Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Roddey  But, you also have to ask, where perhaps did that extra money come from to buy those games? You may want the music more, but if you don't have to spend any money on it, then that money flows down the priority list to those things that are harder to rip off. So, as always, when people stop playing by the rules of capitalism, it becomes impossible to assign values. You can't tell if they like games more, or just that they can now buy more games because they never had to make the decision whether to buy a game or buy some music. |
Yes, perhaps Dean. It sounds like a rather logical rationale.
Nonetheless, I wonder why there are not any solid empirical studies with correlated data on the topic. The actual data on this topic is scarce and limited.
Many factors and their evolution would need to be taken into account to draw an accurate picture of the situation at hand:
- the cost of production itself;
- the cost of marketing;
- the cost of distribution;
- artists' (including engineers...) revenue;
- distributor's revenue;
- retail price and retailer's revenue;
- the revenue of households and the way it is consumed;
- etc...
In addition to that, the way physical media is now sold to consumers has changed quite a bit in the past decade, which influences costs and prices (and hence, revenue), e.g Walmart might be the number 1 music retailer today and I assume it does not buy from wholesalers at the same price independant corner record shops did.
Illegal file-sharing is an obvious culprit, there is no denying it, but I am sure we, as people involved in music production, could benefit from a more realistic view on the topic. That might even help us thinking of how to save our art (and business...).