What If Artists Owned Patreon?
Exploring commons-based models that put artists at the center of the economy.
This week, I’ve been reflecting on how hard it still is to make a living as an artist—despite all the platforms, promises, and experiments in alternative economies. Many ideas look promising on paper. But in reality? There’s often no follow-up, no implementation, and no stories from artists themselves.
Crypto-backed collectives? Most are built for digital artists. Many of us—painters, performers, printmakers—remain locked out. And even where new tools exist, they often replicate the same scarcity-based logic of the market, offering more ways to sell but not necessarily more ways to survive.
So I went looking for models that actually help artists earn a sustainable living. Not just through exposure or audience growth—but through shared infrastructure, reduced risk, and long-term possibility.
Guaranteed Income: Strong Evidence, Shifting Strategy
I spent some time reading about Guaranteed Income (GI) pilots in the U.S., and the findings are remarkably consistent.
There are now over 130 active GI pilots across the nation1.
The evidence is clear: unrestricted cash reduces poverty and improves employment, health, and community well-being2.
As a result, GI advocates are shifting energy away from new pilots and toward permanent policy change.
These pilots confirm what many artists already know: when basic needs are met, creativity flourishes. GI doesn’t tell people how to spend the money. It trusts them. And trust is a powerful economic engine. It’s a model built not on hustle, but on dignity.
This got me thinking: What if we applied some of these lessons—like pooling resources and redistributing income—to artist-run platforms?
Case Study: A Cooperative Alternative
One model I came across is Subvert.fm3—a community-driven music platform designed as a cooperative. Artists and labels sell music and merch directly to fans, just like Bandcamp. But there’s a key difference:
At Subvert.fm, artists earn ownership shares by contributing to the community—through sales, governance, or inviting others. These shares have real monetary value tied to the platform’s performance.
In short: the better the platform does, the more artists benefit. This redistributes both value and voice. Members help shape platform policies, vote on major decisions, and build equity in a space they co-own.
But It’s Not a Magic Fix
Cooperatives aren't automatic paychecks. Here’s why some members may not earn:
No guaranteed sales — It’s still a marketplace.
Contribution ≠ compensation — Community roles are often unpaid.
Uneven visibility — Some artists need time to grow.
Reinvestment happens — Profits may go back into the platform.
A cooperative is a framework, not a shortcut. It’s not meant to eliminate the need for effort or audience-building—but it gives artists a stake in the outcome and a support system for the journey.