My experiment with a subscription deal

[Strat 56]

I wanted to experiment with the subscription model just to find out for myself exactly what I would encounter. I read the pros and cons about it all but I wanted to find out for myself. This post is geared for all of you who are curious about and considering the subscription thing. It’s based upon one site with about the going rate of a monthly subscription fee. it’s as bad and even worse than I read or thought it would be. Now I know !!! Here’s the numbers. I had 69 files downloaded, a combination of full tracks, loops and stingers. The total value of those files would be, off the top of my head, about between 1,500.00 – 1,700 dollars. my 50% cut would be around 800 dollars under normal single track licensing. I was paid a grand total of 14 dollars and some cents !!! So there you have it, my personal experience, real numbers. Needless to say I opted out immediately and will never do anything like that again. I must point out that it was under their early bird subscription price but even under their pending regular subscription pricing I still would have made under 20 dollars. So for all of you who are considering the subscription model, especially you young composers, this is what you’re looking at. What a shame that this is actually happening and becoming more common.

[Pat]

Thanks for posting your results. Cool experiment but no real surprise. I never saw or had anyone point out an advantage to subscription models that was really tangible. You pretty confirmed what I always thought.

[Strat 56]

Hi Pat. Yes, I never did come across anyone posting real numbers so that’s why i decided to try it and get the full picture, holy crap, what a shocker !!!!

[MichaelL]

Thanks for the info @Strat 56. You left out one factor, not that it makes the reality any less grim. How many tracks did you upload in order to generate 69 downloads? No matter how you slice it, your music was devalued by a huge ratio.

[boinkeee2000]

that validates the same horror stories im reading with M.E (which i didnt opt in) everything is coming full circle…so sad the state of stock music is in…

[Strat 56]

Hi MichaelL. Under their deal one’s whole uploaded catalog is available, there isn’t any option to only make select tracks available. i have around 1700 tracks there, that number includes edits. It’s also a quarterly thing. Devalued is an understatement, I felt like I was a victim of outright robbery. I can’t believe things have got to this point.

[Music1234]

Here are what my 10 subscription tracks earned last month and guess what? I have no idea how many times these were downloaded. Subscription amounts to 80% 90% price devaluation. It’s only a matter of time before we see all you can eat for $1.99 a month. There will always be some company that will step in and charge less.

3.16
1.46
2.65
1.92
…and so on (edited by moderator).
$32 of earnings, but I have to guess that the 10 songs were downloaded 4 to 25 times each

And here is what the one sync license at a time statement looked like:

$27
$27
$27
$22.50
$27
$13.50
…and so on (edited by moderator).

It’s up to you, and only you to decide what your music is worth. One thing is for sure, subscription (if it truly becomes the new normal) will eventually dismantle production music as a viable career and way to earn a living and ultimately reduce our earnings by 80%. Composers and Music Producers are enabling this. They are 100% at fault.

[Music1234]

This is where we are headed with subscription (If all composers give in)

0.00002
0.00002
0.3675
0.00012
0.00028
0.00029
…and so on (edited by moderator).

[Tbone]

Thanks Strat 56 for posting that – very interesting to see. I’ve also ended up in an experiment with one library, where the library suddenly introduced a subscription service. I figured I’d let it run for a few months but so far it’s looking very bad as well.

[Strat 56]

MichaelL. I failed to mention in my answer to you that my tracks were already uploaded to the site when they introduced their subscription plan.

[Music1234]

And this months data for 10 subscription tunes…….
Track Amount
$ 2.47
$ 0.45
$ 1.20
$ 1.26
$ 0.51
$ 1.95
$ 2.43
$ 1.83
$ 8.93

Kind of speaks for itself where this model is headed…..Pretty Pathetic.

[Strat 56]

In comparison, you actually did good, you’re on a roll there Music 1234 ! LOL ! All kidding aside, yeah, it’s quite pitiful isn’t it.

[Tele2020]

I don’t understand why companies have to change a system that already works, and that users will already pay for. It’s really cruel what the corporate world has done to hard working musicians.

[mediamusicnow]

I don’t understand why companies have to change a system that already works, and that users will already pay for. It’s really cruel what the corporate world has done to hard working musicians.

In my opinion… Greed! It works well for the company that gets committed users but devalues music.

I am a library owner and composer so can see the attraction of getting subscribed customers, however, to reduce the income that the composer receives to pennies seems like a really bad move to me. Surely we will end up with the quality of music suffering. If this happens there will be no point in spending days or weeks working on music. We will have to knock out 10+ tracks a week to get enough bulk in the subscription websites. Seems like a road to disaster to me.

I can understand that a single composer may offer a subscription option/patron model for clients, meaning that they get a regular income and the client supports their work. However, when a large company uses music (that has cost them nothing to acquire) in order to facilitate a low cost all you can use option, this is great for them but crap for the composers.

I can also understand (and offer) a limited subscription option where the client gets a discount for agreeing to monthly payments, but all you can use seems really bad to me.

As a library owner, I am now losing business to these disruptive business models and being pressured to keep considering them or lose more clients. As a composer, I am horrified that music is becoming so devalued and at best, I can create 1-2 tracks a week currently. This means that it takes a long time to create a sizable library and it is only viable if payouts are sensible. Getting pennies for hundreds of hours of work is pointless.

I think there will be the composers that do join these and composer that don’t. We will end up with a 2 tiered stock industry. If enough people stay out of them, we will end up with two sets of music. A smaller, let’s say more valued set and a larger set where composers are needing to churn them out in bulk and fast.

As a library owner, I know more is not always best. Also, I know that media clients will hunt for the right track and are prepared to pay the going rate for a license. Often £££’s and not pennies.

As a composer, it is time to draw a line in the sand and consider your value. As a library owner, it is time to decide what you value more… money or music.

Some will say do both, but if my client can find your music for pennies, why should I try and get ££ for it. I am doing my client a disservice if your music is also available for peanuts.

I know some will agree and some disagree, but this is just my take on it.

[Mc_GTR]

Yeah well, do not feed the monster. Too many composers do, but these deals are «practice» deals for 14yo kids. When buyers cant afford music, or wont pay for it, dont give it to them. You raise demand by creating scarcity. Trade 101. Eventually new buyers will come along, who will differentiate themselves on music, and beat the shi* out of the cheapskates. These things are ez, but obviously not for modern musicians. Worst business people ever.

[Author]

Posts