Anyone read this article?

slaveern · 4th January 2010

Not sure if this has been posted.

Article on file-sharing/music revenue...etc.

Your thoughts?

SpiralTrance · 4th January 2010

interesting thanks

Forked Lightning · 4th January 2010

Thanks for posting that, it was a good read.

IMO it was over-generalised and stat-heavy, and stats can be made to mean anything.

The truth is that nothing is set in stone - not even the 'rights' of artists to expect payment for the work they do. With hindsight, the advent of the internet has signalled the demise of recorded music as a first-line, bona fide, guaranteed income stream.

Sure, its possible that labels will continue to sign acts, but labels/artists/managers are staring down the barrel, and they have to consider how advances are to be recouped and payments made if their record/cd/download sales are outgunned by the pirated versions of their own music.

Like the vast majority I'm involved in music because I love it. Just occassionally I have made a living. Most of the time though my fortunes have veered towards the 'ripped-off' end of the 'Success continuum': I have been bootlegged by the 'pressing-plant-in-Brazil' brigade; not been paid for recordings I've done for others; I've had plenty of gear stolen; 'friends' have ripped me off. C'est la vie. None of these were avoidable situations, nor could I change the outcome, I only became aware after the fact. The pirating/free download issue is no different, no-one saw it coming until it was too late. In fact, the moment the internet was born it was too late...
I suppose I'm trying to say there are 3 certainties in life:
1. Death
2. Taxes
3. Being ripped off whilst working in the music business.

FWIW these are just some ideas to rectify the situation..

1. Find a watertight way of beating the pirates, thus safeguarding the income stream derived from recordings.....hmm....

2. Release your music free to the internet and defeat the pirates...hmmm...

3. Don't release any more recorded music, so there's nothing to pirate...

4. We all set up our own individual web-sites offering our own encrypted or encoded music which cannot be pirated (is it possible to release unpirate-able material?)

5. Stop looking at iTunes as an answer, it is part of the problem. It is a centralised hub primarily making money for itself. After it has sold a tune it doesn't give a toss if that tune is then pirated. Furthermore it can't prevent it either. iTunes is just another middleman who got his foot in the door first, the biggest shark in a shrinking sea, or: different shark, same species.

For sure, some of the above is tongue-in-cheek but Pandora's box can't be closed now. I think the first mistake to make is to expect anyone else to create a catch-all solution to what is now a hydra of a conundrum.

A new indie revolution could be on the horizon; maybe the music biz is on the point of admitting: "There are now too many pirated versions of our catalogues, and we can no longer make enough money to survive."

What would be the tipping point for that?

rack gear · 4th January 2010

I can't seem to find the sources for the data in the chart?

claend · 5th January 2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

I can't seem to find the sources for the data in the chart?

Have you tried to read it??

It has links, besides you have answered 3 times in the other thread about it...

Do music artists fare better in a world with illegal file-sharing?

I'm a bit tired about the crussade you guys are on.... Read it!

narcoman · 7th January 2010

read it many times. It's flawed. Can't even be arsed to begin to show where and how it is {for example - revenue figures are largely just made up.... certainly NOT the BPI figures my company has received} - but suffice to say some of us work in the industry - the Times does not.

mobius.media · 7th January 2010

I would guess you could gather 3 things:

1) PRS revenue has increased largely in step with inflation. This is to be expected, as piracy has no way of affecting PRS revenue.

2) Recorded revenue to artists has increased (according to this) in step with the growth in the digital market. However, the only way this is mathematically possible is if artists are paid higher royalties on digital sales than physical, as sales revenue for the industry as a whole is down. Not sure how this was calculated or how this is possible? Can anyone make sense of it?

3) Live music is pulling in more and more money. With sky-rocketing ticket prices for major and classic acts, no surprise there.

So far as I can tell, I believe the article should be named "Do artists fare better in the digital economy?" as it does not address piracy.

There should also be some explanation for how artists' royalties can be going up while total industry sales revenue is going down. Again, the only explanation I can imagine is there is something funny going on with the royalty calculations I'm not aware of. If anyone understands what they did to calculate that I'd be curious to hear.

As for piracy, the only way to assess its affects is to minimize it and observe the trends that follow. As was seen in Sweden, I expect any dip in piracy will produce a great benefit to the industry and artists alike.

rack gear · 7th January 2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by claend

Have you tried to read it??

