Horus Music Limited

Payment Discrepancy Patterns

Artists earning meaningful streaming revenue report systematic payment reductions substantially below industry benchmarks. One user documented raw Spotify data showing approximately $4,000 in platform-reported earnings versus $300 received in distributions, with the company declining to explain the discrepancy. Another artist compared per-stream rates: “Apple Music shows 0.001 EUR per-stream rate from Horus versus 0.005-0.01 USD from my previous distributor.”

Multiple users describe similar patterns across platforms, with one reporting royalties at one-tenth of their previous distributor’s rate for comparable streaming volumes. An October 2025 independent analysis aggregating user-reported data calculated payment reduction rates of 73-95% across multiple artists. When questioned, support responses consistently deflect: the company claims to pay “100% of royalties you’re entitled to receive” while noting “each distributor has different agreements with DSPs,” offering no transparency regarding specific platform contract terms.

Thirty-plus independent testimonials from 2024-2025 across Trustpilot, Reddit, and industry review sites document this pattern. The issue affects artists generating sufficient streams to expect meaningful payments—typically those exceeding 50,000 monthly plays across platforms. Users with minimal streaming activity report no payment issues, creating a bifurcated experience where the service functions adequately until revenue reaches levels requiring accurate accounting. Resolution rates approach zero percent across documented complaint cases, with support maintaining the stated position without addressing specific calculation discrepancies.

Account Suspension Mechanisms

Users report account suspensions discovered only upon login, with music remaining live on platforms while dashboard access becomes blocked. One September 2025 case describes the pattern: “When your songs start getting streams, they suspend your account. The bad thing is they don’t notify you about this, you only know when you log in. Also they keep your releases on the platforms without taking them down.”

The same user attempted contact through multiple channels: “I attempted to reach out 3 times and sent emails to all addresses they have. Using the excuse of ‘artificial streaming’ is ridiculous… They’re using ‘artificial streaming’ as an excuse but still keeping my release up without taking it down.” Distribution agreements grant the company unilateral authority to “block your ability to otherwise withdraw funds until resolution of the suspect activities to the satisfaction of Horus,” with automatic forfeiture of all frozen revenue upon determination of “Inappropriate Conduct” by the company’s “good faith determination.”

Eight documented cases from 2024-2025 follow consistent patterns: no advance notification, continued platform distribution generating royalties the artist cannot access, and minimal support communication explaining specific infractions or appeal processes. The contractual framework provides no independent review mechanism, positioning the company as both investigator and adjudicator with complete discretion over fund forfeiture decisions.

Account Termination Structure

Full account deletions occur with subscription charges continuing post-termination and minimal communication regarding causes. One August 2025 user reported: “Still got charged after getting ban for no reason a year ago. And now it just happened again… Ban people for no reason, and just ripping them off. Please for god’s sake, cancel people subscription if you decided to ban them!”

Another case involved an account paid for 12 months but deleted after 20 days following a single error in a multi-artist setup. The user noted communication failures: “You contacted me on the wrong email first (I chose a different contact address) and in such a case you’d best call me. Problem could certainly be clarified… I paid for a subscription for 365 days and I only got the service for 20 days!” A May 2023 user similarly reported: “My Horus Music account was deleted and so were my songs and they don’t even answer my emails.”

Distribution agreement Clause 10.7 explicitly states: “Upon termination, a refund is not provided” regardless of circumstances or time remaining on annual subscriptions. The company exercises unilateral termination authority without required disclosure of specific causes beyond generic policy violations. Ten documented termination cases from 2022-2025 show no successful appeals or subscription refunds, with users losing both platform access and any accumulated unpaid royalties.

Extended Payment Delays

Initial payment processing extends substantially beyond stated 90-day hold periods. One 2024 user reported: “It took over six months for me to receive my initial payment,” while another documented YouTube Red royalties unreceived since the prior September, representing 10+ months of accumulation. Official company policy states: “We account to and pay all eligible clients within 60 days post-receiving royalties from platforms. Many stores take up to 3 months, so there may be a delay.”

The stated justification combines platform reporting delays (up to 90 days) with additional company processing time for fraud investigation, creating total delays of 150-180 days from initial streaming activity to first payment. This substantially exceeds competitor timelines, where 60-90 day total delays represent industry standards. For artists whose releases gain rapid traction, the extended hold period prevents reinvestment of earnings during critical promotional windows.

Three documented cases describe initial delays exceeding six months, with one reporting continued non-payment after that threshold. The company maintains the stated policy position without explaining why individual cases exceed the maximum stated timeframe or providing specific resolution timelines for delayed accounts.

Support Response Quality

Support performance diverges sharply between simple administrative queries and substantive payment or account issues. Multiple users confirm 24-hour response times for basic questions, with human intervention available for emergencies including account security issues and metadata corrections. One user praised this responsiveness: support addressed an account hack and wrong audio upload through direct human contact.

Contrast emerges when payment discrepancies arise. One October 2023 user detailed the experience: “Support replies—would give Five stars for fast responses, but downgrade to 3 for pointless replies… When I asked about missing £40 in payment calculations despite it appearing on my earnings page, I had to ask 4 times (once over phone, three times via email) before they looked into it.” The investigation revealed the company had duplicated a previous royalty payment in their system despite the user receiving only one actual payment. The user described “a whole day of back-and-forth with multiple agents, with me repeating myself multiple times, followed by an unfriendly adviser on the phone call.”

