Connect with us

Published

on

Musicians and songwriters receive “pitiful returns” from streaming and the entire model is in need of a “complete reset”, an inquiry has concluded.

Following several hearings involving stars including Chic’s Nile Rodgers, Elbow’s Guy Garvey, Radiohead‘s Ed O’Brien and solo singer Nadine Shah, as well as bosses from major record labels and streaming platforms, the digital, culture, media and sport committee has found that artists are not being fairly rewarded for their work.

Artists including Noel Gallagher, Robert Plant, Rebecca Ferguson and Lily Allen are among a host of stars who have called on Boris Johnson to update the law on streaming rights, while Gary Numan told Sky News he received just £37 for a hit that had been streamed more than a million times.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Gary Numan: ‘It isn’t even worth printing out the statement’

The DCMS committee report, released on Thursday and based on more than 300 pieces of evidence, raises “deep concerns” about the position of the major music companies in the market.

MPs on the committee are now calling on the government to refer the case to the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) to launch a study into the “economic impact of the majors’ dominance”. They also say a system of equitable remuneration for streaming income – where performers have a right to receive a share without reference to their label contracts – should be introduced.

According to the Broken Record campaign, artists receive around 16% of the total income from streams – while record companies take around 41% and streaming services around 29% – figures that both the Musicians’ Union and independent trade body the Ivors Academy have described as “woefully insufficient”.

Recommendations made following the inquiry include:

  • The introduction of measures allowing music creators to recapture the rights to their work from labels after a period of time
  • Give artists the right to adjust contracts if their work is successful beyond the remuneration they receive
  • The government should introduce legally enforceable obligations to normalise licensing arrangements for user-generated content-hosting services such as YouTube
  • The government should also require publishers and collecting societies to publish royalty chain information to provide transparency to artists about how much money is flowing through the system

Some successful and critically acclaimed musicians are seeing “meagre returns” from streaming, while non-featured performers on songs are being “frozen out altogether”, the report states.

Streaming started to come under increased scrutiny in 2020, with artist revenue from live performances pretty much wiped out by COVID-19.

During his evidence session in December, Chic frontman Nile Rodgers described the current system as “unfair” and said artists are “really kept in the dark” about the worth of their music. At an earlier hearing in November, Garvey, O’Brien and Shah warned that the future of music in the UK is under threat as many artists were struggling with living costs.

Nadine Shah, whose album ‘Holiday Destination’ has been nominated for the Mercury Prize 2018, poses for a photograph ahead of the ceremony at the Hammersmith Apollo in London, Britain, September 20, 2018. REUTERS/Henry Nicholls
Image:
Nadine Shah, whose album Holiday Destination was nominated for the Mercury Prize in 2018, told the inquiry that despite her success she struggled as the pandemic hit and her income relied almost solely on streaming

Shah, a Mercury Prize nominee, became emotional and said she was “embarrassed” to talk about it publicly but admitted she falls into that bracket, saying that despite her success her earnings from streaming are not “enough to keep the wolf away from the door”.

In February, bosses at Spotify, Apple and Amazon defended their streaming models but agreed they would potentially be willing to “get together” to explore options.

Record labels Sony Music, Warner Music and Universal Music also appeared before MPs during the sessions.

Following the release of the inquiry’s report, chair of the DCMS committee Julian Knight said: “While streaming has brought significant profits to the recorded music industry, the talent behind it – performers, songwriters and composers – are losing out.

Subscribe to the Backstage podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, Spreaker

“Only a complete reset of streaming that enshrines in law their rights to a fair share of the earnings will do.

“However, the issues we’ve examined reflect much deeper and more fundamental problems within the structuring of the recorded music industry itself.

“We have real concerns about the way the market is operating, with platforms like YouTube able to gain an unfair advantage over competitors and the independent music sector struggling to compete against the dominance of the major labels.

“We’ve heard of witnesses being afraid to speak out in case they lose favour with record labels or streaming services. It’s time for the government to order an investigation by the Competition and Markets Authority on the distortions and disparities we’ve uncovered.”

