You cannot divide a pie into a larger pie.

You missed the point, but I understand and accept responsibility for this because I buried it a little. Believe it or not, this is not about indie vs. major. The only reason I’m framing it that way right now is I need the majors to have a reason to change, and the argument that is most compelling is the one that is directed at their fear of losing money. So if we exploit the system in such a way that they lose money, they might reconsider the big pool method.
For the royalty method, big pool vs. sub share is not about indie vs. major. It’s about artists with lots of fans, vs. artists with lots of clicks. You’ll find plenty of both types of artists in every genre, and in every category. in majors, and in indies.
There is one category that is definitely hurt by the big pool: new artists. It simply takes a long time to get a lot of clicks. Subscriber share addresses that. In terms of big shifts in revenue between categories (indie vs/ major, blockbusters vs newbies), you won’t see that.
It seems like you are worried about directing money to where YOU want it to go. I think you should take your finger off the scales, and do the fairest thing which is to let people decide for themselves where their money should go. If Jay-z and Rihanna are what makes people subscribe, that’s great. When they get bored of them, maybe they’ll find something else. In the meantime, let the chips fall where they are instead of trying to manipulate things. It’s the manipulation that’s the problem.