"I can tell you that we see Spotify (I'm talking free) users more than twice as likely to be buying digital downloads compared to non-users, and that ratio has not changed since the introduction in Q3 '11."

Nonsense funded by Spotify..

Be careful about the conclusions you draw from this.  This data DOE NOT SAY:

Being a user of Spotify INCREASES your probability of buying music.  In order to know that, we would need to know what the buying habits of these Spotify users was BEFORE using Spotify.  In fact, it is possible that it decreases that probability  (not saying it does, just that its not clear).

In other words, its possible that we have a systemic 'bias' occurring here.  The thoery would go like this:

1.  People who use Spotify are more 'into' music than people who don't.  i.e they tend to listen to more, buy more, etc - as a class.  they are early adopters of new music tech like Spotify.

2.  Therefore, any measurment that attempts to compare Spotify users to non-Spotify users would suffer a systemic bias (each group would have innate characterisitics that make them different as groups in terms of their natural behaviors).

So, this study (at least the little bit of it revealed on DMN) does not say that Spotify is CAUSING people to buy more music any more than it is saying that people who use Spotify tend to be people that buy more music anyway.

I'm not bashing Spotify, either.  Better studies might reveal causality here.  But that would be an inaccurate take away from this one.

This research brought to you by Goldman Sachs

With the obvious exclusion of any valuable data from this research, and if GS clients remain committed to being investors in Spotify, they are obviously secretly being told this is a classic pump-and-dump scheme.

Yeah, that's right; we can't possibly see any good news about Spotify, can we? Go back to listening to your record players, losers.

Haha, love the comment about the record players. Oh, so true.

The first two commenters are obviously still living in the past. Spotify and its like are the future whether you like it or not. Deal with it or end up like the record companies!

Aww... are the poor little babies crying that the artists aren't getting paid enough still? Give it up already! I'm about to gag if I hear that again. About time we get some good news about Spotify on here. Thank you, DMN. I know it was extremely hard to report it with all the cry babies on here.

OMG... am I seeing what I think I'm seeing on DMG. Good news about Spotify? What?! That is blasphemy! You will anger all of the trolls on here wanting more pay for the artists.

Oh no, prepare for all of the artist backlash crying to get paid more and how Spotify doesn't pay enough to these poor little artists!!! I THINK I'M GOING TO THROW UP NOW......

Dude, if you don't want to look like a plant, try not commenting five times in a row, Mr Spotify.

Hey Yura Diq, I'm a even bigger dick and I can even spell it right. Did you not pass 2nd grade? Awww.

Dude, if you don't want to look like a plant, try not commenting five times in a row, Mr Spotify.

I have no idea what your talking about. First of all, as one of the poeple who commented above, I commented only once for your information. The first post actually. Secondly, there are quite a few people I know who care about the consumer (the fans) as well as the artist whether you like to believe it or not Mr. Artist "plant" as you so bluntly put it. I can't help it if we all have the same views, can I? Thirdly, I KNOW you are the one commenting more than once and the same thing at that. And finally and most importantly, I am a consumer as well as a fan and have absolutely no affiliation with Spotify or any other streaming company. Think before you speak, a$$hat. Not everyone is a shill for just the artists!!

Wow, Yura Diq. You're screen name just says it all doesnt? Why should anyone even care to read what you have to say? I am a fan of the consumer as well and was also a commenter above. Your stupidity frightens me.

This is a response to the very first commenter. I'm an artist too. However, the difference between you and me is that I know Spotify is the future. I want to make my fans happy and still be able to hear my music. I know the money will come. I can't live in the past or I will be left in the past. Grow up and grow some!

And the shit hits the fan in 3, 2, 1................. 

And Yura Diq takes the prize!!

I find this a little surprising, but at the same time I have to agree. I have purchased more music lately (downloads anyway) than I had for quite some time, despite subscribing to a music service. There are some songs you discover that you just want to own. Songs I would never have bought without the services because they introduced most of the music to me. It was not the cookie-cutter broadcast radio nor the iTunes best selling. It was the similar artist features and the product's internet radio services that introduced me to new artists and therefore new songs.

Apple is patiently waiting for the downloads tail to start winding down before they drop the ultimate radio/streaming/locker service.  