It has links, besides you have answered 3 times in the other thread about it...

Do music artists fare better in a world with illegal file-sharing?

I'm a bit tired about the crussade you guys are on.... Read it!

the crusade to get paid for my labor and product... ah yeah, I am.

how about you keep working, stop getting paid and talk to me about the crusade you'll be on...

but anyway...

it's actually interesting to read the comments by readers at that link who themselves poke holes in the various flaws in the way that data is presented, and skewed...

people just want to feel good about stealing, so it's just more rationalization... "look the industry is lying to us, why shouldn't we steal music"...

the sources for that data don't actually point to any third party for verification... someone cobbled it together, said here's the source, and didn't provide the source of the source... which is highly suspect (If I'm missing something I apologize and feel free to post those links here).

well, by the end of this month (January 2010) various sources will be releasing 2009 year end numbers...

CDs will be on an even more rapid decline
Digital Albums will still be slowly being adopted
Single Song sales will be increasing

the net effect of the above for bottom line revenue will most like show the recording industry down another 3-5% at least in the USA - and most likely near the same elsewhere as well

I could be wrong we'll see what the reports show for the sales of recorded music.

claend · 20th January 2010

Oh sure, I'll gladly read your trusty sources.

Please paste the links of the REAL absolute non-subjective figures down, I'm all ears (eyes)... Until that, I'll choose my sources if you don't mind.

I know what's the situation, I just think something unavoidable is happening to the industry and just want to get focussed into creating something better.

Steal???

Boy, I have more than 1000 vinyls, and can't stand mp3, (OGG Vorbis 4 on Spotify Premium isn't so bad though) ... I'm just tired of this nonsense childish negation of reality.

You want an Orwelian police state?? I don't. I preffer to put my energy into the new possibilities of the atention revenue models.

And BTW, I've been into live sound for years, and in Spain, there's definitely more work today than it has ever been since I started by 2001.

Let's see what happens, time will surely tell.stike

Cheers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

the crusade to get paid for my labor and product... ah yeah, I am.

how about you keep working, stop getting paid and talk to me about the crusade you'll be on...

but anyway...

it's actually interesting to read the comments by readers at that link who themselves poke holes in the various flaws in the way that data is presented, and skewed...

people just want to feel good about stealing, so it's just more rationalization... "look the industry is lying to us, why shouldn't we steal music"...

the sources for that data don't actually point to any third party for verification... someone cobbled it together, said here's the source, and didn't provide the source of the source... which is highly suspect (If I'm missing something I apologize and feel free to post those links here).

well, by the end of this month (January 2010) various sources will be releasing 2009 year end numbers...

CDs will be on an even more rapid decline
Digital Albums will still be slowly being adopted
Single Song sales will be increasing

the net effect of the above for bottom line revenue will most like show the recording industry down another 3-5% at least in the USA - and most likely near the same elsewhere as well

I could be wrong we'll see what the reports show for the sales of recorded music.

claend · 20th January 2010

That's an interesting post, thanks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mobius.media

I would guess you could gather 3 things:

1) PRS revenue has increased largely in step with inflation. This is to be expected, as piracy has no way of affecting PRS revenue.

2) Recorded revenue to artists has increased (according to this) in step with the growth in the digital market. However, the only way this is mathematically possible is if artists are paid higher royalties on digital sales than physical, as sales revenue for the industry as a whole is down. Not sure how this was calculated or how this is possible? Can anyone make sense of it?

3) Live music is pulling in more and more money. With sky-rocketing ticket prices for major and classic acts, no surprise there.

So far as I can tell, I believe the article should be named "Do artists fare better in the digital economy?" as it does not address piracy.

There should also be some explanation for how artists' royalties can be going up while total industry sales revenue is going down. Again, the only explanation I can imagine is there is something funny going on with the royalty calculations I'm not aware of. If anyone understands what they did to calculate that I'd be curious to hear.

As for piracy, the only way to assess its affects is to minimize it and observe the trends that follow. As was seen in Sweden, I expect any dip in piracy will produce a great benefit to the industry and artists alike.

rack gear · 21st January 2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by claend

Oh sure, I'll gladly read your trusty sources.

Please paste the links of the REAL absolute non-subjective figures down, I'm all ears (eyes)...

sure - no problem - plenty of links sources in the thread link below - Soundscan is the most trusted and credible source of sales data in the United States - these are not RIAA numbers:

2009 Year End / Decade End Numbers & Stats

Quote:

Originally Posted by claend

Until that, I'll choose my sources if you don't mind.

ok - and those are?

