our own music from third party personal playlists we do not want to be associated with and why isn't this a control that has already rolled out?
I'm sure I speak for plenty of your viewers when I say I am sick of Spotify and distributors doing nothing but passing the buck to each other and gaslighting us artists. We are not morons, we know precisely what is going on regarding the extent to which clickfarm phonerack botted playlists are destroying the industry for all of us. Punishing the artists is not the answer.
Finally, ask him why certain features like Marquee and are locked out to artists unless they meet success eligibility criteria such as having an unspecified threshold of followers, % of followers active or unspecified threshold size of active audience segments, within 28 days of a release date. Doesn't this largely go against the whole idea of Marquee being used to aid artists trying to break in? It's basically Spotify artificially limiting the feature to ensure Marquee looks like it's a successful introduced tool.
Thanks for this!!
~ 4.5 billion out of the 9B were paid to indies btw!
@@IndieMusicAcademy Given the ratio of indie artists to signed artists this is an appalling statistic.
@@IndieMusicAcademy what are Indies exactly. Indie labels? Or truly independent artists who aren't signed? Big, important difference especially considering about 9/10 indie labels are subsidiaries of a major. If it's truly $4.5bn to unsigned artists then that's actually great.
@@Spectoral_on_SPOTIFY you hit the nail on the head. There’s a ton “indie artists” that aren’t actually indie they have a partnership deal with majors. As an indie distributor and label owner I am very familiar with this.
@@IndieMusicAcademy ayy he brings up some really good points
The follow up interview is a great opportunity to ask him about the fake artists that dominate the Spotify editorial playlists.
There have been many articles the last days in Sweden about "Johan Röhr" a Swedish composer who is behind 650 fake artists on Spotify and has accumulated 15 billion streams. All in editorial playlists, for example "Peaceful Piano".
The big issue with this is that indepentent artists are sold the myth: "Apply to editorial playlists, and you can be included". But in reality it is close to impossible for many genres (like background music). Because Spotify will instead choose music from their "friends" who has accepted a lower royalty payment.
Wow, mind-blowing insights on Spotify royalties and streaming revenue. The evolution of Independent Artists on the platform is truly inspiring. Stay authentic and passionate!
“Mini-syncs”! Great point. Thank you for this video. ❤
Thanks for watching!!!
I thought the interview was pretty cool. Wasn't a tutorial on how to blow up as an Indie Artist but it good to get knowledge about Spotify and how streaming works etc.
Thanks man! Yeah according to him there is no trick to blowing up on Spotify. Just need to create a cultural movement around your music. Easy right?
@@IndieMusicAcademy certainly isn’t easy but if you put in the hard work and manage to receive a bit of luck… who knows!!??
our comment disappeared
I can see this one! Feel free to try again!
i just did and it disappeared again.@@IndieMusicAcademy
This interview annoyed me. As others have said, you gave this guy an easy ride, no push backs, no hitting him with stats. He's a fan of your channel, yeah right, from that moment you were in his pocket and you stayed there. Didn't feel like you were pitching for the indie artist. This guy is just a shill and you facilitated it/him. Be better, much better.
I have a second interview coming up, what would you like to ask him?
If they generated so much income, why did they state they are still in the red and why is they payout so fractional?
Hi Ryan, I am an artist manager, in regard to the artist metrics portion of this video I have a question. You mentioned Spotify removing followers if they deem them to be fake, one of my artists just had 100 followers removed from their profile, but we have never purchased followers in any form. Do you know why they could be removing those followers, and will this affect our account?
I think the messages in my songs are very much needed right now to help with awareness
Thanks for this interview! I wonder if it's impossible to get on an editorial playlist if you didn't apply for it before its release. It would be nice if it could be demystified as well.
It’s definitely possible even without submitting. However it will need to be driven through external cultural influence.
Ryan you asked good questions but this guy really isn't saying much about how to get your numbers up.
Cuz NO ONE KNOWS. Marketing is a black box. He’s head of RELATIONS and PARTNERSHIPS. He’s a salesman and deal maker. Not a tutorial educator
For sure. The Spotify perspective won’t be as potent as an experienced marketer. I have videos I’ve made that are more tactical here on the channel that might be more useful for actually following a step by step plan!
