Very good article. Reinforces what I already knew about the mafiosos who run the biz.
OK, so to play devil's advocate here for a minute:
if and when the re-structuring of the music industry happens and artists and managers are partners w/ the big bad companies and everyone is all kumbaya with how wonderful it all is, how the hell do any of them make a profit? Record sales will continue to go down in the wake of downloading music. Most peole are at this point, accustomed to getting their music for free. Hard to beat that price, folls.
All that aside, CD's will be obsolete in the not too distant future because of MP3 players that can hold 80-100 gigs of music and video. So there will be no tangible product left to release.
The entire entertainment industry was stupid enough to let technology get ahead of their game. They're fucked!
Very good article. Reinforces what I already knew about the mafiosos who run the biz.
OK, so to play devil's advocate here for a minute:
if and when the re-structuring of the music industry happens and artists and managers are partners w/ the big bad companies and everyone is all kumbaya with how wonderful it all is, how the hell do any of them make a profit? Record sales will continue to go down in the wake of downloading music. Most peole are at this point, accustomed to getting their music for free. Hard to beat that price, folls.
All that aside, CD's will be obsolete in the not too distant future because of MP3 players that can hold 80-100 gigs of music and video. So there will be no tangible product left to release.
The entire entertainment industry was stupid enough to let technology get ahead of their game. They're fucked!
IMO, I believe people will still pay for something. It's just plain wrong that people will not pay for something if it's free.
The main reason why things are the way they are, can be put on the labels themselves.
In any case, check the link above. The one about Last.fm
IMO, I believe people will still pay for something. It's just plain wrong that people will not pay for something if it's free.
The main reason why things are the way they are, can be put on the labels themselves.
Believe me, as someone who worked in the biz for 10 years and ended up getting tossed out like yesterday's news, no one would like to believe that more than me. People, for the most part (and looking down the abyss at a recession) will not spend money on shit they can get for free. Folks like you and me may still shell out money for LP's, but I will not be buying ANY new music that I can DL. I'd rather put that scratch toward something frivolous... like say... groceries or something
IMO, I believe people will still pay for something. It's just plain wrong that people will not pay for something if it's free.
The main reason why things are the way they are, can be put on the labels themselves.
Believe me, as someone who worked in the biz for 10 years and ended up getting tossed out like yesterday's news, no one would like to believe that more than me. People, for the most part, and looking down the abyss at a recession will not spend money on shit they can get for free. Folks like you and me will still shell out money for LP's, but I willnot be buying ANY new music that I can DL. I'd rather put that scratch toward something frivolous... like say... groceries or something
Well, I agree people won't pay for how things are now. Gone are the days that people will spend $12-15 bucks for a CD. Nobody should pay that much. But the idea that nobody will pay for free is not true IMO.
Working at a University I see kids line up all day to buy bottled water. Eventhough they have water fountains everywhere. I sometimes even bring in bottled water, eventhough I have a cooler in my office.
Most offices offer free coffee for their employees (Or the employees set up a pot in the office). And yet, watch them all line up at one of the millions of starbucks or tim hortons (For the canadian peeps) in the neighborhood willing to pay 2-5 bucks for their coffee.
I'm a hundred percent positive if the labels would have embraced the technology 8 years ago and changed up their business model a bit, things might be a bit different. They are just now starting to come around, but it's probably to late.
You made excellent points regarding water and coffee. But there's a quality difference in office coffee versus Starbucks and a taste/health issue that makes it so that people have to now buy their water. Plus the price for either one of these is relatively inexpensive when compared to free music versus purchased full length CDs. It's a no-brainer. If music could be made and distributed in a way which absolutely does away with distribution as the middle man and a fair shake to the artists by way of having them control their own catalogues. It might be a different story. But then again, the business, under those terms would be a way bigger financial risk for the label.
I'm a hundred percent positive if the labels would have embraced the technology 8 years ago and changed up their business model a bit, things might be a bit different. They are just now starting to come around, but it's probably to late.
I agree with this. They basically fucked up their own money. CD's are just not how it's done anymore. Back in the old days you had to call an operator who then connected your call. Technology changed and those ladies all had to get new jobs. It's just how shit goes.
