this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2024
484 points (96.2% liked)

Not The Onion

12271 readers
1636 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Nosavingthrow@lemmy.world 167 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Damn, spotify truly is a scourge to artists.

[–] Sludgehammer@lemmy.world 118 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

The entire music industry is built to grift money from musicians and Spotify is a second layer of musician grifting industry built on the first.

[–] Nosavingthrow@lemmy.world 17 points 2 weeks ago

You know what, you've convinced. Your specific suggestion of 'guillotine' was particularly compelling.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 124 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children)

Some years ago, an artist who was not a mega-star but was on all the major music services published an article detailing how well each one paid. I'm now kicking myself for not bookmarking it. I clearly remember Spotify being among the worst, if not the worst.

[–] Hegar@fedia.io 101 points 2 weeks ago

The musician I saw last week mentioned that he'll get more money if you buy a CD from him now than if you stream his catalog on spotify for the rest of your life.

[–] Diddlydee@feddit.uk 39 points 2 weeks ago

Snoop Dogg said he got 45k for a billion streams.

[–] tacosanonymous@lemm.ee 14 points 2 weeks ago

Fractions of a penny.

[–] jared@mander.xyz 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 14 points 2 weeks ago

I don't remember the artist's name. I'm pretty sure the article was a text post, probably a blog. Not a youtube video.

[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 66 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

Holy shit. I have feet. Does anyone want pictures of a guy's feet? They're big and weirdly shaped.

[–] celeste@kbin.earth 44 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I'm positive there is an audience for men's feet, but if you aren't 5 stars on wikifeet, you'll probably have to market yourself. Study the foot fetish community to find out what the dude foot fan needs more of. Etc.

[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 36 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Is there any way I can do this without finding out any more about this fetish?

[–] celeste@kbin.earth 17 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Hmmm...the problem is, even if you just post pictures at random, you're going to find out unwanted info based on what pics bring in money. Sounds like you'd need a manager!

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jubilationtcornpone@sh.itjust.works 29 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

I wear a men's 14. Basically the DD's of feet. My wife says I'm not allowed to show them off for free so get our your wallets folks.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Lennnny@lemmy.world 63 points 2 weeks ago (8 children)

I'm a girl, in a healthy BMI and with nice hair, pretty and freckled face, but my feet are super crappy. Like, crusty, toes bend at weird angles, hard skin in random places. Even my own husband is like "plz no, stop" if they get too near to him.

I'm now wondering if there's a market on the other end of the scale...

[–] kautau@lemmy.world 40 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

There is. There’s a fetish for everything. Certainly when it involves your feet, I’d ask your husband if he’d be ok with some internet strangers paying you every month to see your feet, the worst is he says no, and on the other hand if he says yes you have a second source of easy income

[–] Lennnny@lemmy.world 19 points 2 weeks ago

He'd probably have empathy pains for any future subscribers.

[–] neidu2@feddit.nl 19 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

It is my firm belief that, given a proper pitch, ANYTHING can be sold at a profit.

Also, there's rule 34: If a thing exists, it's someones fetish.

[–] Joeffect@lemmy.world 28 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

If it exists there is porn of it... Not sure where you got that other version from

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 19 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

I used to know a dude that would have gotten hard at your written description here. No bullshit. Dude was obsessed with feet, and what he called "real feet" were his particular favorite. Feet that had seen some life, had been used was one of the few things he would talk about. Literally obsessive about feet.

I guarantee he is not the only one. The only question is if there's enough like that to make any useful money out of a feet only business.

There's something about foot fetishists that's extra obsessive compared to any other fetishists I've run across over the years.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Post pictures of them on Onlyfans.

Add the caption "Listen up, degenerates. I'll only warn you once. I will release a new photo, closer than the previous, every hour, on the hour, until my subscriber goal is met."

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] MeaanBeaan@lemmy.world 49 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

The article contradicts the heck out of itself.

Says billboard estimates she earns roughly $4k a day from Spotify streams. Then they speculate she makes roughly 8k a month from OnlyFans.

That would be like $120k a month from Spotify and $8k a month from OnlyFans.

That is FAR from more money from OnlyFans. Even if those numbers are hugely off I don't see how the discrepancy would be THAT large.

[–] Starbuncle@lemmy.ca 39 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

That also happens to be exactly the kind of math error AI is notorious for making. I bet the article was written by AI and likely not even proofread by a human.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] doktormerlin@feddit.org 16 points 2 weeks ago

But 8 > 4??? /s

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RangerJosie@lemmy.world 46 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Good for her. If I thought there was a market for my disgusting claws I'd sell feet pics too.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 13 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Be the change you want to see in this world.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RattlerSix@lemmy.world 41 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Am I missing something? Does it not say she makes an estimated $4000 per DAY from Spotify and $8000 per MONTH from onlyfans?