I learned a whole lot of nothing from this marketing schill. Towed the company PR line the whole time. No one cares about becoming the next Kate Bush by landing our legacy track in Stranger Things. Why these guys always talk about their billion dollar top tier artists as if it is at all applicable to the everyday indie artist is beyond me. It's like saying "just look at Elon Musk that's how your small business could go". Just pat themselves on the back for paying out the vast majority of that $9Bn to Universal and Warner music thanks to their lucrative agreements? That doesn't apply to us at all. What % of that $9Bn went to unsigned artists. Bet he "doesn't have the data" on that. And this channel didn't pull him up on any of that. Oh and here we go with the whole "just use Spotify for Artists Pitch tool" which everyone knows is a lie, behind thst black box is a whole industry of pitchers with personal relationships with curators, telling the curators to focus on certain pitched tracks out of the 100,000 they received that week. You can literally payola your way into a Personalised Editorial. I have, many times. Again, no push back no challenge. Just utter PR bs.
What would you like to ask him? I’m doing a part 2 interview in a couple weeks.
@@IndieMusicAcademy ask him to come prepared to answer how much of that 9 billion was paid out to unsigned artists. Ask if Spotify acknowledge that there is an industry generating hundreds of millions of dollars where actual certified Spotify Editorial curators engage with pitchers who are receiving money from artists and labels in order to push their pitched tracks in front of the Pitch list to end up on an Made For You personalised editorial owned and curated by Spotify. And since such an industry exists how does Spotify not admit it isn't a level playing field for those who aren't paying $300 US per pitch? Also ask them how sustainable it is to keep punishing artists who end up victimised by being placed on botted playlists by no action of their own, when they don't enforce the same penalties on major label signed artists who are literally on almost every single botted playlist on the platform without repercussions. What better tools are Spotify giving artists to remove our own music from third party personal playlists we do not want to be associated with?
@@IndieMusicAcademy Ask him to come prepared to answer how much of that 9 billion was paid out to unsigned artists.
Ask if Spotify acknowledge that there is an industry BIGGER THAN EVER, growing every year, generating hundreds of millions of dollars, which Spotify have not been successful in reducing, where actual certified Spotify Editorial curators now engage with payola pitchers who are receiving money from artists and labels in order to push their pitched tracks in front of the list to end up on an Made For You personalised editorial owned and curated by Spotify.
And since such an industry exists and is generating record revenue, how does Spotify not admit it isn't a level playing field for those who aren't paying $300 - $750 US per pitch?
Also ask them how sustainable it is to keep punishing independent artists who end up victimised when their successful tracks end up being placed on botted playlists by no action of their own, when they don't enforce the same penalties on major label signed artists who are literally on almost every single botted playlist on the platform without repercussions. We don't want a lecture about not buying playlisting. We know that already. Yet playlisters still fill up their shitty botted playlists full of innocent artists in order to make them look legitimate, and the result is us artists getting our releases flagged and removed. Does Spotify acknowledge this is not a viable solution?
What better tools are Spotify giving artists to remove our own music from third party personal playlists we do not want to be associated with, and why isn't this a control that has already rolled out? I'm sick of Spotify and distributors doing nothing but passing the buck to each other and gaslighting us artists. We are not morons, we know precisely what is going on.
Finally, ask him why certain features like marquees and discovery are locked out to artists unless they meet success eligibility criteria such as reaching 20K monthly listeners within 28 days of a release date. Doesn't this largely go against the whole idea of Spotify Discovery Mode and Marquee being used to aid artists trying to break in?
@@IndieMusicAcademyOK, here are five or so key questions I think all of us want to know the answers to.
Ask him to come prepared to answer how much of that 9 billion was paid out to unsigned artists.
Ask if Spotify acknowledge that there is an industry BIGGER THAN EVER, growing every year, generating hundreds of millions of dollars, which Spotify have not been successful in re- ducing, where actual certified Spotify Editorial curators now engage with payola pitchers who are receiving money from artists and labels in order to push their pitched tracks in front of the list to end up on an Made For You personalised editorial owned and curated by Spotify.
And since such an industry exists and is generating record revenue, how does Spotify not admit it isn't a level playing field for those who aren't paying $300 - $750 US per pitch?
Also ask them how sustainable it is to keep punishing independent artists who end up victimised when their successful tracks end up being placed on bot- ted playlists by no action of their own, when they don't enforce the same penalties on major label signed artists who are literally on almost every single botted playlist on the platform without repercussions...We don't want a lecture about not buying playlisting. We know that already. Yet playlisters still fill up botted playlists full of innocent artists every day in order to make them look legitimate, and the result is us artists getting our releases flagged and removed. Does Spotify acknowledge this is not a viable solution?
What better tools are Spotify giving artists to remove our own music from third party personal playlists we do not want to be associated with and why isn't this a control that has already rolled out?
