Despite Reports, Don’t Look For Pandora To Be Acquired Anytime Soon

Is Pandora really up for sale? If it is the timing is extremely curious.

Pandora was said to have begun talks with Morgan Stanley to help it find a buyer, according to an initial article by the New York Times, although the talks were deemed preliminary and had no guarantee of a deal. If you look deeper into the company’s pros and cons, a sale looks a lot more fantasy than reality though, at least in the near future. 

While much of the press has focused on the financial part of a possible sale, let’s look at what may be some of the more intriguing aspects of a possible sale.

Where’s the match? 

There are only a handful of deep-pocket companies that might take a even cursory glance at a Pandora acquisition, but most are not a good fit. For instance, Google’s name is frequently mentioned as a possible Pandora suitor, mostly because of the synergy with it’s ad network, since most of Pandora’s revenue comes from ads. That said, there’s really nothing about Pandora that Google doesn’t either already have, or can’t get for less money.

Apple is another that doesn’t need what Pandora has to offer. It already has the same infrastructure for its iTunes Radio, and chances are that most of Pandora’s subscribers are already iTunes users. There’s not much that Apple would find attractive.

iHeart Media could probably find a space for Pandora among its current online radio properties, but the company reportedly has a huge amount of debt and would find it tough to swing a sale that would probably cost it around $2 billion.

Some think that Samsung might be a fit based on the company’s need to keep up with Apple in the smartphone market. The problem is that it already has a similar service in its Milk Music which hasn’t gotten any traction in the U.S. Pandora could instantly give it that traction, but to what end? Does the addition of an on-board music app make that much of a difference to the average smartphone buyer? In a word, no. Samsung would be better off pouring that $2 billion or so into R&D than adding a music app that could be obsolete in the blink of an eye.

Then there’s Amazon. I’ve been predicting for the last year that Amazon would be the next deep-pocket company to enter the streaming music market in a big way, as it’s basically there already with its Amazon Prime Music service for its Amazon Prime members. Reports have recently surfaced that the company is getting ready to introduce a mainstream streaming service not tied to Amazon Prime, and Pandora could actually be a useful addition if that were the case.

Read more on Forbes.

---

Any purchases made through our Amazon links help support this blog at no cost to you (just click here).

The Pros And Cons Of Pandora’s Rdio Acquisition

The music streaming wars just became a bit more interesting early this week when Pandora agreed to acquire some critical assets of the Rdio streaming service out of bankruptcy for a reported $75 million. This will the second strategic acquisition that Pandora has pulled off recently, following its $450 million purchase of Ticketfly a few months ago.

On the surface this seems like it could be a huge positive for the company, but there are also a few potential land mines that come with the deal. Let’s look at the pros and cons.

Pro: On-Demand Infrastructure Can Provide Growth
Pandora is acquiring Rdio’s streaming technology (as well as some of its staff), which could be key to its global expansion. Right now the service is only available in the United States, and to a lesser degree, Australia and New Zealand.

A real problem for Pandora until now has been its ability to expand beyond those territories, mostly due to the company not being able to come to a suitable agreement with the licensing organizations in various countries (which all seem to favor on-demand streaming).

The company is now more more likely to be able to grow, as having Rdio’s on-demand streaming infrastructure available as an integral part of the service not only makes for a more attractive package for the consumer, but may make it easier to gain approval to operate in other countries.

Pro: The Public Prefer’s On-Demand
Give Pandora credit, as it saw the writing on the wall that on-demand streaming would eventually become a clear winner with consumers over the radio-like non-interactive service that it currently provides.

This was blatantly evident with Apple’s recent entry into the market with it’s on-demand Apple Music after only offering the Pandora competitor Apple Radio previously. You could see the trend in user numbers as well, as on-demand Spotify’s numbers continue to grow while Pandora’s have been relatively stagnant.

Con: On-Demand Licensing Costs Are Considerable
While that on-demand infrastructure is important, Pandora didn’t inherit any of Rdio’s roughly 1 million customers in deal, mainly because it’s not buying the Rdio business itself. Maybe more importantly, it didn’t get any of its licenses with the record labels, which were non-transferable. That means that the company will need to negotiate these deals, which can be both costly and time-consuming. Read more on Forbes.

---

Any purchases made through our Amazon links help support this blog at no cost to you (just click here).

Will Indie Streams Earn Less Than Major Label Streams?

In case you've ever wondered how the streaming rates for services like Pandora and iHeart Radio are determined, it's by a trio of judges selected by the US Library of Congress called the Copyright Royalty Board or CRB.

Ever 5 years the CRB sets a new rate, which usually increases slightly each year of the five.

Non-interactive services like Pandora currently at mandated to pay $0.00014 per stream, but that's due to change in 2016, and the CRB is meeting now to determine by how much, if any, the streaming rate will increase.

There's some evidence that the CRB is looking into variable royalty rates this time around. This means that there could be one rate for the major labels, and another cheaper rate for indies.

This would be a disaster for any artist not signed directly to a major, and as you'd probably expect, the outcry from indie labels has been great.

To be clear, the CRB has NOT determined this is the way to go yet, but there's evidence that the direction has been explored. Obviously not a good thing if it happens, as all those thousand's of a cent rack up over time into some real money.

The CRB does not set the rate for on-demand streaming like Spotify, which does direct deals with the labels.

---

Any purchases made through our Amazon links help support this blog at no cost to you (just click here).

What's A Music Stream Worth?

