AfterDawn: Tech news

Music industry unimpressed with $1 billion revenue from YouTube

Written by James Delahunty @ 08 Dec 2016 6:01 User comments (7)

Music industry unimpressed with $1 billion revenue from YouTube

YouTube has paid over $1 billion to the music industry from advertising revenue, and that is apparently not enough!
Earlier this week, Robert Kyncl, Chief Business Officer at YouTube, wrote a blog post titled, "A billion reasons to celebrate music on YouTube," in which he revealed that the video service had paid over $1 billion to the music industry in the past 12 months, sourced from advertising revenue alone.

Kyncl went on to observe that this demonstrates that multiple platforms and models for monetizing music are coexisting and generating significant revenues for music companies.

He also hit an optimistic note about the growth in online advertising, at the expense of other forms of media, and what it means for generating revenue for music going forward.

$1 billion is a lot of money, but not enough according to the IFPI, which in response seemed to question even the validity of the claim.

"Google has today issued more unexplained numbers on what it claims YouTube pays the music industry," a spokesperson for the IFPI wrote.



Even if the figure is accurate, it still provides little reason to celebrate for the IFPI.

"With 800 million music users worldwide, YouTube is generating revenues of just over US$1 per user for the entire year. This pales in comparison to the revenue generated by other services, ranging from Apple to Deezer to Spotify," the IFPI responds.

"For example, in 2015 Spotify alone paid record labels some US$2 billion, equivalent to an estimated US$18 per user."

The IFPI's response ends with a statement that YouTube is not paying artists and producers anything like a "fair rate", and calls for legislative action to address the "value gap" that is denying rights holders a fair return.

Previous Next  

7 user comments

18.12.2016 06:18

GREED.

28.12.2016 12:10

When you consider that the record companies take 90% or more for themselves, it really is pretty depressing from an artist standpoint.

38.12.2016 18:39

LOL Barely any of it goes to the artist. Does he know we're not stupid?

49.12.2016 09:54

I"m sorry but they are comparing YouTube "music listeners" to Spotify "music listeners"?????

This is comparing apples to oranges.........PERIOD! It's also a reach for more money disproportionately as virtually NOBODY listens to YouTube music in the way or to the extent that they listen to music on actual "MUSIC"-specific sites like Spotify.

In comparison, VERY FEW go jogging while streaming YouTube music.

Gimme a break IFPI!!



IFPI is missing the letter 'W' at the end to establish the acronym "International F*ckos Pissing In the Wind" IFPIW

59.12.2016 17:38

Originally posted by ivymike:
GREED.
Agree with the comment above. Just how much gets to the song writers.
Still glad I use an adblock as 1 billion dollars should pay for a hell of a lot of adverts.

610.12.2016 09:01

The record industry has ALWAYS nothing but a bucket of scumbags.
"The Sopranos" did a bit about how the record companies used to add themselves as "Co-Writers" giving them a significant portion of the profits. One reason I never felt a twinge in the old days with napster and the like. I wasn't beating the actual writers or performers.

Then they pushed more coke then a Mexican big wig. Payola was just a fact. You wanted your label promoted? Just drop a few ounces on the DJ.

The Goodfellas had nothing on the record industry, and I'm sure it had some involvement.

So now a BILLION dollars is chicken feed, if it were ten billion the greedy SOB's would still want more.

710.12.2016 10:23

Does anyone really care about the music industry, or for hollywood or pro sports.
All overpaid cry babies.
Keep whining while living in your 10 million dollar homes or spending $1000 on a meal.
Wake up America. You are supporting this.

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive