Spotify pays artists the smallest amount they can possibly get away with without getting sued. Which is a tiny amount. Spotify is owned by music industry giants who needed a new money-grabbing scheme when the older schemes of the 70s-90s failed in the internet era.
A million album sales generates $2-3m for the artist under a typical label deal.
150,000,000 streams typically generates $560k _before_ the label cut.
Your posts make clear that you're a wildly immoral person -- not just because you repeatedly lie and distort to defend your position -- but the crux of your argument is "artists had a mediocre deal, so it is fine that the new deal is dramatically worse".
> but the crux of your argument is "artists had a mediocre deal, so it is fine that the new deal is dramatically worse".
No it's not. I'm saying that artists have always had a shit deal, singling out Spotify doesn't help the systematic problems. I don't use Spotify, I purchase via Bandcamp but that's also because long term its cheaper for me.
> Your posts make clear that you're a wildly immoral person
I'm immoral because I don't think that artists have ever had it good? Alright Mr. RIAA.
The big difference was radio wasn't on-demand. You couldn't just listen to a complete album. If you wanted to listen to your favorite artist, you couldn't do that on the radio without listening to a lot of other stuff.
most big ai will never compensate anyone