You might wonder how the music industry determines how much a stream from a major service like Spotify or Pandora is determined. Unfortunately, that's a wildly moving target so no one can exactly say, and here's why.

• The different tiers pay differently. A free tier has a different royalty rate from a paid tier.

• Interactive vs non-interactive streams. Spotify is an interactive service because the user can select the song she wants to hear so it pays more than Pandora, which is a radio-like service and is therefore non-interactive.

• Different countries pay different rates. The US pays a different rate than the UK, which pays a different rate from Sweden, which pays a different rate from Korea, etc.

Because there's no way to determine the exact amount that a stream pays out, the industry has come up with something called a "stream equivalent album (SEA for short)." The way this works is that 1,500 streams at an average of $0.005 (a half-cent) each equals $7.50, which is the wholesale price for a CD. Therefore, 1,500 streams = one album.

Billboard began using this figure last year to help determine chart position, and the music industry has adopted it as a general sales metric.

That said, that 1,500 figure is subject to change. It was 2,000 streams in 2013, so it may be different next year as well.

---

Any purchases made through our Amazon links help support this blog at no cost to you (just click here).

Artists Get Record Payout From Soundexchange

If ever there was evidence that streaming is becoming the new music consumption paradigm, this is it. SoundExchange, the not-for-profit performing rights organization that collects non-interactive distribution royalties for copyright holders, distributed a record $267 million in the third quarter. This is up 74% over the prior year period, and almost 40% more than the previous quarter.

The good news is that at the current rate, SoundExchange distributions could reach about $800 million this year, which is what the value of digital downloads for the year is predicted to be as well. In other words, there's as nycg money being collected from just this portion of the streaming business than from all digital downloads.

SoundExchange collects for both artists and record labels (whomever owns the copyright) from non-interactive radio-like services like Pandora and iHeartRadio, satellite radio and cable music channels. Interactive streaming services like Spotify and Rdio pay the royalties directly to the copyright holder or an aggregator like CD Baby or Tunecore.

It's interesting that download sales are falling a lot more rapidly than physical product sales at this time, but the good news is that decrease is being more than offset by streaming royalties. Considering that there's only about 28 million full-price subscribers world-wide at the moment, there's plenty of room for growth, which is great news for artists and songwriters.

If you're not yet signed up with SoundExchange, you're most likely leaving money on the table if your songs are getting played on non-interactive services, so register now!

----------------------------------

Help support this blog. Any purchases made through our Amazon links help support this website with no cost to you.

Streaming Music Primer: The Different Types Of Streams

Now that it's pretty apparent that the music world is increasingly centered around streaming music distribution, many artists, bands and managers still have no idea how streaming pays and why the royalty is frequently much less than expected. Here's an excerpt from the latest edition of Music 4.0: A Survival Guide For Making Music In The Internet Age that provides a basic primer on the two types music streams.

"What most artists and bands don’t realize is that there are two different types of streaming services, and they each operate differently, and therefore pay at a slightly different rate.

Non-Interactive Streams

The first is called a “Non-Interactive” stream and this is either from a platform that acts as an online radio station like iHeart Radio or any traditional broadcaster with an online presence (like your local radio station), or a service like Pandora where the user has a certain amount of control over what plays, but  can’t directly select a song or make it repeat. Streaming platforms in this category include services like Pandora, Last.FM, and iTunes Radio.

Radio broadcasters with terrestrial radio stations pay $0.0023 (.23 of a cent) per stream. Non-interactive platforms like Pandora pay $0.0023 per stream from a paid subscriber, and $0.0013 per stream from a non-subscriber, which increases to $0.0014 in 2015.

This money is paid directly to Soundexchange and is paid out at a rate of 50% for the owner of the copyright (which could be the record label or could be you if you’re DIY), 45% to the featured artist, and 5% to unions that represent the musicians that played on the recording.

If a services like iTunes Radio also provides advertising, it pays out at a slightly different rate as a percentage of the ad revenue is added as well (pro rated of course). In the case of iTunes Radio, that rate is 15% of ad revenue until September 2014, when it increases to 19%.

Interactive Streams

Interactive or on-demand streams are treated different from the radio-style streams in that the rate is considerably higher (between $0.005 and $0.007, depending upon how much the listener pays per month). Services that provide interactive streaming include Spotify, Rdio, Mulve, and Slacker.

The downside here is that if you’re signed to a label, the money is paid directly to them first. You’ll then be paid based on the royalty amount negotiated in your agreement. For instance, if you’ve negotiated a 15% royalty, then you’ll be paid 15% of $0.005, or $0.00075. If you’re not with a label, the money will be collected by Soundexchange or an aggregator like Tunecore, Ditto Music or CDBaby if they’ve distributed you songs to the online streaming services.

On top of the royalty paid to the artist and label, there’s also a publishing royalty that varies yet again from the above rates, which we’ll cover in the next section.

You can see why artists, bands, musicians and even record labels can be confused about how much they’re receiving from streaming. As The Temptations once sang, it’s a “ball of confusion.”

That being said, every artist should register with SoundExchange, a service created by the US Copyright Office to collect performance fees for musicians featured on a recording and a song's copyright owners. SoundExchange collects money for the actual performers on a recording, not the songwriters. Go to soundexchange.com for more information."

To read additional excerpts from the Music 4.0 guidebook and my other books, go to the excerpt section of bobbyowsinski.com

----------------------------------

Help support this blog. Any purchases made through our Amazon links help support this website with no cost to you.