Continue Reading

Business

UK-US pact neither a free-trade agreement nor broad trade deal of Brexiteer dreams

Published

on

By

UK-US pact neither a free-trade agreement nor broad trade deal of Brexiteer dreams

Sir Keir Starmer was at home in Downing Street, watching Arsenal lose in the Champions League, when he got a call from Donald Trump that he thought presented the chance to snatch victory from the jaws of trading defeat.

The president’s call was a characteristic last-minute flex intended to squeeze a little more out of the prime minister.

It was enough to persuade Sir Keir and his business secretary Jonathan Reynolds, dining with industry bosses across London at Mansion House, that they had to seize the opportunity.

Money blog: What interest rate cut means for your money
Key details of ‘historic’ trade deal
PM must show public how trade deal benefits them

The result, hurriedly announced via presidential conference call, is not the broad trade deal of Brexiteer dreams, and is certainly not a free-trade agreement.

It’s a narrow agreement that secures immediate relief for a handful of sectors most threatened by Mr Trump’s swingeing tariffs, with a promise of a broader renegotiation of “reciprocal” 10% tariffs to come.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘A fantastic, historic day’

Most pressing was the car industry, which Mr Reynolds said was facing imminent announcements of “very difficult news” at Britain’s biggest brands, including Jaguar Land Rover, which sounds like code for redundancies.

In place of the 25% tariffs imposed last month, a 10% tariff will apply to a quota of 100,000 vehicles a year, less than the 111,000 exported to the US in 2024, but close enough for a deal.

It still leaves the car sector far worse off than it was before “liberation day”, but, with one in four exports crossing the Atlantic, ministers reason it’s better than no deal, and crucially offers more favourable terms than any major US trading partner can claim.

For steel and aluminium zero tariffs were secured, along with what sounds like a commitment to work with the US to prevent Chinese dumping. That is a clear win and fundamental for the ailing industries in Britain, though modest in broad terms, with US exports worth only around £400m a year.

US and UK announced trade deal
Image:
US and UK announced trade deal

In exchange, the UK has had to open up access to food and agricultural products, starting with beef and ethanol, used for fuel and food production.

In place of tariff quotas on beef that applied on either side (12% in the UK and 20% in America) 13,000 tonnes of beef can flow tariff-free in either direction, around 1.5% of the UK market.

The biggest wins

Crucially, sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) production standards that apply to food and animal products, and prevent the sale of hormone-treated meat, will remain. Mr Trump even suggested the US was moving towards “no chemical” European standards.

This may be among the biggest wins, as it leaves open the prospect of an easing of SPS checks on trade with the European Union, a valuable reduction in red tape that is the UK’s priority in reset negotiations with Brussels.

Farmers also believe the US offers an opportunity for their high-quality, grass-fed beef, though there is concern that the near-doubling of ethanol quotas is a threat to domestic production.

Technology deals to come?

There were broad commitments to do deals on technology, AI and an “economic security blanket”, and much hope rests on the US’s promise of “preferential terms” when it comes to pharmaceuticals and other sectors.

There was no mention of proposed film tariffs, still unclear even in the Oval Office.

Taken together, officials describe these moves as “banking sectoral wins” while they continue to try and negotiate down the remaining tariffs.

Follow The World
Follow The World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

The challenge from here is that Mr Trump’s “reciprocal” tariff is not reciprocal at all. As commerce secretary Howard Lutnick proudly pointed out in the Oval Office, tariffs on US trade have fallen to less than 2%, while the UK’s have risen to 10%.

As a consequence, UK exporters remain in a materially worse position than they were at the start of April, though better than it was before the president’s call, and for now, several British industries have secured concessions that no other country can claim.

From a protectionist, capricious president, this might well be the best deal on offer.

Quite what incentive Mr Trump will have to renegotiate the blanket tariff, and what the UK has left to give up by way of compromise, remains to be seen. Sir Keir will hope that, unlike the vanquished Arsenal, he can turn it round in the second leg.

Continue Reading

Business

Energy customers secure compensation for overcharging error

Published

on

By

Energy customers secure compensation for overcharging error

Tens of thousands of household energy customers have secured payouts after a compliance review found they had been overcharged.

