Slashdot Mirror
Recording Deals In The Digital Age
cascadefx writes "There is a really interesting panel wrap-up over at the National Association of Recording Industry Professionals's website. The Incredible Shrinking Profit Margin panel discussion looks like it included some interesting discussion into the deals that are made with performers now that the rules have changed. These notes offer interesting (perhaps hopeful) business predictions about Britney Spears' career as well as answering the (new)-age-old question about just how much an artist makes off of an iTunes download. Check it out."
Why sell through the system at all anymore?
FP?
What you hear in the ear, preach from the rooftop Matthew 10.27b
Is she going into pr0n? At least in that case, if she opens her mouth, it'll be for a good reason!
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
If you sell through the system, talent is optional.
If you sell outside the system, though, you have to succeed on your own merits.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Artists have always been share croppers for the man (record co's.. iTunes is the beginning of change. Artists, with guts, can make their deals direct with the new distribution channels, and they should, especially, anyone with a name that has a contract up for renewal.
Anyone seen my jagged little pill?
narip.com is /.ed even before the first post?
Anyone has a cache?
The prediction about Britney's career?
"Britney Spears' career, as a pop artist, is over."
Wow. That's some Insightful commentary. I mean, backing up a statement like that with support and facts and information is cool and all, but just one hopeful sentence like that is even COOLER.
I'm going start predicting stuff like that. Hey, I predict that computer games will be different in the future.
Moo.
It isn't Britney Spears I fear, but what comes after her. Seems to me that each iteration of manufactured talent is more sickening than the last. (One reason I don't watch American Idol, which seeks out the next 'talent' that fits the cookie cutter.)
But consider that much of Spears' success was the performance. Sing, dance, strut about the stage, before spending the next few decades going from one failed relationship and addiction to the next until appearing on Good Morning America and announcing she's cleaned up, totally focused on life and ready for a comeback (no, not as a signer, but the next president.) Music downloads don't leave much room for performance, unless you plan to watchs someone frolic about on that miniscule screen on your cellphone. Admittedly, some acts have never had a top-ten song or little chart success anyway, but have enormous cult-like followings (i.e. Jimmy Buffet, are you a parrot head? ;-) and without enough curiousity or word-of-mouth, will people attend shows?
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Obligatory google cache.
DiscDividers tabbed plastic CD dividers: divider cards f
Site was very slow, probably /.'d Here's the text:
The Incredible Shrinking Profit Margin
Passion, anger, humor and realism are the order of the day at a lively NARIP panel on how major labels want more from artists and do less. One prediction: "Britney Spears is over."
Reported by Scott G
"Been there, done that, still doing it, but with new budget parameters."
That seemed likely to be the summary of the National Association of Record Industry Professionals' (NARIP) "Incredible Shrinking Profit Margin" program, a look into how major labels are providing fewer services while attempting to grab a piece of artists' publishing, merchandising, touring and more.
Boy, was I wrong.
The session was funny, lively, controversial, cynical, hopeful and exciting. Before the session, it seemed that this topic would lead to a gloomy recitation of low sales figures. But the three panelists mixed facts and a fantastic amount of passion into their presentations - so much, in fact, that they would have goosed an audience even if they'd been discussing the phone book.
Who's Who on the NARIP Panel:
Participating in the discussion were Darryl Franklin (Business & Legal Affairs for Interscope, A&M, Geffen and DreamWorks Records), entertainment attorney Dina LaPolt (LaPolt Law) and Carol Peters (Peters Management Syndicate). Each has an excellent track record (see bios at the end of this story) and each brought a unique perspective to the evening's presentation.
Negotiating a Record Deal:
A prime attraction for this event was a mock negotiation of a major label contract for an up-and- coming band. Each panelist played himself in a hypothetical conversation. While this elicited excellent information and insights (along with much humorous banter), the hoped-for effect of the audience being a fly on the wall didn't always work because all three panelists kept stepping out of their mock negotiation with asides to the audience. The information was great; no one complained.
In fact, NARIP President and panel moderator Tess Taylor rarely needed to ask follow-up questions, as the panel launched into responses in a freewheeling yet coherent onslaught of ideas, fee ranges and controversial deal points.
Some selected gems:
Franklin, on the ephemeral nature of the record industry: "Britney Spears as a pop artist is over."
