The Average ‘Retail Streaming Subscriber’ Contributes $65 a Year In Royalties…



Is that good?  That’s according to streaming music service Rhapsody, which recently purchased Napster and now has 2 million paying subscribers worldwide.   Here’s an excerpt from their year-end update:





4 Responses

  1. GGG

    Depends how you look at it.

    If you are talking about theoretical people who may have abandoned buying 7+ albums year in lieu of streaming (and they don’t buy anything else, like vinyl), then sure it’s not that great.

    If you’re talking about theoretical people who spent less than $60 a year on music who could potentially be inclined to sign up for a subscriptions service, than it’s a positive.

    There’s always been a lot more people in the latter group. Now we just have to convert them. The best thing the TS debate could lead to is allowing artists to stay off the free tier of Spotify. Maybe it won’t work in converting subscribers, maybe it will, but only one way to find out.

  2. Name2

    Right now, Rhapsody’s $5/mo plan only gets you “unRadio”.

    Random, on-demand tunes don’t start until you opt for a plan that’s $10/mo.

    At $120 a year, then, more than half of what I spend on Rhapsody goes to work-owners (usually the record companies (who, one hopes, would pass the cash on to artists, but whatever. Details, details.))

    For their <50% cut, Rhapsody runs the servers, preserves my library and playlists in the cloud, lets me listen on the move on up to three devices. Rhapsody seems to be the entity busting its ass to bring me value. Under the old system, I had to deal with friggin' Sam Goody.

    Life is good.

  3. Anonymous

    lol $65 is more than the average iTunes music buyer contributes annually to royalties


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Verify Your Humanity *