The industry regulator said that 10 suppliers had handed over compensation and goodwill payments to just over 34,000 customers. The total came to around £7m.

Ofgem said those affected, between January 2019 and September last year, had more than one electricity meter point at their property recording energy usage.

Money latest: Which gender wastes most on fad hobbies?

It explained that while suppliers were allowed to apply multiple standing charges for homes with multiple electricity meters, it meant that some were “erroneously charged more than is allowed under the price cap when combined with unit rates”.

The companies affected were revealed as E.ON Next, Ecotricity, EDF Energy, Octopus Energy, Outfox The Market,
OVO Energy, Rebel Energy [no longer trading], So Energy, Tru Energy and Utility Warehouse.

Of those, Octopus Energy accounted for the majority of the customers hit.

More on Energy

Ofgem said that the near-21,000 customers impacted had received compensation of £2.6m and goodwill payments of almost £550,000.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Govt commits £300m to wind farms

The redress was revealed at a time when energy bills remain elevated and debts at record levels in the wake of the 2022 price shock caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Higher wholesale natural gas prices over the winter months meant that the price cap actually rose in April when a decline would normally be seen.

Read more from Sky News:
The key details in ‘historic’ US-UK trade deal
Pope Leo to lead first mass in Sistine Chapel

The latest forecasts suggest, however, that bills should start to decline for the foreseeable future.

Charlotte Friel, director of retail pricing and systems at Ofgem, said of its compliance operation: “Our duty is to protect energy consumers, and we set the price cap for that very reason so customers don’t pay a higher amount for their energy than they should.

“We expect all suppliers to have robust processes in place so they can bill their customers accurately. While it’s clear that on this occasion errors were made, thankfully, the issues were promptly resolved, and customers are being refunded.”

The watchdog added that all ten suppliers had updated their systems and processes to prevent the error occurring in future.

Continue Reading

Business

Interest rate cut to 4.25% by Bank of England

Published

on

By

Interest rate cut to 4.25% by Bank of England

The Bank of England has cut interest rates from 4.5% to 4.25%, citing Donald Trump’s trade war as one of the key reasons for the reduction in borrowing costs.

In a decision taken shortly before the official confirmation of a trade deal between Britain and the United States, the Bank’s monetary policy committee (MPC) voted to reduce borrowing costs in the UK, saying the economy would be slightly weaker and inflation lower in part as a result of higher tariffs.

However, it stopped short of predicting that the trade war would trigger a recession.

Money latest: What rate cut means for you

Further rate cuts are expected in the coming months, though there remains some uncertainty about how fast and how far the MPC will cut – since it was split three ways on this latest vote.

Two members of the nine-person MPC voted to reduce rates by even more today, taking them down to 4%. But another two on the committee voted not to cut them at all, leaving them instead at 4.5%.

In the event, five members voted for the quarter point cut – enough to tip the balance – with the accompanying minutes saying that while “the current impact of the global trade news should not be overstated, the news was sufficient for those members to judge that a reduction in Bank Rare was warranted.”

Even so, the Bank’s analysis suggests that while higher tariffs were likely to depress global and UK economic growth, and help push down inflation, the impact would be relatively minor, with growth only 0.3% lower and inflation only 0.2% lower.

Governor, Andrew Bailey, said: “Inflationary pressures have continued to ease, so we’ve been able to cut rates again today.

“The past few weeks have shown how unpredictable the global economy can be. That’s why we need to stick to a gradual and careful approach to further rate cuts. Ensuring low and stable inflation is our top priority.”

Read more:
Federal Reserve eyes impact from Trump tariffs

The Bank raised its forecast for UK economic growth this year from 0.75% to 1%, but said that was primarily because of unexpectedly strong output in the first quarter.

In fact, underlying economic growth remains weak at just 0.1% a quarter.

It said that while inflation was expected to rise further in the coming months, peaking at 3.5% in the third quarter, it would drop down thereafter, settling at just below 2% towards the end of next year.

Continue Reading

Trending