LaPolt, on the next big area for artist/producer/publisher/record company profits: Mobile phone rights. "Know the four parts of mobile phone rights: master, sync, image, and Java games."
Peters, on the change from physical to digital sales: "Who is the traditional market for records? 14-24 year-olds. It's ironic, but the core record buyers are not buying records."
Franklin, on the profit-taking of phone corporations when their services offer downloads: "Phone companies take 50% of all downloads." Another observation raised a few eyebrows: "The phone could replace the iPod."
LaPolt, on fees that game companies pay to license songs: "They're tiny. Incredibly tiny. And it's inefficient. EA (Electronic Arts) will clear 60 masters, then use just 15 songs in a game, all at low rates. And they want to pay these low rates on a buyout basis, with no share of revenue, no points, and no step-deals."
Peters, on the current state of affairs in the recording industry: "The record business right now is like musical 'Survivor'."
Franklin, sending a warning to MTV: "There's a new video channel in town. Watch for Fuse TV."
LaPolt, on the future: "There is new music coming, real diversity of music, and it will be a rebirth of the record industry."
The Bottom Line:
The LaPolt Law handout on "Traditional Major Label Royalty Computation" was itself nearly worth the price of admission as it revealed the formula used by record companies to retain a much higher amount of money than might otherwise be expected from the way the artist contract is worded. There's a reason major label artist payments are known as a "penny rate."
In addition, the NARIP-supplied "iTunes Artist-Producer Royalty Calculation" sheet was fa
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
Good stuff -- they interview record execs and former/current/hopeful musicians and explain the sorts of problems the industry is facing. While people stealing music online is a factor, lesser-known factors are also discussed including the fact that sales figures may be sinking because people are finished replacing their record collections with CDs.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
Count yourself lucky. I found the file and it's a 30 second read and a big snooze to boot.
The Incredible Shrinking Profit Margin Passion, anger, humor and realism are the order of the day at a lively NARIP panel on how major labels want more from artists and do less. One prediction: "Britney Spears is over." Reported by Scott G "Been there, done that, still doing it, but with new budget parameters." That seemed likely to be the summary of the National Association of Record Industry Professionals' (NARIP) "Incredible Shrinking Profit Margin" program, a look into how major labels are providing fewer services while attempting to grab a piece of artists' publishing, merchandising, touring and more. Boy, was I wrong. The session was funny, lively, controversial, cynical, hopeful and exciting. Before the session, it seemed that this topic would lead to a gloomy recitation of low sales figures. But the three panelists mixed facts and a fantastic amount of passion into their presentations - so much, in fact, that they would have goosed an audience even if they'd been discussing the phone book. Who's Who on the NARIP Panel: Participating in the discussion were Darryl Franklin (Business & Legal Affairs for Interscope, A&M, Geffen and DreamWorks Records), entertainment attorney Dina LaPolt (LaPolt Law) and Carol Peters (Peters Management Syndicate). Each has an excellent track record (see bios at the end of this story) and each brought a unique perspective to the evening's presentation. Negotiating a Record Deal: A prime attraction for this event was a mock negotiation of a major label contract for an up-and- coming band. Each panelist played himself in a hypothetical conversation. While this elicited excellent information and insights (along with much humorous banter), the hoped-for effect of the audience being a fly on the wall didn't always work because all three panelists kept stepping out of their mock negotiation with asides to the audience. The information was great; no one complained. In fact, NARIP President and panel moderator Tess Taylor rarely needed to ask follow-up questions, as the panel launched into responses in a freewheeling yet coherent onslaught of ideas, fee ranges and controversial deal points. Some selected gems: Franklin, on the ephemeral nature of the record industry: "Britney Spears as a pop artist is over." LaPolt, on the next big area for artist/producer/publisher/record company profits: Mobile phone rights. "Know the four parts of mobile phone rights: master, sync, image, and Java games." Peters, on the change from physical to digital sales: "Who is the traditional market for records? 