+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 42

Thread: Is garth missing the boat on streaming

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    LA/Long Beach area
    Posts
    2,183

    Is garth missing the boat on streaming

    I read an article on how catalog artists are the big seller on streaming. So I am wondering if Garth is missing the boat. I am not a fan of streaming and I prefer my music on CD or vinyl. But I know the younger crowd and others like using their devices to get their music.
    I will stick to my old school roots. But Garth could be missing out on new fans and revenue stream.
    I am wondering if he would experiment and maybe release some of his catalog to streaming or maybe his new stuff like MAM, GS and maybe FUN, if that could help sales of his older catalog. They have the formula for making streams into album sales, I think every tenth song equals 1 album.
    Here is article:
    https://hitsdailydouble.com/news&id=...SECRET-WEAPON-
    Maybe Garth could see how a trial program could work and go from their. If it doesn't work, he can always stop. I know he doesn't change, he is a dinosaur like me but if an old guy like me is willing to try, maybe he should also.
    He doesn't have to release his money makers if he doesn't want to. He can always repackage his older catalog (once again) and sell discs that way. Maybe that is what he is doing with the vinyl. Maybe he wqants to release the vinyl first then do streaming and maybe download.
    We know it isn't really the money but the numbers. But i think he can gain numbers with the streaming. Yet I think he can still do stuff with adding new songs and make double discs of his original stuff and keep it off streaming until the sales are over. Or maybe just do his new stuff on streaming and force the new fans into buying the hard copy of the catalog. I say go baby steps Garth. Start slow. I think once he sees the numbers he will change his mind, especially once the numbers are added together with the RIAA.
    The only question I had with article was no mention of how hard copy catalog sales did during this period. A perusal of the Billboard charts and others show lots of catalog albums charting but not how albums that were streamed did on the RIAA/Soundscan lists. That would be an interesting article for me.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Beautiful Oregon..
    Posts
    5,038
    Garth knows this. He chose to stream on Amazon.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    In the USA, the best country in the world
    Posts
    7,968
    Hmm. don't have much time so I have to be concise (hard for me sometimes I know)

    Is he missing the boat on streaming? YES.

    Garth's protests/reasons about streaming/online have been debunked multiple times by different people, so honestly? it's not about the songwriters or the albums, it's about control and #'s.... definitely.

    The younger set, where Gart could GROW his audience if truly interested, isn't as much into the physical media... we don't all live in the 90s and prior with our music buying habits.. I prefer physical media myself for some artists, but even I see that it's (sadly) a dying medium

    Garth can't stop progress though he tries to retard its' influence on his music/career..

    So, is he missing the boat? YES.. could he go online to multiple outlets, areas etc other than Amazon? yes.. Will he? If it's not the pet project of talkshoplive or his amazon 'gig'... I wouldn't hold my breath.. Garth's stubbornness and (pig headed, lets' be honest) attitude towards streaming hinders his growth/impact on the target audience he should be focusing on most..
    An objective Garth fan, with my own views...

    I have a purpose
    Made in His image
    Accepted by Him
    Given new life in Christ
    Eternity with Him

    My collection of all things Garth....
    The GarthCast

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    The Ville
    Posts
    53
    Absolutely yes. No one cares about Amazon Music. Not being on Spotify and Apple Music is about as stupid as it gets.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Arlington, Tx.
    Posts
    969
    With the success he is having in other parts of his career and the fact he's taking his time on releasing Fun, I don't think he cares.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    In the USA, the best country in the world
    Posts
    7,968
    Quote Originally Posted by garthcop View Post
    With the success he is having in other parts of his career and the fact he's taking his time on releasing Fun, I don't think he cares.
    that's def. true- Garth doesn't necess. care... He seems to be happy edging into nostalgia act territory... sad, but it is what it is I guess. Still the best entertainer out there, just one who honest have much of a foothold in a growth mindset
    An objective Garth fan, with my own views...

