Quote:
Originally Posted by
phizix
Major labels don't invest in new/diverse talent at the moment because they no longer have the money to take the risk. Thats a fact. The reason they don't have money is because piracy hit them hard. Nothing else.
They don't invest in grown up music like they do in kids **** because even at the best of times it doesn't sell like the kids **** and at a time like this they're gonna be selling what they know sells. Music shaped, by labels, for kids has been around since the 60s and has proved profitable time and time again. Whether its **** is neither here nor there, because as you say; they think in business models. Why? because its a business and thats good business sense. I'm not saying I like it either but thats the way it is and it will never change.
Kids go to school and hang about with friends and are generally told what is good by their piers. Thats what the majors rely on. Thats why so much emphasis is put on creating a hype around an artist because kids will beleive it.
Adults on the other hand are much more opinionated and have more diverse tastes so they buy different things. They can't be sold things on mass like the kids can. Some will like pop, some rock, some house etc...
So to cover this market they would need to be developing so many different acts [which is a risk they can't be taking at the moment], that the profits would not be as attractive as it may first appear.
Thats why this diverse eclectic mainstream is just an idealistic dream and will never happen. Sorry to piss on your bonfire
No worries mate, was more like a drizzle.. LOL
I think the majors can and should (for their own sake) invest in (risky) new talent. Why can small labels do that and the big ones not? they still have way way more power behind their choices.
Instead they've opted to try to limit the download wave.
Well, they'll fail, because of one simple reason: they don't take risks (anymore), it's the risky stuff that got them where they were at their peak. In short.. they lost it, because they're not able to differentiate the good music from bad, A&R sucks, everyone can tell you that.
Also witnessing the dance music development here in the nineties, I'd say it is arrogant to assume a target audience of young people can't choose their OWN favorites. They can and they will, if this (a wider choice of QUALITY) is offered to them. What I'm trying to say is
IT DID HAPPEN, but the majors decided to fukk it, because the market was too fragmented for their taste, they want complete control, after all.
To offer kids something that is dumbed down, because it is expected of kids to be dumb, is a dog chasing it's tail. Bit like djs playing only what they expect people like, instead of some soul searching. Relying on "hero worship" and repetitious music placement is what made the kids turn away from the crap. Kids may be poorly educated nowadays (note: generalistation) but they sure are aware when they're fed ****e. And they are, right now. ringtones? HUGE market. Is it music? eehm? There is so much potential in modern technology it isn't funny anymore. Key problem is the lack of uplifting spirtitual music targeted at these kids. Simple as that. Part of a consumer culture falling apart and reducing itself to inedible bitesize chunks. Fukk that. If anyone believes in this failed business model, they're buying into the hype.
I just found out the "5 days off" festival (dance music) is now MTV owned. Meaning exit new unknown exciting acts, enter proven money machines bought and paid for by MTV. MTV is "if you can't beat them, buy them, and strangle their product" I've seen enough examples of this, in the late nineties to recognise the pattern.
Bottom line: It's not the kids that dropped the ball (first), it's the majors.
Instead of looking inward and start making radical changes, they're still hawking "their" industry.
dfegadmtv