[Freak_NL]

> SoundRat takes 6% on all payments. This is used to pay for the servers. I believe this is a fair number

If you really want to be fairer than the competition, be transparent about costs and profit margin. Just stating that 6% seems fair reeks of rent-seeking. This might not be what musicians and fans want, and it won't differentiate your service from Spotify.

> perks […] get access to lyrics.

You will need to come up with better perks than that. The lyrics for any moderately popular song can be found on-line at a click.

[dubme1]

Thanks for your feedback. I believe 6% is lower than selling on iTunes, Bandcamp and co. With this number I do not think I can run this (any time soon) as a full time business but that is not my goal right now. I hope to use this percentage to cover some or all of the costs.

I did this for fun and for my interest in listening and discovering small artists.

[lucideer]

> I hope to use this percentage to cover some or all of the costs.

I don't think the commenter above was trying to make out that 6% is not fair, just that they'd like to see the breakdown of this percentage covering some or all of the costs.

iTunes, Bandcamp and co. might not offer that breakdown, so you're definitely not worse, but it would be a really nice differentiator.

[have_faith]

I disagree about the breakdown. I think the vast majority of people are going to go with their gut feel in whether or not the cut sounds reasonable. Reasonable and fair being the goal but evaluation of what is reason and fair from consumers is almost always subjective. The breakdown is going to change when features of the service change, maybe quality is upped and costs rise or a host of other things change. I think from a marketing perspective "this is less than anyone else takes and it allows us to provide the service" is enough.

[amelius]

I agree with parent. If you do this "for fun" then approach it as a non-profit organization, i.e. with full transparency.