[Reimersholme]

Actually, I remember reading an article from someone at Spotify who argued that the economics in that situation would end up hurting small artists and favour Taylor Swift much more than the current model.

As an example; big music aficionados might listen to 75 different bands in a month, which will mean 1% of their subscription money will go to each of them.

The large majority of music listeners though listen to 5-10 big-name artists only.

Distributing money fairly after what each premium subscriber listens too thus would end up favouring the big name artists much more than the current model they have.

I have no way of knowing whether this is true, but thought it was an interesting perspective...

[imtringued]

It doesn't really matter. Spotify just doesn't pay that much per listen in the first place. There is only so much money you can squeeze out of a $10 subscription.

[syrrim]

See this: http://www.digitalmedia.fi/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/UC_rep...

Discussed at the time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25024552

[scrps]

I think a tipping system would be a better solution, preferably one where 100% of the tip goes to the artist. Spotify still gets their cut from subs and I get to make sure I support the artists I actually listen to.

Clarity edit: I mean a tipping system on top of the existing system.