<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Spotify: Labels Win, Artists Lose?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.themusicvoid.com/2009/10/spotify-labels-win-artists-lose/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.themusicvoid.com/2009/10/spotify-labels-win-artists-lose/#utm_source=rss&amp;utm_medium=rss&amp;utm_campaign=spotify-labels-win-artists-lose</link>
	<description>One of the music industry’s leading sources for music industry opinions, insights and interviews.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 02:50:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ant Daly</title>
		<link>http://www.themusicvoid.com/2009/10/spotify-labels-win-artists-lose/comment-page-1/#comment-2699</link>
		<dc:creator>Ant Daly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 23:01:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.themusicvoid.com/?p=1446#comment-2699</guid>
		<description>am i the only one missing the point with spotify?
I totally understand the service from a consumer point of view. Free access / Subscription if i want.
I just don&#039;t get this from a label point of view, surely the ad generated revenue cannot make up for the shortfall in revenue from consumers trying before they buy, and only purchasing individual tracks rather than the whole album, because they have heard what they liked ahead of purchase?
does anyone have any information to argue to the contrary?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>am i the only one missing the point with spotify?<br />
I totally understand the service from a consumer point of view. Free access / Subscription if i want.<br />
I just don&#8217;t get this from a label point of view, surely the ad generated revenue cannot make up for the shortfall in revenue from consumers trying before they buy, and only purchasing individual tracks rather than the whole album, because they have heard what they liked ahead of purchase?<br />
does anyone have any information to argue to the contrary?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael</title>
		<link>http://www.themusicvoid.com/2009/10/spotify-labels-win-artists-lose/comment-page-1/#comment-2170</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 16:16:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.themusicvoid.com/?p=1446#comment-2170</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s difficult for creators to get too enthusiastic. Yes, it&#039;s always nice that big numbers of people tune into music. Yes, it&#039;s nice to have good news from music start-ups. But Spotify seems to be grabbing an awful lot of column inches for something that will be entirely marginal to the business of creating music. Online streaming royalties are the joke of the community for the moment. In fact, one small labels dubbed the entire online business as, &quot;Nice, like having a second milk round&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s difficult for creators to get too enthusiastic. Yes, it&#8217;s always nice that big numbers of people tune into music. Yes, it&#8217;s nice to have good news from music start-ups. But Spotify seems to be grabbing an awful lot of column inches for something that will be entirely marginal to the business of creating music. Online streaming royalties are the joke of the community for the moment. In fact, one small labels dubbed the entire online business as, &#8220;Nice, like having a second milk round&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
