Worked in hospitals for years. The day my flu vaccine expired I had to go get another or I would be in violation of my contract. Has been like that for decades.
As far as I'm aware this is a very common practice for orgs with high seasonality. Have you worked somewhere with high traffic and high seasonality that doesn't implement code freezes around known peaks?
Yes, I work in a high traffic (Alexa rank above 400) ecommerce site specializing in stock photography, music and digital assets. We see a 10-15x spike around Black Friday, around Christmas to New Years, both in direct consumer sales, inventory upload, new sign ups (customers and sellers) and in ad inventory sales.
We don’t do code freezes except in very special, isolated cases of known failure risk. When we do need an isolated code freeze for one system, that is a “all hands on deck, this had better get fixed” kind of moment. If the larger system of most of our core services needed an extended code freeze to be safe, that would result in probably (justifiably) firing senior engineering leaders.
If you have a CI/CD system and you can’t trust normal automated deploys at any time, that is a huge problem. If this happened one year and you needed the code freeze, so be it - that’s just responsible risk assessment. If you intentionally plan the system to work this way every year that is egregiously bad engineering leadership.
A radio play is around 9.5 cents per play. Assuming there are no royalty splits, then that would be 11 plays to earn a dollar.
I think royalties of 1 to 3 cents per stream are completely reasonable. Subcent royalties are just platforms taking advantage of the content creators.
Which is why most artists see all the streaming platforms as merely a way to advertise for live shows and merch. That's the only way to really make money without hitting Taylor Swift levels of streams.
Going from your original numbers (which I didn’t check), a play current pays out just under half a cent (1/230), and you’d like Spotify to pay around 5 times that (avg 2c). Spotify distributes about 70% of revenue to rights holders so you’re asking Spotify to pay out ... 350% of revenue to rights holders?
Spotify could almost certainly be charging more, but it’s already incentivised to maximise revenue, and it has competitors, so it seems like it’s probably found the market value of a play?
From wikipedia: "Spotify pays royalties based on their "market share"—the number of streams for their songs as a proportion of total songs streamed on the service."
Regardless, Spotify is free to pay whatever they think is fair and artists are free to accept or reject that compensation as they will. But if you're an artist, Spotify (and the other streaming platforms, which mostly pay even less) are not going to be something that you can ever expect to be an income source.
For Spotify to pay 1/3 of radio stations, wouldn't that imply that only 3 people are listening to the radio station? I don't know what typical numbers are but that sounds... low.
Assuming your number of 1 cent/stream, and considering that 7$ out of the 10$ subscription pays for the music, that gives an average of 23 streams/day for a subscriber.
That's about 80 minutes of music per day, down to 50 minutes or less if you're sharing the subscription.
And somehow terrestrial radio stations, which have no subscription base manage to make it work.
As I said in the comment above, artists are free to NOT put their music on Spotify if they don't think it's a good deal, but regardless streaming services are only commercials for artists. Spotify is far from the worst offender. :-)