Quote:

Originally Posted by claend

You want an Orwelian police state?? I don't.

I want the protection of copyright.

I also think that the difference between me and you is I'm not in denial that we're already there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by claend

I preffer to put my energy into the new possibilities of the atention revenue models.

I'm all ears. I watched the media futurist clip and responded on that thread. Thanks - that was informative, if not insightful.

Quote:

Originally Posted by claend

And BTW, I've been into live sound for years, and in Spain, there's definitely more work today than it has ever been since I started by 2001.

that's great news - if only we were discussing live sound revenues in Spain... but we're discussing global recorded music sales/revenues.

Quote:

Originally Posted by claend

Let's see what happens, time will surely tell.stike

Cheers.

agreed.

kieran kelly · 22nd January 2010

I love it how "Claend" is posting is his opinions ( which we should not confuse with fact ) on threads but he refuses to answer "red velvets" basic questions.

chrisso · 22nd January 2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

I want the protection of copyright.

I also think that the difference between me and you is I'm not in denial that we're already there.

Great point.thumbsup

claend · 5th February 2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

Soundscan is the most trusted and credible source of sales data in the United States -
2009 Year End / Decade End Numbers & Stats

Hmm... this phrase is biased by deffinition. But I'll read it when i got time, thanks. I was trying to point that there are not 100% trusty figures.

Quote:

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

ok - and those are?

Tones, where's the point?? Any non scientific opinion/text is biased...

But ok, I'll play:
David Kusek's blog: Future of Music - music industry, music business, digital music and free music downloads

Quote:

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

I want the protection of copyright.

I also think that the difference between me and you is I'm not in denial that we're already there.

Great, I want respect of human rights all over the world... Why don't we put a camera into everyone's ass to take care of it?? See??

So you don't fear an unofficial agency who can shut down your connection, without a trial?? What next?? Let's face it... Internet is a hole new game, and copyright law needs to adapt to it in order to work this days. Laws are created to respond human necessities... not the oposite IMO

BTW... I'm not a lawyer... don't know HOW SHOULD it be reformed... But I'm sure it could be done to acomodate new needs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

I'm all ears. I watched the media futurist clip and responded on that thread. Thanks - that was informative, if not insightful.

Great, on that website, there are tons of essays and videos with a creative point of view.

Quote:

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

that's great news - if only we were discussing live sound revenues in Spain... but we're discussing global recorded music sales/revenues.

agreed.

Hmm that's actually not truth, it's an example of a part of the cake.. would you give me that??

--------------------------

Hey, I just can't understand why some of the guys writting here are so closed to the new possibilities, so negative without even trying to get informed about the real possibilities already working (at least that's what my spanish brain gets from reading most of your posts). I guess you will say "cause there's no chance for it to work"... sure?? Shouldn't we give it a chance, or get well informed??

Sorry but the prior pre-internet situation didn't work that good for musicians, period. Been there, done that (at least a little

)

claend · 5th February 2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by kieran kelly

I love it how "Claend" is posting is his opinions ( which we should not confuse with fact ) on threads but he refuses to answer "red velvets" basic questions.

Hey... you won't find a post by me confusing opinion with fact (at least in this section) nor trying to snuggle one for the other.

Hmm... Nice to see you are able to spot the difference...?? Or are you trying to create consense??

thanks for the love anyway, I'll be here all week.

rack gear · 5th February 2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by claend

Hey, I just can't understand why some of the guys writting here are so closed to the new possibilities, so negative without even trying to get informed about the real possibilities already working (at least that's what my spanish brain gets from reading most of your posts). I guess you will say "cause there's no chance for it to work"... sure?? Shouldn't we give it a chance, or get well informed??

Sorry but the prior pre-internet situation didn't work that good for musicians, period. Been there, done that (at least a little

)

because no one as yet has been able to show how the new model(s) are better than the old ones for generating sustainable profit. profit is the thing that pays the bills, for both labels and artists alike.

the thing that no one seems to understand - is that if the labels can't make money selling music, what makes you think artists can on their own? labels are basically specialty investment banks focusing on music.

the equation is simple for both:

Return On Investment = Profit.

No return on investment = No Profit.

No Profit = Unsustainable Business Model.

