Weverse Co. CEO Joon Choi stands to reply a query throughout a Tradition, Sports activities and Tourism Committee audit on the Nationwide Meeting in Yeouido, Seoul, on Oct. 7. (Yonhap)
Weverse Firm, a world fan platform run by Hybe, is dealing with backlash for forcing its accomplice labels into a compulsory paid membership service, sparking accusations of monopolistic practices. The brand new “digital membership” service, set to launch on Dec. 1, compels over 130 music labels to take part, elevating issues about coercion, unfair revenue-sharing and exploiting fan loyalty for revenue.
Based on Rep. Lee Jung-mun of the Democratic Occasion of Korea, Weverse emailed 130 accomplice labels on Sept. 26, informing them of the brand new subscription-based service tentatively known as “digital membership” and mandating their participation.
“Digital membership is a service providing followers unique digital advantages, primarily accessible by Weverse. This membership is obligatory for all artist communities hosted on Weverse, permitting followers to subscribe to particular person neighborhood memberships on a month-to-month foundation and selectively entry digital membership companies,” Weverse wrote in an e mail, which The Korea Herald completely obtained on Oct. 7.
Weverse forces labels into unfair income sharing
Weverse already offers a paid neighborhood membership choice priced at 30,000 gained ($24) yearly, providing perks like early ticket entry and unique content material, decided by the artists and their labels.
Nevertheless, the brand new service provides additional options corresponding to offline entry, ad-free video streaming and higher-quality VODs — just like YouTube’s premium service. To supply these advantages, labels are compelled right into a revenue-sharing association with Weverse, a deal many discover unfavorable.
The proposed income cut up, in keeping with an nameless supply, sees labels receiving between 40 p.c and 70 p.c of earnings, whereas Weverse retains a hefty 30 p.c to 60 p.c. This vital reduce, relying on subscription tier, has sparked discontent amongst accomplice labels, who consider the portion Weverse retains is disproportionate. The month-to-month subscription costs vary from 2,700 gained to five,400 gained ($2 to $4).
An e mail despatched by Weverse to over 130 accomplice labels on Sept. 26 introduces a brand new paid membership service, scheduled to launch on Dec. 1. (Rep. Lee Jung-mun’s workplace)
Whereas main labels listed on the Weverse platform corresponding to YG Leisure and SM Leisure might not be thrilled with this revenue-sharing mannequin, their bigger fanbases permit them to generate larger earnings in comparison with smaller labels, even with the identical stage of content material output. But, smaller labels are significantly cautious, with one label telling Rep. Lee the proposal just isn’t solely unattractive however might additionally hurt artists’ reputations by showing to use followers for cash. The obligatory strategy means that Weverse fears labels would possibly decline to hitch the service whether it is made non-obligatory.
Weverse’ monopoly leaves labels no selection
Abandoning Weverse, nevertheless, just isn’t an choice for many labels. The platform has an unchallenged grip on the Ok-pop fandom market.
As of June, Weverse boasted 10 million month-to-month energetic customers, reinforcing its dominant place. Of the 152 groups hosted on Weverse, 137 will not be Hybe-affiliated, showcasing its intensive attain. The platform caters not solely to Hybe’s teams like BTS, NewJeans and Seventeen, but in addition to acts from different Ok-pop giants like Blackpink, aespa, and EXO. Its solely actual competitor, SM Leisure’s Bubble, has simply 2 million paid customers, and that quantity is steadily declining.
On this monopolistic market construction, labels on Weverse really feel pressured to adjust to the brand new membership program, although no particulars have been offered about potential penalties for non-participation.
Hybe declined to touch upon the difficulty.
“Weverse, operated by Hybe, has been criticized as an irreplaceable, monopolistic platform within the Ok-pop business, controlling all the pieces from stay content material and merchandise gross sales to fan neighborhood administration,” Rep. Lee stated Tuesday.
“Labels have change into so depending on Weverse that they’ll now not conduct fan advertising and marketing with out it. The Truthful Commerce Fee must completely examine these new types of monopolistic practices and decide whether or not unfair therapy is going on towards affiliated corporations utilizing the platform,” Lee famous.
Followers name new membership perks nugatory
Ok-pop followers, too, are voicing dissatisfaction. They argue that the “unique advantages” supplied by the brand new membership tiers present little further worth.
Park, a 25-year-old Ok-pop fan who makes use of Weverse, finds the brand new perks much less interesting, significantly as a result of alternatives to make use of them are rare.
Baekhyun, Xiumin and Chen, members of Ok-pop group EXO, on Weverse platform (Weverse)
“It is usually joked amongst followers that the one actual advantage of the membership is early live performance ticket entry. Even that’s restricted if the artist doesn’t maintain many live shows, which lowers the general worth of the membership,” Park instructed The Korea Herald on Wednesday.
Followers additionally identified that content material like artist-produced movies or stay streams, as soon as free on platforms like YouTube, V Stay, and Instagram, at the moment are being monetized by Weverse. This shift has left followers feeling like their loyalty is being exploited for revenue.
Whereas followers perceive that Weverse, as a enterprise, must generate income, many really feel that the brand new membership tiers provide perks which are both pointless or too just like the prevailing membership. Bonuses like early live performance ticketing, fan occasion raffles and ad-free streaming will not be new, so little worth is added for present fan membership members.
“The monetization of artist content material beneath the guise of ‘new advantages’ seems like turning followers into money cows,” Park added. “It gives the look that followers are seen as mere income sources, relatively than being appreciated for his or her assist.”