It makes sense to ride out paid downloads the same way it makes sense for majors to still depend on cd sales in the big box retailers. 

Paul, I was told there are riots outside U.S. embassies because of the blasphemous picture you created. Beware!

ha ha... the Christians are a more peaceful flock.  Though I'm burdened with the heavy guilt of what I've done.

/paul

Does anyone know why Spotify insisted that all affiliate links to iTunes were removed from their product? The labels used to try to put them there and buy links to iTunes for sales. If they kept those, they wouldn't have to tell lies like this; they'd just know how much music they were selling. Impressive spin and PR department, if not an impressive product or business model.

People who walk into music stores are twice as likely to buy music than people who do not walk inot music stores.

Your comment made my day. lol

You forget. Most people don't even have the option to walk into music stores these days besides Walmart. And is that really a music store? Nah. So, digital it is.

Those users are just music freaks so if you would take away from them free Spotify they would be 10x more likely to buy from iTunes or Amazon!

I'm a music freak as you put it and have Spotify Premium. I have better sound quality then Amazon and iTunes and you want me to pay for them? Why? What's the incentive for the audiophile? Give me lossless audio quality and maybe I'll consider buying from them again!! But 256?? Fugghet about it.....

I have to agree with TheFuturist. 320k audio quality with Spotify definitely beats any of those pay per song services. You have to admit, they're really not trying to compete with Spotify on sound quality, are they?

Well I guess they finally see what we all knew 11 years ago when the napster debacle was happening...

don't tell grizzly bear

So, if 38% of Spotify users buy a car in the last 3 months, compared to 17% of non-users, then Spotify promotes car sales?

And what kind of uneducated social-media-lobotomised moron compares 38% with 17%?!?

As a heavy Spotify user and user of other legal streaming services I can tell you that I'm not among the 38% mentioned in the report. Since I have been using these streaming services I have bought less music.

Years ago, when I heard a song on the radio that I liked, I would go to a shop, listen to the album, and if I liked what I heard I'd buy the album. A lot of these albums are now stored in a cupboard in an other room, never to be played again with a few exceptions. Now that I have Spotify, I listen to a new album once, maybe twice, and go on to the next one.

I only buy albums from artists that I really like, mostly extending my collection with albums of artists that I have loved listening to in the past 20 years. New artists I hardly buy anything from. I check them one or two times on Spotify and that's it. Albums that I like get saved to playlists so I can return to them later.

sad to see so many scoffing at the idea that artists should be compensated fairly for their work.

Yeah, we know; you'd rather see the consumer (your fans) get screwed instead. If you had it your way, we would be charged $20+ for your vinyl. No, thanks!

spoken like a guy whose going to be making minimum wage his whole life.

Stop defending your shareholders

Yura Diq,

Not all of us are in the upper class like you and Mitt Romney. Us 47%ers do the best we can. Get a life, you fuc*kin loser.

Signed,

Obama is your bitch!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2+2=5

Hey tard. That equals 4.

I think he's a Radiohead fan maybe? Man, they suck. They should go back to making rock music again.

The only REAL way major labels fukt up is because they OVERESTIMATED their artists' value. Imagine if you could buy PHYSICAL COPIES of an album for $5 or less. I'm sure most of us would buy it then right? Or at least give more thought into BUYING IT than to go home, get on a computer, download the bittorent (if it's available) and converting it to CD/IPod.

Prime example: I was in the 99 cents only store the other day and there was a CD there. I never heard of the artist or the album. I never previewed it on Spotify or anything like that. I bought that album and took a chance because it was $1. It turned out to be a GREAT CD! But what do major labels do? They try to sell us CRAP for $10-$20.

Spotify pays $0.0001 - $0.004 (from what I've seen) per PREMUIM stream. The FREE users streams don't even count. Did you guys know that Spotify CHARGES at LEAST $5,000 to advertise on their site/service??? So they charge $5,000 but only pay the artists $0.0001??? The artist should AT LEAST get $0.01 per PREMIUM STREAM.

Are CD sales dwindling because of cost, or because technology is changing and people would rather carry their music around on a mobile device instead of bringing a library of CD's with them?