A June 2025 artist reported similar deflection: “Reached out to customer support about extremely low per-stream payouts. Replies have been disappointingly brief and unhelpful, leaving me feeling ignored.” Twelve documented support interaction cases from 2023-2025 show this bifurcation: administrative issues resolve within 24-48 hours, while payment calculation questions receive cursory responses restating generic policy positions without addressing specific numerical discrepancies raised by users.

Distribution Performance

Release processing speed represents a consistent operational strength. Users across multiple testimonials confirm 24-hour distribution to major platforms, with some releases appearing on Spotify, Apple Music, and other services within hours of submission. The company’s infrastructure reliably delivers to claimed 150+ platforms, with particular strength in Asian markets including Chinese DSPs (NetEase, QQ Music, Kugou), Indian platforms (JioSaavn, Wynk, Hungama), and Korean services where larger competitors often lack direct relationships.

One documented case highlighted this advantage: a hip-hop artist achieved 15,000 streams on NetEase through Horus’s local partnerships versus minimal reach through their previous distributor lacking Chinese market access. Platform coverage extends across 180 countries, with emerging market penetration distinguishing the service from major aggregators focused primarily on Western territories.

Content ID eligibility restrictions apply more narrowly than competitors. The service rejects original tracks when extended mixes appear alongside standard versions in single album submissions, or when requesting Facebook and Instagram Content ID distribution despite complete originality. One user described: “Although everything in this song is 100% original, they claimed because I released an extended mix alongside the single version in an album, sending these to Content ID is not possible… They also wouldn’t send my song to Instagram and Facebook Content ID, claiming it goes against their policy.”

Distribution reliability faces occasional disruption. October 2020 saw all user tracks temporarily disappear from platforms during infrastructure maintenance with no advance notification, causing stream count resets and disrupted advertising campaigns. Email system issues also emerged, with users reporting bounce-backs from overly restrictive DMARC policies blocking legitimate support requests.

Asian Market Access

Horus maintains direct distribution relationships with platforms unavailable through most Western aggregators. Chinese market access includes NetEase Cloud Music, QQ Music, and Kugou Music—services collectively representing hundreds of millions of active users largely inaccessible to artists using DistroKid, TuneCore, or CD Baby. Indian platform coverage similarly extends to JioSaavn, Wynk Music, Hungama, and Gaana, with local expertise facilitating metadata optimization for regional discovery algorithms.

Korean distribution includes KakaoMusic and Melon, platforms with strict content requirements and partnership barriers that exclude many international distributors. This regional specialization reflects the company’s expansion strategy, including establishment of Horus Music India operations in 2016 and development of local market expertise through on-ground partnerships and cultural understanding of non-Western streaming ecosystems.

Artists targeting Asian audiences report this as the service’s primary distinguishing feature. One user confirmed substantial NetEase streaming activity that would have been unavailable through their previous distributor. The trade-off involves accepting potentially lower per-stream rates globally in exchange for access to regional markets where Western competitors cannot place content. For artists with established Asian fanbases or genre styles resonating in these territories (K-pop influenced production, Bollywood fusion, Mandarin/Cantonese vocals), the platform access justifies the service despite payment concerns affecting Western platform royalties.

Management Transition

March 2025 saw simultaneous departure of senior financial and publishing leadership. Deborah Mary Smith (Director with 13+ years publishing and sync licensing experience) resigned March 13, followed immediately by Jennifer Joanne Radcliffe (Finance Director) the same day. Both also resigned from sister company Horus Music Publishing Limited on March 17, 2025. These represented the two most senior operational roles below founder Nick Dunn.

May 2025 brought appointment of Rich Orchard as Managing Director, reporting to Dunn in a newly designated CEO position. Orchard’s background includes six years at CD Baby (Director of Business Development, then Director of Artist & Community Engagement) plus 15+ years across digital music, operations, and marketing including roles at Absolute Label Services and gaming industry positions (Activision, Nintendo) on Guitar Hero and DJ Hero franchises.

The timing correlation between senior departures and intensified payment complaint documentation raises operational continuity questions. User reports of payment discrepancies increased substantially in early 2025, coinciding with the Finance Director’s departure specifically. Whether this reflects changed accounting methodology, reduced oversight capacity during transition, or unrelated factors remains undocumented. The company has not publicly addressed whether payment processing procedures changed during this leadership restructuring period.

User Experience Polarity

Trustpilot reviews split nearly evenly between highly positive and severely negative experiences. Satisfied users emphasize rapid distribution, responsive support for basic needs, and successful platform delivery: “Great service, fast uploads, music went live within 24 hours.” Long-term users (2-5 years) report stable operations for artists maintaining modest streaming volumes without payment disputes.

Negative experiences concentrate among artists generating meaningful revenue. These users encounter payment discrepancies, account suspensions, or terminations, with frustration amplified by support responses perceived as dismissive or deflecting. One characteristic negative review: “Raw data shows I’ve earned thousands but received only hundreds, and support won’t explain the math.”

The bifurcation suggests operational competence for basic distribution services while payment processing, fraud detection, and dispute resolution systems fail at scale. Artists earning under $100 monthly report satisfactory experiences; those approaching $500+ monthly encounter systematic issues. This creates a service that functions adequately as a hobbyist platform but presents significant risk for professional artists depending on accurate royalty accounting for livelihood.

Platform coverage and pricing remain competitive—£20 annually for unlimited releases with claimed 100% royalty retention (post-subscription) undercuts most competitors. However, the “100% royalty retention” marketing claim conflicts with documented user experiences showing systematic payment reductions, raising transparency questions about whether the company defines “royalties you’re entitled to” differently than industry-standard platform payment rates.