So, first of all many thanks to those who explained to me, why i-tunes is tracking magazine sales.
Attitude magazine has an app for every issue, and that is how this was tracked. Somehow, in my mind, digital reading would mean providing some kind of access to an existing web content, rather than selling a separate app for every issue of the magazine. I clearly had no idea how that was technically done. Kind of makes sense in a way to use that i-tunes app mechanism for their digital sales, but I had not really sorted that one out yet. So thanks for the enlightenment.
And obviously good for Adam that this is selling so well, digitally too.
=============================================
lilly, while I can only decipher half of what you are saying, I have to tell you, I also have a few questions regarding their math.
i.e. if you multiply their artist revenue per unit (single dl or stream) times the number in that big balloon, it should come out to the $1,260 minimum wage, I would think. Trying to follow their chart logic here. But some numbers are by factor 10 off, others are right, and a few others don't match up at all. So, I am really not sure what they did here.
Whether an artist is able to make money that way is dependent on how many people are listening via a specific platform/format combination, but also on quite a few other factors:
a) what contract they have with the label, if there is one involved
b) whether they have to split the income between multiple artists
c) whether they have songwriting credits in addition (which is not covered in this chart at all)
d) whether the service is still building a user base or is well established
etc.
In addition, it is mind-boggeling, how complicated all this is. As you can see from the ongoing lawsuit between 19 and Sony over some of the other idols, even those in the accounting departments of these companies don't know anymore what the correct numbers are. It is hard to imagine, that there are not tons of errors in this multi-level allocation logic that is the foundation for all these allotments. Basically, it is my understanding that this is what Kobalt does for the artist. Track all these income streams and try to see that their artist does not get screwed in the process.
But, it boggles my mind, how many wash cycles every penny goes through, before it lands in the artists pockets, assuming that it ever does.
In my surely simplified world it must look something like this:
For every country, every platform, count every song that was streamed and document that correctly. Ya think, they can get that right? Your guess, is as good as mine and this is the top level revenue number from which now all other calculations cascade downwards.
So, say, that for a specific song, Spotify determines that it was streamed 1000 times on a specific day. They need to calculate the resulting payment to the label for every day, add that for their accounting period and get it there correctly. And iIt is not like the label has an A/R department waiting for a specific amount or has any way to track how much they are supposed to receive, so it is a random income stream, like rain in the forest for them. Maybe they should have gotten more, maybe less, who knows.
For every penny the label receives, you would assume they also receive some information which song it was for, and now they need to start their own wash cycle. They need to engage the contractual rules they have with that artist, which usually means at first, feed their artist cost center (out of which advance, and song creation, and promotion, and allocated label overhead were paid), and if there is something left over there, then the artist gets some and the label starts making a profit. How an artist is supposed to know, whether they get what they deserve, is beyond me.
Now you add to that, that the artist gets money not only for downloads and streaming, but for commercials, and public appearances and endorsements and radio play and then you have to take the number of platforms and multiply that by all the countries, grrrrrrrr...
I personally think that nobody can untangle that mess, and there just has not been anybody yet who told the world that the emperor is naked. Sorry, I assume that artists who have somebody like Kobalt have better representation than those that don't, and that they are earning their keep, but whether they are able to undo this mess, and really understand the whole revenue chain, I have my doubts.
Clearly Adam is getting paid something, and the good news, the big bucks for him, come from QAL concerts, which are easier to track. But whether any typical artist's income from sales and streaming is correct, is a great question. Even correctly tracking the initial numbers that are the foundation of it all, or correctly managing the many algorithms that are used along the way, seems daunting.
i.e. the present conflict between Sony and 19 is about the question, whether the algorithms used, actually reflect their contractual agreement. And there are now legal teams on both sides fighting over these interpretations.
Well who is fighting for the individual artist? In Adam's case, Kobalt is doing that, but an artist who does not have anybody, is imo hopelessly screwed.