• feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours 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.

  • EnderMB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    7 hours ago

    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.

    • MBM@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 hour ago

      That’s wild, I guess she was only popular in Europe? She had a bunch of big hits around 2010, like “Fuck You” which was about George Bush

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        18 minutes ago

        I’m American and I knew about her. Smile was at least a modest hit.

        I said above that the album that was on, Alright, Still, is a really good album.

        Edit: from Wikipedia-

        Alright, Still debuted at number 20 on the Billboard 200 in the United States, with first-week sales of 34,000 copies.[51] The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) awarded the album a gold certification on 6 December 2007,[52] and by November 2013, it had sold 627,000 copies in the US.

        That’s a bit less than half of UK sales, which is pretty good for a British artist in the U.S.

    • justabaldguy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Would it? Another way to word this might be “Platform with 8,000,000 monthly streamers/listeners pays less than platform of 1,000 subscribers to view pictures.”

      I don’t think this individual’s identity enters into it at all. That sentiment comes across as a deliberate, mean-spirited attempt to denigrate this person.

      Whether or not selling pictures of one’s anatomy is a viable career, or a morally questionable career, or any questions along these lines are a separate discussion. This article to me points out the drastic discrepancy in two services, yet again calling attention to the issue of artists and their earnings when utilizing Spotify as a distribution platform.

      • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        48 minutes ago

        Another way to word this might be “Platform with 8,000,000 monthly streamers/listeners pays less than platform of 1,000 subscribers to view pictures.”

        Think about it for a minute and it becomes pretty clear that shouldn’t be surprising at all

        You subscribe directly to someone on Onlyfans, you subscribe to Spotify as a whole and your listening habits help split the bill. If both are ~10 bucks a month of course one is going to make you more money than the other

        Especially if they’re a lesser known artist. Even if they’re getting listened to, if the same people listen to 3x as much swift or whatever that will impact the lesser known persons earnings

        This article is a dog shit way to bring attention to Spotifys issues, simple as

  • Rakonat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    7 hours ago

    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?

    • polographer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      27 minutes ago

      Go to their concerts, buy the official merchandise and get CD’s or pay the whole albums like on qobuz (they also have streaming, but they sell hi-res flac)

      Streaming is not designed to benefit the artist

    • kerrigan778@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Tidal, or buy albums and self host if you’re up for it but I feel like that’s not a real option for most.

    • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 hour ago

      There are none.

      All of the services steal from artists, so I’d recommend ripping MP3 tracks from Youtube. There are several tools online for this purpose. Yes, the artist gets nothing, but the more important thing is the services stealing from the artists don’t get anything either.

      Do this and then compensate the artist in other ways. Buy music directly from them if you can, or buy their merch, or something of that ilk.

        • Nollij@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          At a recent (niche) music festival, they said it takes 50,000 streaming songs to pay the artist as much as a single CD sale.

        • nimble@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          That is a complex question but my line of thought is this: artists have accepted legal agreements on how to sell/stream their work and how much they get for it. You as a consumer don’t need to worry about this. If there is a way to buy/stream the product legally then the artist has approved of getting money that way.

          Basically i don’t think this should be a point to discourage buying audio and owning it. The alternative is never owning music and tough luck if a song gets pulled because of legal disputes or whatever.

  • Mango@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I love how the whole crowd of people that used to be all “what, you don’t have a Spotify account?!” Are now starting with the “wait a minute, these guys are domineering and bad!” Like the signals for crowd abuse aren’t plain as day.

    This exploitative behavior will be down by literally any company that sets themselves up to be “the streets” that you gotta navigate to interact with someone else or their media. That means YouTube, Facebook, and also all those physical places on Earth.

    • bitchkat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I had a 6 month trial of Spotify for $1 so I thought I’d try it to see if it would help me discover new music. It only has about 70% of the albums in my collection. I wasn’t willing to lose 30% of my music so it’s back to USB in the car and plexamp everywhere else.

    • Mango@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      So come on over, what you waiting for?

