Uncategorized

2011 Was A Great Year For Spotify [By The Numbers]

image from www.google.comDespite some legitimate concerns over the amount of revenue returned to artists and streaming music's impact on sales, Spotify had a breakthrough year. Here's it looked like based on official company figures:

  • Launched in 5 new countries, including (finally) the U.S., Denmark, Switzerland, Austria and Belgium

MORE:

  • Major service improvements including Spotify Apps, a new Radio mode, a download store, Facebook and iPod integration, support for BlackBerry and Windows Phone as well as moving further into the home with Onkyo, Western Digital and Boxee
  • Signing over 300,000 independent music labels to Spotify this year – including Sub Pop Records, Merge Records and SC Distribution.
  • Adding approximately 20,000 tracks per day
  • Adding 1.5 million subscribers to the service to take the total number of paying users to over 2.5 million

Share on:

7 Comments

  1. May I add that in 2011 the payout per stream grew 240%! from $0.0026 to $0.0063.
    Time to throw the Lady Gaga story and the informationisbeautiful graph in the recycle bin.
    Sorry for bringing this up again

  2. Since they won’t give out actual numbers, what is your proof on that? Also, have any *artists* seen a 240% increase? Or any at all? Or is it all more power to the greedy labels?

  3. that varies from label to label. i’ve seen statements from my colleague’s labels showing $0.004.
    please stop pronouncing your personal experience as if it’s universal fact

  4. It’s not just personal experience.
    I have also seen statements from other labels and artists. It doesn’t vary from label to label but from aggregator to aggregator. For some tiers artists even get $0.0111 per stream. In average the pay out is about $0.0063 (and rising).
    My point is that the pay out is better than most people think it is.

  5. The percentage-of-completion method is generally the required method of financial and tax accounting of larger construction companies for long-term contracts. Its justification relies largely on the matching principle in accounting, where revenues and expenses are matched in the applicable accounting period.

Comments are closed.