14-24 year-olds. It's ironic, but the core record buyers are not buying records." Franklin, on the profit-taking of phone corporations when their services offer downloads: "Phone companies take 50% of all downloads." Another observation raised a few eyebrows: "The phone could replace the iPod." LaPolt, on fees that game companies pay to license songs: "They're tiny. Incredibly tiny. And it's inefficient. EA (Electronic Arts) will clear 60 masters, then use just 15 songs in a game, all at low rates. And they want to pay these low rates on a buyout basis, with no share of revenue, no points, and no step-deals." Peters, on the current state of affairs in the recording industry: "The record business right now is like musical 'Survivor'." Franklin, sending a warning to MTV: "There's a new video channel in town. Watch for Fuse TV." LaPolt, on the future: "There is new music coming, real diversity of music, and it will be a rebirth of the record industry." The Bottom Line: The LaPolt Law handout on "Traditional Major Label Royalty Computation" was itself nearly worth the price of admission as it revealed the formula used by record companies to retain a much higher amount of money than might otherwise be expected from the way the artist contract is worded. There's a reason major label artist payments are known as a "penny rate." In addition, the NARIP-supplied "iTunes Artist-Producer Royalty Calculation" sheet was fascinating because it answers the question all artists on iTunes keep as
The music industry is changing, along with the movie industry. Distribution channels are changing, and as such the method of getting your margin is going to change too. The RIAA's job of seeming to try and protect what is soon to be an outdated distribution scheme is pointless for the long term, and irritating for the short. A slimmer profit margin is no big deal, when you consider that it's not a few hundred companies trying to support their insfrastructure, but rather a half dozen online firms supporting theirs. Let's not forget that online distributors will never get caught with extra inventory. It's hard to run out of warehouse space. They have to worry less about shipments. In short, thinner margins that are consistent fit the business model. It's nothing to whine about, though of course the RIAA always has to find some large stick to shove in the wrong place.
Britney, no matter what you think, will suprise them all and having someone at that Assc. make predictions is no better than a prediction from a 5 dollar card reader, and what a shitty site..., oh, I have a prediction, it crashes any second, 1,2,3...
Anyone seen my jagged little pill?
They say that their core buyers aren't buying. IIRC, every year, the recording industry beats inflation in terms of revenue and profit growth but they keep saying that they are going down the drain. And now this recording professionals group seems to be parroting the same line. That is one drain I'd like to go down.
I'm not saying file sharing is necessarily good for them but it seems to be a case where they are trying to get enough people to say they are losing money often enough such that everyone believes them even if the facts are the opposite.
Text only from Google's cache
.... thats not good enough!!!!!
It can be done much better.
Lets face it, a sales person gets at best 30%... Typically 10-15%
Why should it be any different here?
Because the sales person can be automated.
EA (Electronic Arts) will clear 60 masters, then use just 15 songs in a game, all at low rates. And they want to pay these low rates on a buyout basis, with no share of revenue, no points, and no step-deals.
That's nice. I'd like a convertible with bucket seats and a six-speaker audio system. "They want" "They want" "They want" It's nonsense.
Here's the product. Here's the price, LICENSED for a limited period in a specific market excluding all others. 15% advance in TALL LONG GREEN CASH DOLLARS WALKIN' DOWN THE BOULEFUCKINGVARD starting day one with a double-the-rate step up when the clouds part. Two minutes and we fold up the card table. Here's a pen.
Artists own 100% before they sign the deal. The best way to make a good deal is not to make a bad deal.
Phone companies take 50% of all downloads
Only if the artists agree.
"The phone could replace the iPod
Everyone wants to be Apple.
Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
They just don't get it ... do they?
They charged admission to hear this great theory of business.
Oh, and you can get a CD of the proceedings ... for $20.
Quite accurately, they pointed out that their target audience just isn't buying records anymore. Oh the shock and horror of it all!
Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting different results -- according to Einstein. Maybe that's it ... that's the answer ... the recording cartel (let's not pretend that it's an industry) is collectively insane. That's a much kinder, gentler (though less accurate) view than to say that the recording cartel is stupid and clueless.
Even though I'm outside their demographics (no, I'm not at the low end!), I'll continue to buy music I like ... from the artist directly.
That having been said, I think the music is crap. But you wont catch me downloading it. For music I like, the cost of the CD is nothing VS the amount of enjoyment I get from it.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
that there is rip in NARIP?
The karma could be for ripping CD's or it could be for ripping off the artists.
Slightly offtopic since this is not mentioned in the article at all, but since we're talking about recording deals...