    I have a purpose
    Made in His image
    Accepted by Him
    Given new life in Christ
    Eternity with Him

    My collection of all things Garth....
    The GarthCast

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    768
    Quote Originally Posted by Skywise View Post
    that's def. true- Garth doesn't necess. care... He seems to be happy edging into nostalgia act territory... sad, but it is what it is I guess. Still the best entertainer out there, just one who honest have much of a foothold in a growth mindset
    Based upon his concerts, he has really never stopped being a legacy act. You can almost hold up his current setlists.....aside from the housekeeping acoustic section......and they are mirror images of his sets 20+ years ago.

    Deep album cuts are Never part of his regular set, and he has barely played Live his post-retirement songs. When he says that he's bringing the old stuff, because that's what he believes everyone is there to hear, he means it. It's one thing to have a few songs that are mainstays on every tour. Heck, Bruce Springsteen plays Born To Run in every show he's done the past 45 years. But when he has a new album out, you can bet that for at least most of the tour, he'll be playing several songs off it. And he'll also include some old songs that might not have been part of his last tour.

  8. #8
    I could forgive him for not streaming due to whatever principles he has but to not have his videos on YOUTUBE is mind boggling. If anyone wants to view legendary videos like The Thunder Rolls or Standing Outside the Fire one has to track down an OOP DVD released back in 2007....insane.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Beautiful Oregon..
    Posts
    5,038
    Quote Originally Posted by SoCalGarthFan View Post
    Based upon his concerts, he has really never stopped being a legacy act. You can almost hold up his current setlists.....aside from the housekeeping acoustic section......and they are mirror images of his sets 20+ years ago.

    Deep album cuts are Never part of his regular set, and he has barely played Live his post-retirement songs. When he says that he's bringing the old stuff, because that's what he believes everyone is there to hear, he means it. It's one thing to have a few songs that are mainstays on every tour. Heck, Bruce Springsteen plays Born To Run in every show he's done the past 45 years. But when he has a new album out, you can bet that for at least most of the tour, he'll be playing several songs off it. And he'll also include some old songs that might not have been part of his last tour.
    +1 for sure

  10. #10
    I wonder if Garth will change his mind, say with all these older artists streaming, lets say a dozen or so solo artists and groups thanks to catleog streaming, pass him with their RIAA Album totals.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    In the USA, the best country in the world
    Posts
    7,968
    Quote Originally Posted by SoCalGarthFan View Post
    Based upon his concerts, he has really never stopped being a legacy act. You can almost hold up his current setlists.....aside from the housekeeping acoustic section......and they are mirror images of his sets 20+ years ago.
    Ehhh.... I'd say it's not as much "Never really stopped being" as much as "transitioned to" or "has become".. I'm well aware of the setlist thing.. Heck I went to concerts in 92, 93, and 96. .. a lot of same songs, but at that point (I'd say right up to retirement) it's forgivable really.. almost expected for him to have a setlist similarity. AFTER retirement.. the first bit I guess could almost be the same as he's reestablishing himself... At least into 2016 he really shoulda started playing different music. (or at least we can wish)..

    That's one pet peeve w/ GArth- his inflexibility in song choice/setlists..

    Deep album cuts are Never part of his regular set, and he has barely played Live his post-retirement songs
    Again, having been to 5 concerts post retirement I understand and realize that. He's gone the KISS route (hence the nostalgia act comment(s) )


    . When he says that he's bringing the old stuff, because that's what he believes everyone is there to hear, he means it.
    a concert manifestation of his lack of willingness to embrace anything new IMO