I'm sure I speak for plenty of your viewers when I say I am sick of Spotify and distributors doing nothing but passing the buck to each other and gaslighting us artists. We are not morons, we know precisely what is going on regarding the extent to which clickfarm phonerack botted playlists are destroying the industry for all of us. Punishing the artists is not the answer.
Finally, ask him why certain features like marquees and discovery mode are locked out to artists unless they meet success eligibility criteria such as reaching 20K monthly listeners within 28 days of a release date. Doesn't this largely go against the whole idea of Spotify Discovery Mode and Marquee being used to aid artists trying to break in?
Could you ask: How to get more streams ? @@IndieMusicAcademy
I would also like to know, what are they doing to make Artists aware of their different royalties, the importance of PROs and Mechanical License Collectives without tagging on ala cart charges? Why do they make you relinquish total control of other rights as the distributor? An Artist should own 100% of their Publication rights (different from royalties), however . . . Based on fine print I last read, this was not the case. Furthermore, how do they connect the Artist with their fan base AFTER leaving their platform? An Artist should own 100% of their fan base as well as that data, NOT the platform. The Artists are the REASON the fan is here!
Viewers, when it comes to getting numbers up NO ONE KNOWS. Marketing is a black box. That guest is head of RELATIONS and PARTNERSHIPS. He’s a salesman and deal maker. NOT a tutorial educator. Keep that in mind
Well said! Viewers need to remember he is head of artist and industry partners. He’s an expert on how Spotify works and manages the artist and industry relationships. So basically if viewers are looking for someone who knows everything about Spotify, this is your guy.
If viewers want someone to tell you how to set up a marketing campaign for music, then I have other videos on the channel that show you that.
How about asking him why we have to wait such a long time between pulling a catalog or track from their platform to uploading to a different one? Additionally, how about songs that get flagged that are 100% organic (meaning no samples, no sample packs etc), and taken down for copyright when the Artist is the copyright holder, producer, performer . . . thusly the Artist owns it free and clear yet is penalized but not financially stable enough to register said composition for US Copyright?!
Only 66 000 artists make 10k+. That's pitiful when you consider millions of artists publish on the platform. Meanwhile Spotify raked in over $4bn in profits last year.
Thanks for your comment! I truly appreciate you joining in the conversation, but your stats are incorrect.
Spotify did not make $4b in profits, its public knowledge that Spotify has struggled to be profitable and in fact lost -$70m last quarter.
Also, it seems you’re forgetting that independent musicians don’t all generate the same amount of traffic to their catalogs. Millions of artists are getting zero streams because they are creating zero social impact with their music. They have zero influence anywhere… so it only makes sense that lack of impact would continue on Spotify (as well as on their website, socials, in venues, etc).
@@IndieMusicAcademy Hey thanks. Yes, they show a loss in the books, but we all know how corporations work. Income was still over 10bn. Also I'm not forgetting not all artists get a lot of streams, but seems the model could better facilitate the emergence and discovery of new talent.
@@IndieMusicAcademyits called Hollwood accounting all this money is being funneled to major labels.
Good info but this was kind not really what I thought it might be. These guys have the ability to identify and eliminate botting beyond anything that 90% of the artists would have yet pass the buck. They don’t even have to prove to you that botting has taken place.
There was lot more that I hope happens in part 2.
If I understand, he said look at the tools we have and use them. He didn’t really answer the questions.
Yeah, he said there are no shortcuts and Spotify reflects culture. So you need to create a cultural moment off of Spotify first.
Blessings
I’m from Sweden and he’s dialect was a bit hard to understand. I normally have no problem with British but he did speak strange and fast. Gave up after 10 min and after reading the comments I didn’t miss out on anything.
even other British people can have a hard time understanding the Liverpool accent lol
I'm selling a bridge in Brooklyn‼😒
Ryan, is it fair to say spotify has given you the shaft ?, why would you like to interview the people that have done this, unless you have sold out to more revenue with them, or you just wanna expose the madness, there are other streaming platforms, would be good to know which one's are actually indie friendly and paying out fair stream counts and leave spotify in the dark to drown in their 9b of debt? if they can't manage 9b in revenue then they should go out of business, food for thought brother
If an artist does not like Spotify then they should remove their music. Simple. Stop moaning, stop thinking they owe you a living.
I love this channel but this interview wasn't very good, you just allowed him to parrot the usual Spotify PR and comms lines unchallenged, gave him a very easy ride
Thanks man, building a corporate relationship takes time. This was my first interview with Spotify ever. More are planned but Spotify clearly is taking baby steps when it comes to stepping out into more topics! Let me know what questions you’d like to see in the next interview?