;p
Don't buy music from sites like the iTMS or Napster. Ever. According to this article French Apple enthusiast site Mac Bidouille, support personel (eg dancers, clip director, sound techs etc) are not getting their cut from legal online sales.
The reason? Record labels are unwilling to change their contracts, which ties royalties to the sales of physical media, not the song itself. That's outrageous. That's outright theft, pure and simple.
(Article is in French. Grab a translation here.)
Support the little guys. Download your albums off Suprnova NOW!
We have had monopolies in the past due to lack of personally available technology.
...
That time is coming to an end.
Time to start updating practices inline with technology or get left behind. Hundreds of jobs don't exist anymore because the work could be done more efficiently by a machine.
The recording industry needs to face facts, people CAN and therefore WILL
If a singer is good, let them make money from concerts, and of course higher quality recordings of songs they sing (which usually are written by somebody else).
Now the sting. How about letting a few people sing the same song so WE CAN CHOOSE the version we like????
If we didn't have sleezy record company execs we may never have had lord of the rings!
Something occurred to me recently which I hope is on topic:
Stars lose money on the first couple records-all the down payments for promotion and limosines etc. The record company provides these services and makes money.
When stars are established and put out multiple top selling albums, the Stars become more powerful than the record companies (Madonna, U2).
Most acts don't get to that point because they have no talent. Some acts don't get to that point because they over-dose and self destruct despite the fact that they have multiple examples of how not to handle their career.
Question: Do the record companies encourage drug addiction and over the top lifestyles in the hopes that stars self destruct before reaching the point of financial independence?
Reading an article recently on Prince's sales model. He makes $7.50 for each $10 CD. He controls distribution, handling advertising everything. If you've noticed the bill board charts lately his latest CD is doing well. My GF is a member of his sight where she can hang with other fanatics, or famatics as they call themselves. Prince has even managed to circumvent Ticketmaster to an extent. He sells a percentage of the floor seats through his site directly to his fans. I think everyone will agree that he is also the opposing force to any manufactured talent out there.
But I'm on a no-carb diet. Looks like it's gonna be rum.
Don't get me wrong -- I have great sympathy for musicians, other artists, and everyone else trying to get their fair share, but I can tell you that my salary as a programmer would be in the high six digits if I was paid 10% of the revenue my software generates for my employer. The artists' percentage alone is not really cause for much sympathy.
What is royally fucked is the fact that artists could command much higher percentages if the music industry wasn't dominated by a cartel with the aid and abettance of easily-purchased legislators.
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
"CDs of program available: $20."
Score: +17, Still-don't-get-it
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
Can I get this on Kazaa?
Along that line, then: do you support capital punishment? The murder rate in Texas seems to prove the above point ...
Global warming is neither science, nor politics. It is a religion.
Very good point. She lip-syncs. Any wonder why she can't perform if there's no electricity, or in a tiny venue? Strange that she can cavort around stage exercising and sweating, but she never ever sounds out of breath.
Similarly, Shania Twain a couple of Superbowls ago. She was clapping her hand to the music, against the wrist of the hand holding the microphone. Funny, though, the sound of her clapping didn't come through. Sure could hear the music & voice, though.
Global warming is neither science, nor politics. It is a religion.
If music is worth the download, its worth the 15$ for the CD.
... not just no, but hell no. There's a HUGE difference between paying $0 (the case in downloading) and paying $15 and going through the hassle of making MP3's (the case in CD-buying).
Um
My point? People who're willing to listen to crap music for free are not necessarily willing to buy crap music for $15.
Global warming is neither science, nor politics. It is a religion.
Do please believe me: the last thing I am is a Britney Spears fan. I couldn't even remember a tune from her.
But to get things straight: She's been professionally singing and performing in Musicals on Broadway since about the age of 10. _professionally_, _singing_, _performing_, _age of 10_. Get it?
The age when us kind was gaming on atari or SNES and was at least 3 years away from even doing our first lines of basic. She's a performer and an entertainer, and, believe it or not, she's damn good at it. With the support of an uber-patient mother and father she's worked herself up from that girl next door to somebody who's got a licence to print money. 'Tell you what: Go eat your hearts out.
