Must be connected to his iTunes/Apple TV live stream promotion.  So now Apple's gonna make artist pull down from Spotify to get the love??

Seems like good business in 2012.  Maybe not so much in 2015. 

Nobody gives a shit about his standards album anyway.

Despite the reproduction of press releases in mainstream media, despite the reviews of said album in same, no one really cares. That's the dirty little secret of being a classic rocker, you're done, you're toast, only people your age have any desire to hear your new music, and most of them don't either.

Which is why you've got to make it easy.

Somehow, these acts still put money in front of exposure. When their problem is just the opposite. Believe me, McCartney's grosses are not going to go down if his music is on Spotify, just the opposite. People know the legendary cuts and want to hear them live. But they don't want to hear the new music. That's time to pee, to get popcorn, an indulgence by the oldsters that they tolerate, just as long as it's only a couple of songs. And how do you change this? By making good new music and making it available to people.

 

read his entire letter at: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/index.php/archives/2012/02/

Oooooh, download blog boy doesn't care for Paul's standards album (which just happens to be great, BTFW). I'm sure his heart will be broken about that. Maybe some folks should stick to writing hipster doofus posts about the power YouTube.

lefsetz is a tool. it's a solid album.

It's really quite simple...

iTunes = modest revenue stream

Spotify, YouTube, and the like = black hole of nothingness for artists

(except maybe for Google and the investors in Spotify)

Haaaa brilliant and quite probably true. It makes me cringe when I see a big banner ad of someone like McCartney draped over some service's front page. It makes my eyes cry a little bit inside the eye ball.

 

Ah yes, so sad that someone would take a niche-y jazz inspired album that doesn't have much commecial appeal and put it in front of a large audience. That's such a pity. Everyone is just so greedy and commercial these days, not like the old days of the music business when everyone was so ethical and fair. These bastards even want to exploit iconic artists who are trying something different and promote them to the world. Such B.S. Really everyone should just be groovy hipsters and not get any marketing or promotion so they can stay cool and relevant to SXSW (and broke). Why are there so many people with an I.Q. < 9 on this board?

Well, that's actually funny since... The midweek UK chart position shows this is going to be his most succesful album in the UK since the 90's! 

this is not about paul its about the record company.

they dont have a piece of any other income stream, and they paid for the record.

how they suppsed to get it back?

the answer is, they shouldnt have made a deal unless they had a piece of touring or they shouldnt have paid and advance for the record....

This move won't hurt Paul, Concord, UMD, or even Spotify.  It's a fear-motivated move that will be hard to defend or criticize months or years from now.  I seriously doubt if track sales will increase by removing these albums from Spotify and other streaming services.  I challenge Concord to do an analysis 6 months from now and see if sales increase beyond the 8% annual rise we've seen in past years.  I'll bet good money that there won't be a sizable bump.

Track sales will not increase. Why would they? However giving the album away for free or next to nothing to bottom feeders will decrease. Can you fault Paul's camp or the label for assessing a shitty business model and saying, "uh, no thanks, we're smarter than that." Wake up people.

An understandable move. The situation is very different for young artitsts however, needing a platform for making themselves yet known.

Yawn!!

Seriously, who cares?? 'Live and Let Die' is on there, so that's enough Macca for one day.

This is not a mass exodus from Spotify. This is Apple working/manipulating things + that looks bad. It will do iTunes no favours in the long run.

I'm sure Paul McCartney had absolutley nothing to do with this.

Not to be picky but, "Band on the Run" IS on Hear Music/Concord, as is "McCartney" and "Memeory Almost Full", and pretty much all his post-Beatles stuff (barring some of his classical stuff on EMI).

I guess when you live in a digital music world you can't see the info on the record labels...

We've seen rumblings from other major and independent artists on the compensation model from Spotify.

As we see fall out from the bit torrent community, it will be interesting to see where the intersection of technology and music takes us.

WHO?

who cares. fuck you paul mccartney.

there are a bunch of (mostly younger) spotify users not giving a shit right now.  i'm sure the songs are real pretty, but this is just the record you buy your mom at christmas.  it's purpose is not to be shared to show someone's artistry and get attention.  it's a cash grab that worked just fine for rod stewart.

Rdio is ripping stuff down the catalog is gone as of today. 

Gone from MOG also.  

It's a wipe.

Well if it not's on Spotify I guess I'll have to get it for FREE. I guess they figure that anyone who will want his music doesn't know how to get it for FREE. That's probably mostly true. Even though I'm just a wee bit younger than ol' Sir Paul, I am personally moving with the tide of the future and will just ignore anyone who doesn't want me to listen to their music for $10 a month. (Spotify)

 

You are exhibiting antisocial [criminal] behavior ie. "If I don't get I want at the price I demand, I will steal that product."