    It's one thing to have a few songs that are mainstays on every tour. Heck, Bruce Springsteen plays Born To Run in every show he's done the past 45 years. But when he has a new album out, you can bet that for at least most of the tour, he'll be playing several songs off it. And he'll also include some old songs that might not have been part of his last tour.
    Comparison comments to another artist aside.... I agree with the notion of playing different music. there are a handful of songs that Garth "has" to play.. (FILP, The Dance, the river, unanswered praters, The Thunder Rolls, Rodeo, Calling Baton Rouge etc..) but there are certainly times in the main set where you could have variety. (WSBF interchanged w/ PLP, for example).. you don't HAVE to include Beaches, or Two Pina Coladas (well, perhaps 2PC) in every show. STOF isn't always nec... ITNC isn't necessary nor is (though it's a great song) Much Too Young. there are spots where Garth could easily put in some other songs.. For example, when he was in Denver in 1996 and he sang "we Bury the Hatchet"... kinda housecleaning before housecleaning was a thing....

    there are some that are mainstays.. some that could be changed, and new ones sprinkled in- Garth doesn't have to be Bruce (or KISS) (or anyone else) but He also doesn't have to be Garth of the 90s.. the 90s are past... Garth should move forward too
    An objective Garth fan, with my own views...

    I have a purpose
    Made in His image
    Accepted by Him
    Given new life in Christ
    Eternity with Him

    My collection of all things Garth....
    The GarthCast

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    1,828
    The more and more that CD players become extinct (most cars and laptops don’t even come with them anymore), the more hell have to reconsider his position if he ever wants new fans.

    But as others have said, he seems to be content with his status quo, so for now hoping he’ll reconsider is just a pipe dream.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    In the USA, the best country in the world
    Posts
    7,968
    Quote Originally Posted by Emerald Isle View Post
    The more and more that CD players become extinct (most cars and laptops don’t even come with them anymore), the more hell have to reconsider his position if he ever wants new fans.
    though he may say otherwise, you'd have to wonder if he truly does want new fans..
    An objective Garth fan, with my own views...

    I have a purpose
    Made in His image
    Accepted by Him
    Given new life in Christ
    Eternity with Him

    My collection of all things Garth....
    The GarthCast

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    LA/Long Beach area
    Posts
    2,183
    The thing that confuses me with streaming is, when you look at album sales in today's market, they show, for this weeks #1 album Lil Wayne with 138,388 total with albums making up 37,224, TEA 1,960 and sea 99,200. For a #1 Top 200 Billboard ranking that is all LiL Wayne sold this week. So is Garth loosing sales by not streaming or allowing down loads. Maybe if Amazon would publicize his numbers people could know and maybe if he opened up his music to all?????
    This is the formula they use to come to sales ranking....After a comprehensive analysis of a variety of factors – including streaming and download consumption patterns and historical impact on the program – and also consultation with a myriad of industry colleagues, the RIAA set the new Album Award formula of 1,500 on-demand audio and/or video song streams = 10 track sales = 1 album sale.
    So 10 track sales of FILP could equal 1 album sale. 1,500 audio/video streams of Dive Bar could equal 1 album sale. I think maybe Garth should try releasing his catalog for a short period of time and check out how it helps his numbers. If he sees fans actually buying the catalog in big numbers, maybe he would change his mind. But are the fans willing to buy the catalog music in big numbers or just casually when they want to? Will be interesting to see. Are their really enough Garth fans willing to buy the catalog music or are they satisfied they bought enough CDs instead and only want to buy new music?

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Arlington, Tx.
    Posts
    969
    He did promote the Dive Bar video big time. Maybe he's keeping at least one eye open on streaming in relation to that.


    Otherwise, he doesn't have to change anything. I think he worried about things coming out of retirement. But he had success that he didn't think he would have (even though we his fans knew he would). He's got the record for a single artist for record sales that will never be touch. And he has a good host at passing the Beetles eventually.

  16. #16
    After I heard Peter Frampton say that "Baby I love Your Way" got 1.5 billion streams and only made $1,500 from Spotify, I don't really care if he streams or not.

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by wimpy77 View Post
    After I heard Peter Frampton say that "Baby I love Your Way" got 1.5 billion streams and only made $1,500 from Spotify, I don't really care if he streams or not.
    I guarantee it's because of the deal he has with his label. A lot of acts that started before streaming was a thing got kind of screwed by their labels, causing them to make almost nothing from streams of their music.

