• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

SiriusXM projected to have lower subscriber gains later in 2023

Don CT said:
Yes, I love SXM. I never listen to terrestrial radio anymore.
Click to expand...
I also listen to satellite nearly all the time now. I don't like the music selection as well as tighter, more researched and stiff and dud free terrestrial services, but I can't take the long commercial breaks and the horrible production and creative in the ads today.
 
TheBigA said:
You asked about the chart. Songs are released at the same time, but they have an "IMPACT date" for the chart. For example, The Kid Laroi's new song has an impact date of Feb 7. However, hundreds of Top 40 stations are playing the song already. It's even charted at #24, so we know it's getting a lot of airplay. It will take time for it to go from #24, where it may be getting 15 or so spins a week, to #1, where it will get over 100 spins a week. But then again, we're talking about a local radio station, not a national music service.
Click to expand...
In CHR and its related Churban, Urban and Hispanic equivalents, I'd not expect a "new" add category song to play less than 4 spins a day, or about 28 a week. I figure most station don't put new songs in personality AM Drive unless it is a superstar core artist (In which case you want the morning show to present it and talk about it).

The faster you play it, the faster you can test it and determine if it is a stiff or not.
 
DavidEduardo said:
Remember that teens don't subscribe to Sirius/XM. For the in-car portion of the service, half don't drive and the majority who are old enough to drive don't own their own car. So why would the "hot currents" channels on Sirius/XM want to do something that is primarily of appeal to non-consumers?
Click to expand...
To build up Sirius/XM brand awareness for the time they decide to buy a car or home system with Sirius/XM capability?
 
TheBigA said:
Funny you should ask. They just past 200 million paid subscribers.

variety.com

Spotify Hits 205 Million Paid Subscribers, Topping User Growth Targets for Q4 With Record Total Quarterly Gain

Spotify packed on 10 million Premium customers in the last three months of 2022 to stand at 205 million, topping its previous guidance.
variety.com variety.com



Try to understand that SiriusXM makes more money in a year than the top 5 on-air radio companies put together.

talkers.com

SiriusXM 2022 Q4 Revenue Flat; 2022 Up 4% Over 2021

SiriusXM reports results from the fourth quarter of 2022 as well as the year in full. For Q4, revenue was $2.28 billion, flat compared to the same period in 2021. For the full year of 2022, revenue…
talkers.com
Click to expand...
Thanks for digging up those numbers, I almost overlooked your post here.

Very interesting.
 
Looking over those numbers, Spotify has almost 489 million subscribers, roughly half of which are paid subscribers, and they still had a net loss of 270 billion Euros (= $291 million) in the last quarter, a greater loss than the Q4 the previous year. And they cut 6% of their workforce.

If this is the future, it looks like some improvement might be needed?

RE: Sirius, if they're making more money than the top terrestrial radio companies, that's definitely a positive for them. Still, it looks like their net profit dropped year to year, but I suppose that is expectable in an economy like the one we have right now.
 
boombox4 said:
If this is the future, it looks like some improvement might be needed?
Click to expand...

Streaming is expensive. On-demand digital music royalties are more expensive than what Sirius pays. So it's likely that Spotify will have to raise its prices.


Spotify would prefer to phase out free streaming given that their ad rates aren't covering their expenses. Which is similar to what we've seen in broadcast radio.
 
TheBigA said:
Streaming is expensive. On-demand digital music royalties are more expensive than what Sirius pays. So it's likely that Spotify will have to raise its prices.


Spotify would prefer to phase out free streaming given that their ad rates aren't covering their expenses. Which is similar to what we've seen in broadcast radio.
Click to expand...
I can see why they would want to cut out free streaming -- it looks like they've been losing money for 17 years. 70% of their revenue goes to pay the royalties, which rumor mills say the music industry wants raised considerably (at least one artists' group called for Spotify to double what they pay). Even Apple reportedly pays 52 cents of every dollar made on their streaming service to royalties.

The problem, for Spotify at least, is that with cutting out free streaming, it's more than half of their listeners (who are free streamers).

So how does this all pencil out, if streaming is the future of radio? Streaming looks like a business model that -- unless big changes are made -- loses money.

Does this mean radio will lose money when they go all streaming, and get rid of their towers and transmitters? Or does it mean that OTA radio will probably be around for another 2-3 decades? My gut is probably the latter. But I'm just an observer.
 
Keep jacking up the price of a paid subscription and hope that people keep buying and existing subscribers don't bail. Another option is increasing the length and/or frequency of the commercial sets and forcing the freeloaders who can't live without Spotify to give in and get a subscription.
 
CTListener said:
Keep jacking up the price of a paid subscription and hope that people keep buying and existing subscribers don't bail. Another option is increasing the length and/or frequency of the commercial sets and forcing the freeloaders who can't live without Spotify to give in and get a subscription.
Click to expand...
It's a volume model. More subscribers the better.
 
CTListener said:
Labels, music publishers, producers and studio musicians benefit most, I believe. I'm sure BigA can clarify or correct?
Click to expand...
Who gets the biggest cut, I remember the artists getting screwed over in these deals.

Let’s say that Apple and Spotify say they are out and shut down the streaming. CDs are not coming back. How does the industry make money.
 
Don CT said:
What’s the difference between artist and musician.
Click to expand...

The leader of the session, or featured artist, gets 45%. The non-featured musicians who play on the session split the 5%.

If there are two featured artists, such as a duet, they split the 45%.

In the case of a band, such as The Beatles, the band members split the 45%, with other players splitting the 5%.
 
TheBigA said:
The leader of the session, or featured artist, gets 45%. The non-featured musicians who play on the session split the 5%.

If there are two featured artists, such as a duet, they split the 45%.
Click to expand...
What if you are an equal band. Do they split it amongst all of them.
 
Session musicians are not named and many later become unhappy because their contribution to a song goes unrecognized.
 
Harvey_Dogg said:
Session musicians are not named and many later become unhappy because their contribution to a song goes unrecognized.
Click to expand...

Musicians rights are spelled out in the union contract. They know their situation going into the session. They get paid regardless of the success of the song. It's up to the session leader to offer a portion of their royalty or bonus to certain musicians.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom