| >TikTok is per view generating less revenue than YouTube plus appartently there is not proper consideration for >the difference in length! Oh, well. There's lots of unresolved fundamentals when revenue is not coming in per view or per length, but people are trying to use things like this as a KPI. Misguideds gonna misguide. For the vast majority of artists and music lovers, the ideal model so far is not a "business" model, more along the lines of the free sharing proven by the likes of Napster. Artists didn't make any money off of Napster, but most of them don't make any money from rights organizations either, or when they do it's closer to zero than it is significant. The only way to surpress the free file sharing was to offer a paid service that was insignificant in cost to so many mainstream consumers that it was marginally viable, and go from there. Consumers paying for it in some way was the main consideration, not paying the artists very much. So this is all we got now and ever since. Until the price rises enough to no longer be insignificant, and naturally triggers Napster-like procedures to trend back toward becoming undisrupted. There's just not enough money for any significant middlemen between an artist and the lovers of their music. With more than one rights brandisher "competing" by failing to lower consumer prices as the streaming services splinter, and trying to prolong a business model where the artist gets less than the majority of revenue generated, all that's got to lead to alternatives where once again the savvy consumers get everything free and the rightsholders and their artists get nothing directly. |