As said here a few weeks ago, things are happening in the music industry.

One of them seems to be everyone finally gets it: digital sales are up and there's no going back. Already digital is a hefty part of revenues (Warner's digital sales account to roughly 33% of its revenues now) and digital portals are paying labels and artists more than they ever did. Which isn't much when detailled individually and the debate is still raging on whether the common rate per stream actually allows songwriters and artists to make a living. On the other hand, it's more than one would get from his work being pirated so there you go: we need to work upwards, not downwards.

And this is something that business savvy people and companies have understand as the money invested in music start-ups is 34% above what it was in 2011 ! We're talking lots of green here as 600.000.000 $ have been invested in music dedicated new companies.
If one details the numbers, Spotify, Deezer and Sonos (wireless Home Music system and hifi music players) account for most, but even below them one can see and feel the excitement music start ups generates these days.

We believe a new crop of...

Ok, for a few days we had a go at the bright side of streaming music: the longer life of the tracks, the recommendations, the playlists. It all is fine and nice and extremely addictive and from a pure consumer's point of view it's brilliant. But then, there's the artist's point of view where he/she is being paid roughly 0,006 € per stream and that is an angle we just cannot forget. But can we forgive ?

Damon Krukowski, he of the excellent Galaxy 500 band and now in Damon & Naomi, has some interesting thoughts on the matter on Pitchfork. He sat down and made some maths and wherever you look at it, it's an abyss for small artists and newcomers. Comparing to the superb 1988 Tugboat 7" from Galaxy 500, it would take 13.000.000 streams on Pandora to earn as much as the 1000 Tugbat they released back then. Something is wrong with the maths at Spotify and Pandora ? No, they actually count very well, they are just not in the business of making selling music a mean of living for artists, they are in the business of their own capitalization. They're selling to customers an access to something they hardly pay. They are procuring these customers a formidable and economical...

Captivating article on Daniel Ek, boss of Spotify, in Quartz, where the journalist asks the question that irritates thousands of musicians across the globe: how am I to make any money with only 0,006 € paid each time someone plays my music ?

According to Ek, who we believe has strong data to show, it will take about 200 streams of his song before an artist will make the same amounf of a download but the period of "bliss" his music can enjoy is much, much larger.
See, before it all went bad, a CD was pushed during its initial period and you would see it peaking weeks later and having a drop in sales. With Spotify, you're adding other elements to the equation: when the initial period is over, the music is still being pushed thanks to the people's playlists and the fans talking about it and then the recommendation process kicks in. This, to him, is the beauty of streaming: it is like paying an artist everytime the needle is on the record and not just once when you buy the record...This extended period where a record enjoys being picked up by fans and consumers is somehow the return of the mythical long tail.

Ek believes that the music industry will stop...