Unsustainable Business Model = Web 2.0 VC Burn Rate

Works great for web start ups, but probably not so much for bands...

Sooo to recap... where is the sustainable revenue model, with return on investment, that generates PROFIT for bands...

let's see it.

thanks.

claend · 5th February 2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

Sooo to recap... where is the sustainable revenue model, with return on investment, that generates PROFIT for bands..

let's see it.

thanks.

A band growing their fanbase locally (by their own) and playing live. I see it everyday. That's more sustanaible/possible today than before. Sorry if studios are loosing that ninche... I also see less possibilities for bad bands in today's scene... Plus Spotify is simply a dream from my standpoint.

Do you really think this is going backwards to the prior situation (pre-internet??). Really?? It doesn't look like to me.

And yess Kieran Kelly ... it's only my opinion!

rack gear · 5th February 2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by claend

A band growing their fanbase locally (by their own) and playing live. I see it everyday. That's more sustanaible/possible today than before. Sorry if studios are loosing that ninche... I also see less possibilities for bad bands in today's scene... Plus Spotify is simply a dream from my standpoint.

Do you really think this is going backwards to the prior situation (pre-internet??). Really?? It doesn't look like to me.

And yess Kieran Kelly ... it's only my opinion!

all that said - I'm not seeing a sustainable revenue model for anyone - bands or labels.

This isn't about going backwards, it's about finding a sustainable revenue model for artists to create PROFIT going forward - with or without labels.

For all the hype around here about NEW Models it always comes back to the same conversation...

OLD MODEL LESS MUSIC SALES REVENUE : IE playing live and Selling Merch - both of which are not new, the only thing that is new is there is now NO REVENUE FROM MUSIC SALES...

is this so hard to understand?

claend · 5th February 2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios

all that said - I'm not seeing a sustainable revenue model for anyone - bands or labels.

This isn't about going backwards, it's about finding a sustainable revenue model for artists to create PROFIT going forward - with or without labels.

For all the hype around here about NEW Models it always comes back to the same conversion...

OLD MODEL LESS MUSIC SALES REVENUE : IE playing live and Selling Merch - both of which are not new, the only thing that is new is there is now NO REVENUE FROM MUSIC SALES...

is this so hard to understand?

What is new is the potential amount by playing live. (30% aprox in UK reading this article). It's fine if you don't believe it or if you think it's only because of old monster's bands doing high priced revival concerts...

And don't forget that the amount of artists actually making money 15 years ago by CD sales are almost negligible. (0.15€ per cd after you pay the label loan?)

Hey, it's fine, we won't convince each other.

rack gear · 5th February 2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by claend

What is new is the potential amount by playing live. (30% aprox in UK reading this article). It's fine if you don't believe it or if you think it's only because of old monster's bands doing high priced revival concerts...

do you really think anyone other than the very top 1% of artists playing live are really making 30% more - that article is skewed by the top 5 grossing acts - it's like saying all movies are making money this year because Avatar is the highest grossing movie of all time....

Quote:

Originally Posted by claend

And don't forget that the amount of artists actually making money 15 years ago by CD sales are almost negligible. (0.15€ per cd after you pay the label loan?)

I have no idea what you are talking about... how are they paying for ferrari's on .15 per cd... I don't even know how you're coming up with that number...

Look we don't have to agree I'm just trying to point out all of the gross misinformation and intentional disinformation that gets thrown about here... which still doesn't change the fundamental baseline of this conversation:

This isn't about going backwards, it's about finding a sustainable revenue model for artists to create PROFIT going forward - with or without labels.

For all the hype around here about NEW Models it always comes back to the same OLD conversation...

OLD MODEL LESS MUSIC SALES REVENUE : IE Playing Live and Selling Merch - both of which are not new, the only thing that is new is there is now NO REVENUE FROM MUSIC SALES...

is this so hard to understand?

Quote:

Originally Posted by claend

Hey, it's fine, we won't convince each other.

fair enough.

4th January 2010	#1
slaveern Gear nut Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 124 Thread Starter	Anyone read this article? Not sure if this has been posted. Article on file-sharing/music revenue...etc. Your thoughts?

