Trade Review: Week Eight (2/2)

Is Music Streaming Good For Album Sales?

The notion of whether or not Spotify and other music streaming services are beneficial for artists is a heated debate filled with legislations, piracy, royalties and much more. The fact that websites like Spotify pay the bare minimum for royalties over a song angers labels and artists alike ($12.50 for 90,000 streams). However, what most industry executives and artists cannot argue with is the immense exposure music streaming provides for all artists. This article observes Mumford and Sons’ sophomore album sales and whether or not music streaming inhibits their sales. For their release, the record label executives permitted the full album, Babel, to be available in the same week as its release, a strategy most artists have strayed away from. The increased availability and accessibility allowed Mumford and Sons to obtain over 600,000 records in its first week and have six Billboard top 100 songs at the same time, which has not been done by a British band since the Beatles (McCallum).

Mumford and Sons’ record label, Glassnote, proclaimed they were absolutely thrilled with the results and believed music streaming encouraged more album sales due to increased accessibility. Consumers simply being exposed to Mumford and Sons’ second album is a modest statement, for the album was played more than eight million times in the first week on Spotify (McCallum). To put it into an even more impressive perspective, one of ten songs played in that week by all Spotify users was from Babel (McCallum). Smashing previous record holders on Spotify, Glassnote was thrilled with the results as it hints at international appeal, a strong fan base and the power of word of mouth in streaming services. Music streaming is exactly what a middle-class level band on the verge of superstardom like Mumford and Sons needed to throttle their career into the upper echelons of international artist recognition.

However, music streaming is not always beneficial for all artists, where some artists refuse to even make their content available on streaming sights as a way to maintain the traditional business model of the music industry. This is commonly found amongst superstar bands and musicians because they believe music streaming has a negative, chain reactive effect on multiple streams of revenue. Yet, from the Mumford and Sons case study, music streaming appears immensely beneficial for lower to middle level bands looking for incredible exposure and opportunity. Glassnote said despite minimal royalty payout from their eight million streams, the amazing exposure of music streaming would eventually increase other streams of revenue.