Man, you have GOT to be kidding . . .
"Multi-million dollar record companies closing up" ???? Not likely. The
US music industry, RIAA, et al. may be slightly concerned, but don't think
for a minute that the industry is packing up and shutting down.
First, while there is a small amount of bootlegging going on via the net,
it really only counts for a 1-3% decrease in profit for the majors.
Second, what you must remember is that most of the major record companies
are units of MUCH larger international entertainment conglomerates anyway.
For example, take Universal studios: They count A&M, Geffen, MCA,
Universal, Interscope, Mercury, Island, London, Polydor, Motown and Def
Jam; country music's MCA Nashville and Mercury Nashville; jazz's Verve, GRP
and Impulse!; and classical’s Decca, Philips and Deutsche Grammophon among
their labels. They do business in 48 countries, and sell 25% of ALL the
recorded music sold in the U.S, which amounts to something like $18 billion
for tapes and CD's alone. But not only do they sell CD's and tapes. They
own the plants that make them. They own the publishing rights to the music
in many cases. They own the channels through which the music is
distributed. They own the venues where live concerts happen. They also
make a great deal of money PROMOTING concerts. They have VAULTS full of
material that has been recorded for them over the years that belongs to
them and can be reissued at any time, and the list goes on.
Sony Music is another example of the same thing. They hold Columbia, CBS,
Epic and Work records in their fold, and they have some of the hottest
growth in the industry right now. And they are similarly vertically
integrated as Uni is.
Owning a record company is like a license to print money, especially when
you have the critical mass to vertically integrate like the giants do.
Think about the process: you sign a young band and they record for you.
After paying a couple of hundred thousand to the producer and the band and
the studio and the mastering studio and the pressing, you have a product
that costs you about $3 to mass produce. You sell it in stores for $19.99
regular price, $14.99 on sale. Sell one CD and you've made five times what
you paid to make it.
Then Radio starts playing your artist's single, and they're paying you
their royalty -- which may be cents per play, but in the case of a top-40
single that gets into high rotation that song may be played once an hour
for a couple of weeks -- as is music television. Then your artist is on
the road touring. While there are some upfront costs again, the tickets
are like $40 and you're skimming 35-50% of that as profit. Then you take a
concert video of that show and sell IT in stores for more profit still.
In short, the music industry is NOT hurting, at least not right now. MP3
is a concern, but not enough of one that anything will be done about it
soon. In any case, before some one puts that MP3 out on the net and says
"Screw the record companies . . . " I'd like to ask that you consider who
you're really hurting: the artists.
The artists are probably the worst done-by in this deal. They often have
to give up the rights to their music, which means their payment comes only
on the original recording, not on any of the spin off stuff. And the
royalty can be as low as .25c per CD. Granted, $250,000 is nothing to
sneeze at on a platinum record, but if you're in a four-piece band, you're
splitting that between four guys and all of a sudden you're down to
$62,500. Not a bad wage, you say? Well, for what these guys go through,
all the touring and the PR and stuff, it's not nearly enough. I see it
first hand when a hard working band comes into Muchmusic for an appearance.
Typically, their record company has scheduled them to do a whirlwind day
in Toronto, perhaps three or four appearances where they have to load in
their gear, play, answer some inane questions, sign autographs and talk
with fans, load out their gear and move on to the next venue. The day
usually starts like 7:00 and goes 'til about 2:00am the next morning,
because the last stop is a local club show. Then it's back in the van or
on the bus to the next city to repeat the process. It's a lot of work and
if you've signed away your publishing rights, you're getting 62,5 for all
that work. No overtime, no premiums, no guarantee that you'll be doing
this next year.
These are the people that MP3 bootlegging hurts.
Personally, I see nothing wrong with making MP3's out of CD's one has
bought and owns legally. The precedent for that is well known and has been
upheld many times. It's exactly the same as recording your records to
tapes. In fact, I'm also building an MP3 changer for my Dak.
I have a bigger problem with people who take advantage of a technology like
this and rip off the artists who have worked hard to produce the material
that I enjoy listening to. While I'm not normally one to be a zealous
crusader, let me say this: Buy your music. Buy it on sale or at a
discount or however you have to do it to make it work for you, but PAY for
it so that our artists get paid.
my nickle's worth
-ch
>I don't wanna' start a flame war or anything, but MP3's cost the music
>industry billions of dollars every year, and people rely on that money
>for their livelyhood... the more people exploit the ease of reproduction
>of music, the lower the quality of the music will become, and advances in
>technology will come slower... it's already happening... multi-million
>dollar record companies and studios are closing up becuase people don't
>buy CD's anymore..
>they copy them or download them... MP3's started out
>as a way for consumers to get music cheaper because they bypass the costs
>of CD's and record stores.. but, of course, people started copying and
>reporducing and makin' CD rippers and stuff... it's sorta like buying
>products made overseas even tho people in your own country depend on
>similar products made in the US for their livelyhood...
>just my opinion....
>
>flame retardent suit on and all =)
>
>- -mike d.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:14:24 EDT