4th January 2010	#3
Forked Lightning Gear Head Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Everywhere and nowhere baby... Posts: 59	Thanks for posting that, it was a good read. IMO it was over-generalised and stat-heavy, and stats can be made to mean anything. The truth is that nothing is set in stone - not even the 'rights' of artists to expect payment for the work they do. With hindsight, the advent of the internet has signalled the demise of recorded music as a first-line, bona fide, guaranteed income stream. Sure, its possible that labels will continue to sign acts, but labels/artists/managers are staring down the barrel, and they have to consider how advances are to be recouped and payments made if their record/cd/download sales are outgunned by the pirated versions of their own music. Like the vast majority I'm involved in music because I love it. Just occassionally I have made a living. Most of the time though my fortunes have veered towards the 'ripped-off' end of the 'Success continuum': I have been bootlegged by the 'pressing-plant-in-Brazil' brigade; not been paid for recordings I've done for others; I've had plenty of gear stolen; 'friends' have ripped me off. C'est la vie. None of these were avoidable situations, nor could I change the outcome, I only became aware after the fact. The pirating/free download issue is no different, no-one saw it coming until it was too late. In fact, the moment the internet was born it was too late... I suppose I'm trying to say there are 3 certainties in life: 1. Death 2. Taxes 3. Being ripped off whilst working in the music business. FWIW these are just some ideas to rectify the situation.. 1. Find a watertight way of beating the pirates, thus safeguarding the income stream derived from recordings.....hmm.... 2. Release your music free to the internet and defeat the pirates...hmmm... 3. Don't release any more recorded music, so there's nothing to pirate... 4. We all set up our own individual web-sites offering our own encrypted or encoded music which cannot be pirated (is it possible to release unpirate-able material?) 5. Stop looking at iTunes as an answer, it is part of the problem. It is a centralised hub primarily making money for itself. After it has sold a tune it doesn't give a toss if that tune is then pirated. Furthermore it can't prevent it either. iTunes is just another middleman who got his foot in the door first, the biggest shark in a shrinking sea, or: different shark, same species. For sure, some of the above is tongue-in-cheek but Pandora's box can't be closed now. I think the first mistake to make is to expect anyone else to create a catch-all solution to what is now a hydra of a conundrum. A new indie revolution could be on the horizon; maybe the music biz is on the point of admitting: "There are now too many pirated versions of our catalogues, and we can no longer make enough money to survive." What would be the tipping point for that? __________________ Life is not about how fast you run, or how high you climb, but how well you bounce

22nd January 2010	#12
kieran kelly Gear addict Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: new york Posts: 361	I love it how "Claend" is posting is his opinions ( which we should not confuse with fact ) on threads but he refuses to answer "red velvets" basic questions. __________________

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Read This Article	phillysoulman	Rap + Hip Hop engineering & production	13	29th August 2009 09:06 AM
Anyone read the Wash Post article about the violinist?	TREMORS	The Moan Zone	15	10th April 2007 01:44 AM

4th January 2010	#2
SpiralTrance Gear nut Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 78	interesting thanks

4th January 2010	#4
rack gear Lives for gear Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: the big rack Posts: 9,106 10 Reviews written	I can't seem to find the sources for the data in the chart?

7th January 2010	#6
narcoman Lives for gear Join Date: May 2007 Location: UK Posts: 9,393	read it many times. It's flawed. Can't even be arsed to begin to show where and how it is {for example - revenue figures are largely just made up.... certainly NOT the BPI figures my company has received} - but suffice to say some of us work in the industry - the Times does not.

7th January 2010	#7
mobius.media Lives for gear Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 3,397	I would guess you could gather 3 things: 1) PRS revenue has increased largely in step with inflation. This is to be expected, as piracy has no way of affecting PRS revenue. 2) Recorded revenue to artists has increased (according to this) in step with the growth in the digital market. However, the only way this is mathematically possible is if artists are paid higher royalties on digital sales than physical, as sales revenue for the industry as a whole is down. Not sure how this was calculated or how this is possible? Can anyone make sense of it? 3) Live music is pulling in more and more money. With sky-rocketing ticket prices for major and classic acts, no surprise there. So far as I can tell, I believe the article should be named "Do artists fare better in the digital economy?" as it does not address piracy. There should also be some explanation for how artists' royalties can be going up while total industry sales revenue is going down. Again, the only explanation I can imagine is there is something funny going on with the royalty calculations I'm not aware of. If anyone understands what they did to calculate that I'd be curious to hear. As for piracy, the only way to assess its affects is to minimize it and observe the trends that follow. As was seen in Sweden, I expect any dip in piracy will produce a great benefit to the industry and artists alike.