---
title: "Subscriber Share for streaming music"
slug: subscriber-share-for-streaming-music
section: tech
date: 2015-08-21T11:23:00.000Z
canonical: https://roland.leth.ro/blog/tech/subscriber-share-for-streaming-music
---

I recently saw [this medium post](https://medium.com/cuepoint/streaming-music-is-ripping-you-off-61dc501e7f94) linked on [The Loop](http://www.loopinsight.com/2015/08/20/who-pays-the-price-for-click-fraud-in-streaming-music/), and at first I thought "sure, this is a major issue, but, on the other hand, it seems pretty fair to be paid by the number of plays, that's what streaming means; I can't see any another way", but eventually I reached the part where he offers a solution; and I think it's perfect:

> The premise behind Subscriber Share is simple: the only artists that should receive your money are the artists you listen to. Subscriber Share simply divides up your $7 *($10 per month, -30% service fees)* based on how much time you spend listening to each artist. So if you listen to an artist exclusively, then that artist will get the entire $7, but if you listen less they get proportionately less.
> As an example, if you listen to Alt-J 25% of the time, then Alt-J would get $1.75 ($7.00 * 25% = $1.75).
> Let’s compare this with the Big Pool: if you typically stream 200 streams per month (that’s roughly 13 hours of streaming), then playing Alt-J 25% of the time would equal 50 streams. Since each stream gets a flat $0.007 per stream, the band will recieve just 35 cents. (50 * $0.007 = $0.35).

*I hope the music industry will adopt this, it just feels right.*