Bottom Line: I'd suggest the slashdot crowd quit babbling on stuff they can't summon the slightest shade of competence on (popular stage performance and entertainment) and go back to comparing sendmail and postfix. After all, that's what we're actually good at.
Thank you.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
You know, when I buy music I like to imagine that DANCERS are not getting me money, mainly because I cannot SEE them.
Perhaps (and only perhaps) I could see them getting a cut of video sales. But even then I'm iiffy on it They are hired to do a job. They don't have to dance.
Why should everyone get a percentage instead of just a payment? I'm technical myself but I think there are very few people in the chain that really deserve a cut for every album sold. If a local band records a demo in a rented studio that turns into a big hit, should the janitor that works there get a cut? Or the guy outside asking for change? I'm a firm believer that the artists themselves are the only ones that really deserve whatever is left over in profits from the sale of each album (and perhaps agent and records companies if the artists could not do that on thier own).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Pretty touchy stupid moderator
The parent got modded flamebait for the above comment, but is it really debatable?
Hell, I understand the allure. I'm a lonely slashdotter on a friday night, and it would be nice to, uh... hang... with a girl like that for awhile. But we all know she has no substance, and no... ya know, mystery about her. What you see is what you get. I long for the day when music of substance returns, just like everyone else...but did it ever really leave? Or did the public get sucked down the corporate-pop drainpipe?
There are still artists of integrity, soul, and majesty out there now, playing in empty clubs, or their own basements. We, as the public, need to find them. Really, it's just a matter of looking - the internet makes this possible.
I think Britney's time may be coming to an end. Music of substance and power will find its way back to us as we struggle to find it. I've discovered some incredible east asian folk music recently, and it's some of the most eerie and amazing music I've ever heard. Great songs are out there, we just need to find them, and quit BITCHING all the time about how corporate america doesn't deliver the music we require upon a silver platter. Until we seek out new/old music we deserve that poptripe.
Electric Monkey Pants
I just got an XM radio and have been looking up biographies of the bands I have been listening to from the 1980s and 1990s. Invariably they talk about "getting a record deal" or "signed with a label".
What exactly does this mean? Who gets what and who is obligated to do what? Why were they so eager? This is the old model, of course.
A post farther down here states that support staff don't get their cut if you download off iTunes Music Store and similar under the new model, so maybe some insight there would be +5, informative.
Why would bands sign with the big, bad record companies if these stories of indentured servitude that have been promulgated by earlier bands were true?
Thank you for any insight.
slashdot: A failed experiment.
Actually, all Super Bowl halftime acts go pre-recorded, not just Shania Twain. Most artists agree with the network that the potential for error and embarassment is too great when you're performing for literally a BILLION people.
Sub-trivia: Want to guess the one exception to this rule? U2. When they performed a couple of years ago, they threatened to walk if they couldn't do it live on the spot. Pretty cool, if you ask me.
Hail Doom MCMXVIII!
Ever wonder what a Doom prequel set in A.D. 1918 would be like?
In addition, the NARIP-supplied "iTunes Artist-Producer Royalty Calculation" sheet was fascinating because it answers the question all artists on iTunes keep asking: "How much of a 99-cent download do I get to keep?" While indie artists do better, for major label artists, Apple collects 34 cents, the label keeps 55 cents, and the artist gets a dime.
Ah yes, a dime. Some things never change.
And this shows exactly why Apple isn't a friend to the musician. IF they were , they would allow artists to deal directly with iTunes as a distribution system. Instead, Apple, like all the other corporate thieving bastards, require artists to go through intermediaries, all who take a massive cut of the money.
There are umbrella orgs, such as CDBABY, but WHO in their right minds wants to be part of an organisation called CDBABY? There are a few others, but still, They Take All Their Cut. Leeches - the lot of 'em. They must be SMASHED. After all, it wasn't that long ago that for one to hear music, you had to get off your fat ass and learn to play an instrument. This recorded music thing is an historic anomaly. It will go away. Some day.
RS
Kiew da wabbit!
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
Now, this case is sort of an exception, because all of the lyrics to the songs have to be in Simlish. Pretty hard to find a market for that outside the franchise.
Or with one of the music game companies. Players of Konami's Dance Dance Revolution series, for instance, frankly don't give a flying if they can't understand a song's lyrics. They just want a beat so they can step on arrows. Does EA make music games?
