People see the value in the platform more than the actual art. The marketing must be doing something! I'll throw out a silly idea... recreate Spotify for the v4v artists. Monthly subscription fee (fiat) and sats go to each track listened to until the balance expires (app continues to work for the month, maybe a message to say they can top up their balance). Would need to be in a jurisdiction that allows it. And maybe the funds would need to be held for a couple months to avoid chargebacks but that's how it currently works anyway. It might be a stepping stone into v4v for listeners as well as attract artists if there are results?

Maybe this is an idea @Joe Martin for solving the fiat Bitcoin issue. I actually have no idea how to exchange Fiat for Bitcoin without having my bank account frozen - it happens here and I am very reliant on access unfortunately.

I'll bite! Let's say i have recreated spotify for the v4v artist. What do i do next? Get people to subscribe on it, or find music for the subscribers to listen to? Now of course, many musicians have less say about all this than their label. I believe this is part of the root cause: the contemporary licensing models are simply in favor of major labels.

In my mind the listener simply pays their monthly subscription in fiat and the app/platform pays the artists per stream using their RSS value block, like a fairer version of Spotify. It's just to eliminate that hurdle of "how to I get these sats things" for onloading. A larger listener base (and getting them paid more per stream) should help lure the artists. Just ideas.