Don't let the hackers and thieves control the Internet and legal commerce.

Paul, please give me only ONE exciting song after beatles/wings, who cares about your CD or if you're on Spotify. 

Weer een artiest/label die het nog steeds niet begrepen heeft

#fail

Thank you Paul, thank you...

NOT THE FROG CHORUS!?

Seems like Spotify will soon be THE place for quality tunes.. ;)

THE place for STOLEN quality songs. And if you KNOW the content is stolen, even if you pay for their service, the theft passes down to you as well.  You know they are stealing their content, they are stealing from ME.  If you continue to pay them, YOU are stealing from me. 

Cowboyslim, Change distributor.

If CD Baby tells you all or nothing use someone else.

My company IndigoBoom (Shameless plug) lets you choose and so I think, does Ditto. Regardless of who you choose you can distribute without including Spotify in your portfolio.

Frankly I'm beginning not to care.

Natuurlijk Sir Paul, nu rennen we ALLEMAAL naar de winkel om je saaie standardsplaat te kopen.

Bad move.

Everybody loses.

Likely over music royalties...

This is lazy journalism by Digital Music News. Had any fact checking been done at all you would have found Paul's music hasn't been on Spotify for at least 12-18 months and certainly not since Spotify has been available in the U.S.  Journalism FAIL.     

This is absolutely incorrect.  I've only had Spotify since September 2011 (in the US) and I've listened to quite a few McCartney solo releases there.  I don't know why Spotify itself wouldn't know this. 

Hey labels, it's time to embrace digital.

Who cares???

long time fan here. I have no need to hear Macca on streaming services as I already own the catalog on old fashioned CD's ripped to my home server.  When I listen to streaming services, I'm looking to hear music I don't already own.   There are a million classic rock stations, why bother paying to listen to classic rock on a streamer?

As for him pulling his catalog, its his music after all and he can decide how and when he sells it. Having been royally ripped off in the '60'd, I can understand his wanting to get paid for his work. 

I heard an off cut from the new album today in the car on Sirrus and it sounds great.  Just need time to go to a bricks n motar store.   I could download it, but with a collection going back to the 80's why not just keep it all in one format?

Because he needs the money presumably?

ZZZzzzzzz Somebody tell these old school artist to join the 21st century.

Spotify might have fancy technology that's great for the user.

But the way they treat artists is not 21st century - more like 19th century.

Who's Paul McCartney, and why should I care?

Sir Paul is one of the reasons we even have a music business. Show a little respect. The guy and his label are completely right to do some windowing on this.

I'm guessing that by "streaming music services" what is meant is "on-demand" streaming music services; and that this does not apply to streaming services such as Pandora or broadcast stations that are streaming their programming. Anyone know?

We saw how vital Paul still is with his Starbuck's deal didn't we? No streaming involved there.

When you gouge fans for tickets and remaster, repackage and rerelease your age-old content like the dinosaur brigade Macca is ensconced in I guess you can make these kinds of moves. From one who PAYS for Spotify and BUYS music this is ridiculous.

Listening to rich old men complain about a royalty rate that will continue to increase as the service is adopted is tiring. If you think you can still make it work under the old model, good luck. 

 

 

"a royalty rate that will continue to increase as the service is adopted"

You have absolutely no proof of this. None whatsoever.

It's just as likely that if Spotify become more powerful they will drive their royalty rate down on a "take it or leave it suckers" basis.

Please stop making arrogant and conceited assertations when you have zero proof to back it up.

Check out my post a little further down on this thread.  Spotify steals from EVERYONE. They sell you a service but they don't pass the money on to the creators of the content.  It is a "one for me, none for you, one for me, none for you" division of the proceeds.  If you feel okay about paying someone else to steal for you, maybe I AM wrong...but my Mama taught me better than that...theft is theft, no matter how you disguise it. 

How does it benefit McCartney not being on Spotify?...

Ugh, you greedy bloke.

I have content on the digital services and have been continually ripped off by Spotify. I attempted to single them out and remove my music from their "service", but CDBaby told me it was all or nothing. This company manipulates even the way they report streams...they pay different rates depending on who-knows-what rules. I noticed they report identical sales on consecutive days to avoid paying FRACTIONS of a cent. They are stealing from me and YOU, but I have only the recourse of NO DIGITAL distribution or allowing those skunks to rip me off. Since I am an artist trying to get my music out there, I settled for having people hear me, even if they listen for free. There is definitely something wrong when my distributor tells me to take it or leave it, and I am the one who created the product.

Good. More artists and labels should do the same until streaming services offer a reasonable compensation rate, and TRANSPARENCY.

- Versus