Not if the artists have anything to say about it:
“A Musicians’ Perspective On Pandora:”
“We are big fans of Pandora. That’s why we helped give the company a discount on rates for the past decade.
Pandora is now enjoying phenomenal success as a Wall Street company. Skyrocketing growth in revenues and users. We celebrate that. At the same time, the music community is just now beginning to gain its footing in this new digital world.
Pandora’s principal asset is the music.
Why is the company asking Congress to step in and gut the royalties that thousands of musicians rely upon? That’s not fair and that’s not how partners work together.
Congress has many pressing issues to consider, but this is not one of them. Let’s work this out as partners and continue to bring fans the great musical experience they right expect".
The letter is signed by a host of high profile artists from across the musical spectrum: Katie Perry, Sheryl Crow, Rihanna, Pink Floyd, Blondie, Bill Joel, Amy Grant, Megadeth, CeeLo Green, Ted Nugent and the Dead Kennedys. To name a few.
"Gut royalties that musicians rely upon"? Well, if Pandora goes under, then they get NOTHING. What a bunch of dummies.
Let's face it, many of these musicians don't know SQUAT about business, which is why half of them have been swindled by managers/bookeepers, etc. They know music. What they say about what's fair regarding streaming audio is meaningless.
Nobody with an ounce of sense can rationalize that Pandora is taking advantage, while they pay more royalties than any other radio company in the U.S. and more than the total paid by all the radio companies in any one country outside the U.S
Over-the-air radio pays almost NOTHING compared to Pandora. Why? Because artists recognized the value in having radio promote their product. Pandora is no different than those radio companies, so why the radically higher fees? It makes no sense, and as long as congress isn't swayed by celebrity, they'll do what makes sense and equalize the fees, no matter the medium.
No, it's conjecture.
The Fact is that this is a proposal that will linger in Congress forever, and with the lobbying power of ASCAP et al, the ruling will be that they will not reduce the rates. Artists receive almost nothing from the streaming services with Pandora being one of the worst offenders. They are basically stealing the music from the artists so they can give it away for free. It's not their fault that Pandora is unable to generate enough revenue to cover their costs.
And Pandora's argument is based on a false comparison to satellite radio with regards to the percentage of revenue that is paid for royalties. I'm not sure what kind of idiot finds that a comparable statistic, but it's not even close. SiriusXM charges every customer an additional fee to cover royalty costs for the music content provided. However, a significant portion of SiriusXM content is NOT music, but rather content that is paid for by the company. The revenue generated by SiriusXM is not strictly related to music, so for Pandora to claim that their content cost % of revenue is much higher than SiriusXM is a flawed argument.