      No strings attached, no you won’t be ignored!

      We could be family; you’ll be comfortable

      Ever expanding; fully functional!

      You won’t have to answer to anyone!

      You’ll always have room to breathe!

      We all worship at the house of fun!

      We are the well intentioned!

      We only fight in the name of peace!

  • Lenny@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 hours ago

    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…

    • bluewing@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Due to the people being people, who knows who has what kinks. I suppose there is only one way to find out.

      And no, I’m not into feet myself.

    • neidu2@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 hours ago

      It is my first 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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

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

        • skye@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          8 hours ago

          You can probably extrapolate from “if it exists, there is porn of it (no exceptions)”.

          If there is porn of something, the most likely reason is that someone has a fetish for it.

          If the person making the porn doesn’t have a fetish for said thing, then they’re making it for an existing market of people.

          QED, you can say “if it exists, someone has a fetish for it”

          P.S: What if there isn’t porn of something? Rule 35 states that if it doesn’t exist, it will be made.

          • brygphilomena@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            3 hours ago

            Just because you can extrapolate something from it, doesn’t mean you can change the words in the rule. They got the rule wrong, simple as that.

          • untorquer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            7 hours ago

            You have fundamentally misunderstood millennial meme culture ca. 2006 (roughly when the rules were made).

            No one having a fetish for it would be extremely motivating to create such porn. People realized after it was made that they had a fetish for it. See: Shrek.

            So technically you can still say “if it exists, someone has a fetish for it” but you’ve relied on correlation to determine causation and gotten it backwards. This is a great example of why we don’t do that.

    • Agent641@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours 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.”

    • kautau@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      11 hours ago

      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

    • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      10 hours ago

      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.

      • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        See, I can kinda get it for some elegant and well kept ones and I’d definitely down for some foot play in such cases. But I don’t know if that would even classify as a foot fetish when I constantly hear about how bad people have it for the (pardon) “ugly” and unkempt ones, which I just find weird.

        But yeah… I mean, there’s like 8 billion people on this planet. There’s always some niche where one fits into that would get someone off and could be capitalized if they’d be willing to do so. Just keep in mind that you’re, in the end, still selling your body for sex in a way.

        • SplashJackson
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 hours ago

          To be honest, I’d rather sell my body for sex instead of selling my body to backbreaking warehouse work

      • /home/pineapplelover@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 hours ago

        I wonder how onlyfans pay model works. If they take a percentage and you don’t need to put any initial funds down to start then you’ll basically have nothing to lose.

    • Maalus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Some people just don’t like feet / being near them etc. Had girlfriends who would freak out if we somehow touched feet (even with socks on).

    • KoalaUnknown@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      28 minutes ago

      Yep, spotify pays a fraction of what napster, tidal, and apple music pay while raking in record profits each year.

    • Sludgehammer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      95
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 hours ago

      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.

  • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    100
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    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.

      • Nutteman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        12 hours ago

        I’m a big feet man and damn is it annoying when I go to a rollerskating or ice skating rink and the largest size they rent is 13 :(

          • Graphy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            10 hours ago

            What’s up fellow size 14s!

            I often joke that I’m the person happiest that malls have died off because as a kid I was always forced to go there and try on a a bunch of 12s and 13s that never fit.

            These days I’m still upset that so many good looking shoes only go up to 13

    • celeste@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      13 hours ago

      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.

        • celeste@kbin.earth
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          12 hours ago

          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!

    • Nollij@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Leaving you with 80% of the revenue you, yourself, directly generate is unheard of in this day and age. If you have anything like a 9-5, you’re probably getting around 10-20%. The rest goes to all your bosses, and most importantly of all, the company shareholders.

    • Letstakealook@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Maybe. Without it, though, the individual would have to build and maintain a site, direct traffic there, and handle payments, as well still do all of the community management and content creation they already do. Now either they’d spend their own time doing this if they have the knowledge, or pay others, which might meet or exceed that 20% depending on their income level.