As the article stated, the majors were all about moving physical units, not selling an artist or that artist's art. With no physical units being moved anymore, they're in trouble. Similar to the real estate lending discussion in the "Sell" thread, there seems to be a little karmic backlash going on here. Years of "indentured servitude" as the article called it is now smacking the majors in the face.
You made excellent points regarding water and coffee. But there's a quality difference in office coffee versus Starbucks and a taste/health issue that makes it so that people have to now buy their water. Plus the price for either one of these is relatively inexpensive when compared to free music versus purchased full length CDs. It's a no-brainer. If music could be made and distributed in a way which absolutely does away with distribution as the middle man and a fair shake to the artists by way of having them control their own catalogues. It might be a different story. But then again, the business, under those terms would be a way bigger financial risk for the label.
No, it's just business have found a way to compete against free. I believe that people will pay for music if they don't feel like they are getting ripped off.
Radiohead offered their album for whatever you wanted to pay. Even if it was free. For a couple of months you could grab it off their site for nothing if you wanted or get it by other means (Torrents, etc). And yet, when the CD became available (Months after), it's a number one seller.
The main problem IMO were that labels never even attempted to win the consumer back. They never even tried to compete for you the consumers money. Movie studio's atleast tried with DVD prices.
In any case. This is off topic on what I posted above.
Comments
great read for anyone in the biz
fookin shady ass bastids
I see big things are going on.
http://blog.last.fm/2008/01/23/free-the-music
OK, so to play devil's advocate here for a minute:
if and when the re-structuring of the music industry happens and artists and managers are partners w/ the big bad companies and everyone is all kumbaya with how wonderful it all is, how the hell do any of them make a profit? Record sales will continue to go down in the wake of downloading music. Most peole are at this point, accustomed to getting their music for free. Hard to beat that price, folls.
All that aside, CD's will be obsolete in the not too distant future because of MP3 players that can hold 80-100 gigs of music and video. So there will be no tangible product left to release.
The entire entertainment industry was stupid enough to let technology get ahead of their game. They're fucked!
IMO, I believe people will still pay for something. It's just plain wrong that people will not pay for something if it's free.
The main reason why things are the way they are, can be put on the labels themselves.
In any case, check the link above. The one about Last.fm
Believe me, as someone who worked in the biz for 10 years and ended up getting tossed out like yesterday's news, no one would like to believe that more than me. People, for the most part (and looking down the abyss at a recession) will not spend money on shit they can get for free. Folks like you and me may still shell out money for LP's, but I will not be buying ANY new music that I can DL. I'd rather put that scratch toward something frivolous... like say... groceries or something
Well, I agree people won't pay for how things are now. Gone are the days that people will spend $12-15 bucks for a CD. Nobody should pay that much. But the idea that nobody will pay for free is not true IMO.
Working at a University I see kids line up all day to buy bottled water. Eventhough they have water fountains everywhere. I sometimes even bring in bottled water, eventhough I have a cooler in my office.
Most offices offer free coffee for their employees (Or the employees set up a pot in the office). And yet, watch them all line up at one of the millions of starbucks or tim hortons (For the canadian peeps) in the neighborhood willing to pay 2-5 bucks for their coffee.
I'm a hundred percent positive if the labels would have embraced the technology 8 years ago and changed up their business model a bit, things might be a bit different. They are just now starting to come around, but it's probably to late.
I agree with this. They basically fucked up their own money. CD's are just not how it's done anymore. Back in the old days you had to call an operator who then connected your call. Technology changed and those ladies all had to get new jobs. It's just how shit goes.
As the article stated, the majors were all about moving physical units, not selling an artist or that artist's art. With no physical units being moved anymore, they're in trouble. Similar to the real estate lending discussion in the "Sell" thread, there seems to be a little karmic backlash going on here. Years of "indentured servitude" as the article called it is now smacking the majors in the face.
No, it's just business have found a way to compete against free. I believe that people will pay for music if they don't feel like they are getting ripped off.
Radiohead offered their album for whatever you wanted to pay. Even if it was free. For a couple of months you could grab it off their site for nothing if you wanted or get it by other means (Torrents, etc). And yet, when the CD became available (Months after), it's a number one seller.
The main problem IMO were that labels never even attempted to win the consumer back. They never even tried to compete for you the consumers money. Movie studio's atleast tried with DVD prices.
In any case. This is off topic on what I posted above.
Which is some fucked up shit.