[–] celeste@kbin.earth 49 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

https://www.billboard.com/music/music-news/lily-allen-feet-pictures-make-more-money-spotify-streams-1235811354/

Allen’s daily stream count on Spotify as of Oct. 17 was about 851,623. Assuming that number is correct, the Music Streaming Royalty Calculator estimates Spotify would’ve paid a total of $4,077 a day, with $3,239 going to sound recording for the copyright owner; $336 of mechanical royalties going to the publisher, who pays the songwriter; and $503 in performance royalties going to performance rights organizations (ASCAP, BMI, etc.).

Which of these numbers goes to her? I'm just confused, I think.

[–] state_electrician@discuss.tchncs.de 49 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Everybody likes to hate Spotify but if they pay out 4000 dollars a day and the artist gets nothing, that doesn't sound like Spotify is the main problem.

[–] Pringles@lemm.ee 22 points 2 weeks ago

That's pretty well known. They cut shitty deals with the record labels so they can have a large library. The record companies are making massive bank on Spotify, unlike pretty much every other party involved, including Spotify.

[–] egrets@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

There's a definite industry problem, but that doesn't excuse Spotify.

Apple Music pays artists 50-100% more than Spotify do per play, and Tidal pay triple to quadruple. Even Amazon pay artists more than Spotify; only YouTube is worse.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 25 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

An unknown and probably pitiful fraction of $336, by the looks of it.

$336 of mechanical royalties going to the publisher, who pays the songwriter

[–] RattlerSix@lemmy.world 19 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Ok I did a little searching. She might get some of the $336 to the publisher/songwriter, but only if she is credited as a writer. Not every song is written by the artist. There doesn't seem to be anything in that breakdown that goes to the artist specifically. The bulk of the money is going to the copyright owner, who is often the record company, and seems to be who owns her songs. It seems like whatever she gets paid would be up to whatever contract she signed with them.

This pdf file explains that a typical major label artist might make 18% of the $4077 per day.

https://www.manatt.com/Manatt/media/Media/PDF/US-Streaming-Royalties-Explained.pdf

If she makes $266 a day from onlyfans, she has to be making around 8% of the $3,239 the record company is getting daily for it to be less than onlyfans.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Hellinabucket@lemmy.world 19 points 2 weeks ago

The article is missing the content from the quoted article for the 4,000 a day. It pays out 4,000 a day to the studios and publishers, whatever actually % of that she gets is probably less than 10.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 34 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

I wonder how much her record label makes from her music on Spotify...

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] EnderMB@lemmy.world 33 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Something I've noticed in British media as of late is that OnlyFans makes some serious money - enough so that a creator can essentially use local journalism as an outlet for promoting their page.

I doubt some of the figures, but if you were to dig into them you'd probably see that number after the media have basically told people "look! Lily Allen has OnlyFans!"

Alongside that, funny enough, OnlyFans is probably one of the UK's biggest tech success stories. They make a lot of money, have only a few employees, and are basically leaders in their field. That's probably another weighing towards this being a promo piece.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] celeste@kbin.earth 31 points 2 weeks ago (8 children)

What's fun is that some people who read this article are probably into feet (good for them!) so it's like an ad and now she'll probably make even more on onlyfans. While still making ludicrously little from spotify.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] kaffiene@lemmy.world 19 points 2 weeks ago

Spotify is a fucking racket

[–] Rakonat@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago (14 children)

Seeing how this thread is full of hate for Spotify by seeming large number of people who are fans of streaming music/podcast services, I'll pos this question here:

What are the better alternatives for someone seeking to get their favored audios, in terms of library selection, able to form custom playlists and how much if any support to the artist/content creator actually gets to them and what is pocketed by the app?

[–] flamingo_pinyata@sopuli.xyz 16 points 2 weeks ago

I don't think there's all-in-one best option

library size

Deezer

how much is paid to the creator

Bandcamp

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

feet just dont do it for me

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

Perhaps this just means people value her feet more than music? I'm not into feet, but I really didn't like her music, so maybe this is reasonable.

[–] meowMix2525@lemm.ee 19 points 2 weeks ago

Not really. It just means onlyfans pays more than Spotify... which seems obvious to me??? A direct subscription to an artist vs only a few cents per play... yeah, no brainer, the artist is going to make less money in the latter deal.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Sumocat@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It’s worth noting that Allen doesn’t actually claim she earns more money from OnlyFans than Spotify. “imagine being and artist and having nearly 8 million monthly listeners on spotify but earning more money from having 1000 people subscribe to pictures of your feet. don’t hate the player, hate the game.”

[–] GlenRambo@jlai.lu 14 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

According to the singer, the decision has already paid off, as her monthly revenue from the subscription site has surpassed her Spotify income.

Seems like she claims monthly revenue from OG surpassed Spotify revenue.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›