[aclimatt]

Absolutely right. It seems almost every other thread here is missing the crux of the article, which has nothing to do with some alleged musician-listener supply-demand issue. Rather:

Graham Davies, CEO of The Ivors Academy said: “This survey is further demonstration that the song and the songwriter are undervalued. Too much streaming money is going to the major labels, this is an outdated model and needs reform.”

The survey results come amid an ongoing government inquiry into the impact of “the business models” operated by the likes of Spotify, Apple Music, Amazon Music and Google Play.

It doesn't sound like musicians are (necessarily) arguing that we should pay more than $10 to stream their music. Or that they should get more than their share of the pie relative to other artists.

It's that musicians' share of the $10 as a whole should be way more than it is now, and Spotify + labels should get less. And that's a fair claim to make that's worth talking about.

[satyrnein]

Actually, that quote is "musicians" fighting over share. In this case, a songwriters' group (Ivors Academy) is complaining that performers (via labels) get too big of a share. This fight has been going on since recorded music began and has nothing to do with Spotify or any recent development.