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".
There's no way to respond to that.
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.
https://sociallifemagazine.com/the-archive/90s-record-deals-...
If you actually want to defend artists... I suggest _not_ drawing equivalence between the old (bad) deal, and the new (much worse) deal.
Radio didn't pay much, but it was promotion for the album.
Spotify doesn't pay much, and it _replaces_ the album.