    I have music on streaming services and even on Spotify, which pays me the least, I get an average of probably $0.003 per stream. It's not a set number but I think it's a fair estimate. If I got 1.5 billion streams, that would give me $4.5 million dollars.

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by handinhand12 View Post
    I guarantee it's because of the deal he has with his label. A lot of acts that started before streaming was a thing got kind of screwed by their labels, causing them to make almost nothing from streams of their music.

    I have music on streaming services and even on Spotify, which pays me the least, I get an average of probably $0.003 per stream. It's not a set number but I think it's a fair estimate. If I got 1.5 billion streams, that would give me $4.5 million dollars.
    That. 0.003 is how much the song makes per stream. The artists doesn't see all of that $4.5 million. That money has to be split between the songwriters and and label.
    Last edited by wimpy77; 02-12-2020 at 03:28 PM.

  19. #19
    I dont beleive for one second, that if you got 1.5 Billion streams you would only get $1,500 dollars from a major service like spotify No artist would touch that.

  20. #20
    A famous artist must be on a better deal than a lesser known artist.

    https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/201...ams-royalties/

  21. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Brett Dale View Post
    I dont beleive for one second, that if you got 1.5 Billion streams you would only get $1,500 dollars from a major service like spotify No artist would touch that.
    Artists really don't have a choice. Most artists music doesn't belong to them it belongs to the label unless your like Garth or Metallica but buy your catalog.

    I went back and tried to find the article. I misquoted Frampton. Here's his direct quote from Twitter. Still if you get $1,700 from 55 million. You're only getting $3,400 for 110 million.

    "For 55 million streams of, ‘Baby I Love Your Way’, I got $1,700. I went to Washington with ASCAP last year to talk to law makers about this. Their jaws dropped and they asked me to repeat that for them."

    Still if you get $1,700 from 55 million. You're only getting $3,400 for 110 million. I think Apple Music may pay more than Spotify.

    According to this CNBC article artists are paid between $0.006 to $0.0084 per stream. But that's split between artists, songwriters and label.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/26/how-...ommentary.html

    Here's a line from that article.

    "Spotify pays about $0.006 to $0.0084 per stream to the holder of music rights. And the "holder" can be split among the record label, producers, artists, and songwriters. In short, streaming is a volume game."

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    In the USA, the best country in the world
    Posts
    7,968
    I'm way out of my area of knowledge here (mainly because it's stuff don't pay CLOSE attention to) but:

    from the following article

    https://soundcharts.com/blog/music-s...-rates-payouts

    here's one 'table'

    Spotify paid the artists $0.0032 per stream
    Apple Music got the average rate of $0.0056
    Google Play Music landed a $0.0055 payout rate
    Deezer fell slightly lower at $0.00436
    IF these are semi accurate #'s... There's a disconnect.. somethings' off.

    At the listed #s... 55 million streams would net anywhere from $176,000 (Spotify) to $308,000 (Apple Music).
    getting $1700 from 55 million streams is roughly $0.00003

    Is he getting $1700? if so, let's say that it's the 176,000 model (from spotify).. that's a little under 1% of the money paid, assuming the #'s in the chart.

    does the artist actually get only 1% of the profit? I understand splitting between record companies, etc but even if they only get 10%, that'd be 17,000 not 1700..

    (unless I'm way off?)
    An objective Garth fan, with my own views...

    I have a purpose
    Made in His image
    Accepted by Him
    Given new life in Christ
    Eternity with Him

    My collection of all things Garth....
    The GarthCast

  23. #23
    I think Garth once said with Apple, that apple takes 80% and the artist/songwriter/label gets 20%.

  24. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Brett Dale View Post
    I think Garth once said with Apple, that apple takes 80% and the artist/songwriter/label gets 20%.
    That's for single says and full album. Streaming is different.

  25. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Skywise View Post
    I'm way out of my area of knowledge here (mainly because it's stuff don't pay CLOSE attention to) but:

    from the following article

    https://soundcharts.com/blog/music-s...-rates-payouts

    here's one 'table'



    IF these are semi accurate #'s... There's a disconnect.. somethings' off.

    At the listed #s... 55 million streams would net anywhere from $176,000 (Spotify) to $308,000 (Apple Music).
    getting $1700 from 55 million streams is roughly $0.00003

    Is he getting $1700? if so, let's say that it's the 176,000 model (from spotify).. that's a little under 1% of the money paid, assuming the #'s in the chart.

    does the artist actually get only 1% of the profit? I understand splitting between record companies, etc but even if they only get 10%, that'd be 17,000 not 1700..

    (unless I'm way off?)
    Spotify doesn't have to pay them 1%. There's no law saying they have to pay them a certain percentage. I think the man knows how much got paid.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    In the USA, the best country in the world
    Posts
    7,968
    Quote Originally Posted by Brett Dale View Post
    I think Garth once said with Apple, that apple takes 80% and the artist/songwriter/label gets 20%.
    That's incorrect information- Apple does not take 80% of the profit/20% to the artist/songwriter/label...

    it's actually almost flipped from that..

    Apple's take is roughly 30%.. They pay out 70%.. the artist still does get only about 10%, but apple's only taking 30%. it's the record company/label that's taking majority...

    https://discussions.apple.com/thread/4981061
    An objective Garth fan, with my own views...

    I have a purpose
    Made in His image
    Accepted by Him
    Given new life in Christ
    Eternity with Him

    My collection of all things Garth....
    The GarthCast

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    In the USA, the best country in the world
    Posts
    7,968
    Quote Originally Posted by wimpy77 View Post
    Spotify doesn't have to pay them 1%. There's no law saying they have to pay them a certain percentage. I think the man knows how much got paid.

    If the amounts I posted (in the chart which was not included in your post) were accurate... then there's a disconnect somewhere... somethings off.. I'm not saying he's lying or that he doesn't know.. but there's SOMETHING off.. whether it's with him, spotify, or the reported amounts/#'s
    An objective Garth fan, with my own views...

    I have a purpose
    Made in His image
    Accepted by Him
    Given new life in Christ
    Eternity with Him

    My collection of all things Garth....
    The GarthCast

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    LA/Long Beach area
    Posts
    2,183
    Maybe that is why Garth stays away from streaming. If I wasn't desperate for money and more into music, I wouldn't release it on streaming. If I just want to put out new stuff good or bad, then I wouldn't mind dumping stuff on the market. I mean it is nice that we have devices and don't have to fumble through CDs but it is called the music business. So I am making music to make money. So I think Garth has a better business model since he doesn't have to prove himself at the stage. Just saying.

  29. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Skywise View Post
    That's incorrect information- Apple does not take 80% of the profit/20% to the artist/songwriter/label...

    it's actually almost flipped from that..

    Apple's take is roughly 30%.. They pay out 70%.. the artist still does get only about 10%, but apple's only taking 30%. it's the record company/label that's taking majority...

    https://discussions.apple.com/thread/4981061
    Im sure it was Garth that said it.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    In the USA, the best country in the world
    Posts
    7,968
    Quote Originally Posted by Brett Dale View Post
    Im sure it was Garth that said it.
    I'm sure theat he probably said it.. or parroted words from his "team" who told him, if not directly. He is wrong, it's that simple. it's not an 80/20 split where apple takes 80%.. it's a situation where Apple takes 30% and the rest (label, artist, songwriters etc) take 70%. Do artists still get screwed over? sure perhaps they do. but its' not Apple's doing... another hole busted in his anti Apple Music stance actually...
    An objective Garth fan, with my own views...

    I have a purpose
    Made in His image
    Accepted by Him
    Given new life in Christ
    Eternity with Him

    My collection of all things Garth....
    The GarthCast

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts