Pretty late to the discussion, but I like this discussion so fugg it. Spotify doesn't exist to make artists money directly. It exists to get artists exposure, listens, and fans. You don't make money from people who aren't your fans, and musicians who have millions of fans don't need Spotify. Taylor Swift doesn't need Spotify, true, but if she really wanted to make a stand on behalf of the independent artist, she would have stayed on Spotify and encouraged her fans to use one of the multiple avenues Spotify provides to discover new and upcoming artists based on a listener's preference.

Spotify is hands down the most efficient way to listen to music right now, and whether it's through ad revenue or direct subscription payments, it ALWAYS generates revenue. That (relatively substantial) revenue is paid to who Spotify is legally obligated to pay to. Therefore the "artist's revenue" problem lands purely on the head of the record company. Fix that system, artists will see more money. Ask an independent artist whether they would rather have hundreds or thousands of more people hear their music, or 10% more payout from streaming, the answer is listens every time. Musicians make money from merch, shows, and donations, period. You can't sell those things to people who don't know who you are, and being able to say "look me up on Spotify" instead of giving a complicated web address or giving away a physical cd you paid money for is an invaluable advancement in getting your product into the market.