Subscription Models Must be Destroyed!

[guscave]

NO composer, even those just starting out would agree to terms of $0.17 a license if they KNEW what was happening

I wish that were true, however take a look at what’s happening with online beat sales. Producers are giving away tracks for free with the hope that buyers will come back and buy additional beats. This use to be a market where Artists would easily buy your tracks for $50 and up. Now producers have basically created a market where new Artist doesn’t think they should pay for music.

Personally I don’t think the subscription model will creep into the back-end TV/film world, but I can see where it would give libraries like Pond5, AudioJungle, etc a run for their money.

[nwcomposer123]

I made over $40k last year from these models. How can I justify walking away from that? The volume and client base is there and as long as I’m creating new music, I am being paid far more than any single-license service I’m working with.

[nwcomposer123]

I’d rather adapt and be a part of new trends in the industry than rest it and all of a sudden be on the outside looking in.

[Tbone]

How many tracks did you have in how many subscription libraries to make that?

How much did you get per license?

[MM_Musicworks]

Wow that’s highly impressive… Congrats!

[guscave]

I made over $40k last year from these models.

That’s a very impressive number. How many tracks did you need to upload to get to this point?

[Music1234]

I am listening too. A random statement without additional supporting evidence is kind of hard to take seriously unless all the facts are presented.
How many tracks are in how many subscription services?

What 3 people told me is this: With 100 to 350 tracks their earnings have been $1500 to $2100 a month. It started a little slow…around $700 to start. These are 3 writers who have been and still are top selling writers in the sync license market. They were making between 4K and 15K a month in the regular sync market typically selling 300 to 800 licenses a month.

They all also have stated to me that they highly doubt their subscription earnings will ever grow to match sync licensing royalties.

Unfortunately it does look like were heading towards another devaluation phase in our business, but only artists themselves are to blame. I don’t know what else to say, but I am not encouraged.

They have no clue as to how many downloads have occurred, but it has to be easily around 5,000 to 10,000 downloads each month. Imagine that. Your music just morphs into a free for all commodity for thousands to download at will.

[Tbone]

I’m with Music1234 on this. I am not at all surprised by the figures from those other composers. If anything I’d expect subscription income to be even lower than those numbers, and much much lower than regular sync.

One question though: why did these top writers decide to put their music into this subscription model? Can they get it back?

[Music1234]

Tbone, I saw statements first hand. Why they joined? Hmmm… great question…some of it is ignorance, some of it is greed and paranoia, some of it is fear of missing out and some stated “I joined because I was invited to join the new model so I did.” Others say “I guess I just have to adapt to the changes”.

They can move their music on and off the model as they please. There is no contract that they must stay for a certain period of time. The music is simply Ubiquitous . There is no information as to who is “licensing” the music nor for what type of project, nothing, just “unlimited action” and never ending downloading activity. A free for all for all customers who subscribe to the service.

There are no download counts on the statements these guys get. These site operators would not dare divulge that information because then maybe composers would wake up to how insane this business model is for writers.

[Tbone]

Interesting.. so did they just place their entire non-exclusive catalog with the subscription libraries? Or write new material?!

[Author]

Posts