Hacker News Reader

Comment by istvan__ | Hacker News Reader

"In early 2015, Bandcamp released an announcement that artists using the website had officially gotten $100 million in total from music sale"

Total music industry is 15B (afaik). It is 1/150th of the entire music industry and that is just one site. I think the artist make more on Bandcamp and other music distribution platforms than on big labels, that might be the reason why Bandcamp is greatly successful.

View on HN

You left out the source for that quote, but it appears to be from Wikipedia, which has this[1] as a source.

From that article I get the impression that the $100 million refers to all money paid during the existance of Bandcamp, while I suppose the 15B is annual? The article says that Bandcamp has revenue of $3.5 million a month (= $42 million a year), most of which goes to artists.

[1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/hughmcintyre/2015/03/10/direct-t...

All correct what you are saying. This was exactly my point that Bandcamps revenue goes to artists (mostly).

Well that's incredibly positive and I wasn't aware of that. I'm used to seeing more of the news that artists get almost no money through Spotify and similar channels or that consumer websites like Pandora getting legally harassed.

Bandcamp is very different though - you buy and own your music there. An album bought is worth much more to an artist than fractions of a cent per stream.

I'm not surprised that Bandcamp has been doing that well for a long time now. In contrast to all those streaming services it's a business model that seems to be sustainable.

I never liked Pandora, I was forcing myself to use it but they have limited music and their recommendation engine was a joke. It might work for hip-hop vs. heavy metal context but when it comes to sub-genres in electronic music not so much.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com