Sharecroppers is a pretty good term, but indentured servant almost applies, since many artists end up owing the label money, with their work tied up legally so they can't rerecord it, and sometimes contracts they can't escape from. Most artists don't earn jack from the record label (even fairly big and well known artists). If something gets a lot of airplay (or clubplay, or anything that BMI/ASCAP collect money for), they may get some money from publishing, but even that's iffy for a lot of artists who have a small but steady following. For every Madonna or Britney Spears, the labels have screwed a thousand smaller artists who don't suck, but aren't consistent with the business model of "small range of product, huge distribution".
w eb.html). The issue of independent bands and filesharing comes up, and most people he knows don't have much problem with filesharing- they're not getting paid by their distributors anyway.
The reason you're seeing "name" acts like They Might Be Giants (and one of my favorites, http://www.neubauten.org) going it alone is that they weren't making any money being on a record label anyway, and they can find a way to do better by dealing with distribution on their own over the web (or combination web and snailmail). A lot of these bands never had terribly good support from their label anyway, and got to be known through word of mouth/college radio/touring. Over the next few years we can probably expect to see some bands make it big without being on a major. Then they just have to deal with Clear Channel's attempts to control major venues...
(only partially off topic: I know a computer wargame company that also has done extremely well by self publishing after having bad experiences with the big publishers, and then subsequently acting as a very developer friendly boutique publisher for similar games. http://www.battlefront.com)
Here's the obligatory link to Steve Albini's "Problem with Music" article: http://www.negativland.com/albini.html
and another to a long (~hour) video clip of him giving a talk and answering questions (http://www.mtsu.edu/~nadam/downloads/Stevealbini
Hey, I got the "share cropper" ID from a rant of Courney Love's from way back; June 14, 2000. I believe it was originally in Slate, and despite her predicaments at the present moment, the speech is quite eloquent and worth the read for anybody who wants a perspective on this from the bad old "Napster Days."
Anyone seen my jagged little pill?
sleazegrinder
paragraph 6
Anyone seen my jagged little pill?
One prediction: "Britney Spears is over."
Yeah, righhht. That reminds me of : "No one eats there anymore; it's too crowded."
The FACT is that Britney whole life has been: 1: Ask people who invest money, "What sells?" 2: Provide THAT for her cut 3. Go back to step 1.
That, my friends, is a winning formula. She's over when she wants to be over and not before.
For (I-tunes) major label artists, Apple collects 34 cents, the label keeps 55 cents, and the artist gets a dime.
Pay the artists a penny a song per disk to provide the top 10,000 songs on every hard disk that's at least 200 gigs in size. I already have over half that and I've paid the artists zero cents per song.
(The label got zip and Apple got nada, and that's the way it oughta be, but I feel for the artists.)
And the labels took a big chunk of any money customers paid for a record.
It was a deal with the devil.
The major record labels were just a bank to finance the artists' distribution & marketing, a specialized bank for artists and musicians but just a bank nonetheless. The artists might as well go to a Credit Union--they've got much lower rates I hear. hehehehe No, better yet, let's view the NEWER business models.
I'm just going to name 2 ways artists are making money now which I listened to on npr.org this week. Now, you don't need these companies to do biz as an artist or "independent creater", but just look at the way the business model CAN BE now without the RIAA.
Artistshare
Maria Schneider, a well-known and highly regarded jazz arranger/band leader now uses artistShare which uses the power & money of the artist's fans and she now makes a little money compared with losing money the past 3 years without her fans' help.
With artistshare, you can buy into various "plans" and get otherwise unavailable CDs, unreleased clips, Schneider's own annotations. At the very top are "Gold Participants" who, for $1,000, get their names listed on her next CD as an underwriter.
Bitpass
Fans make micropayments for specific songs. A comics artist was sick of giving his works away and not receiving any sort of compensation. With bitpass, his fans come back for more while making micropayments and both sides are happy.
* weedshare.com 50% to artists, webjay.org iuma.com CDBaby.com Epitonic.com ampcast.com
The reality is that there are plenty of very talented (arguably even more talented) musicians in the world who don't have label contracts who would do the same job for $150k. The fact that a select few musicians make over 10 times this amount is due to the fact that record companies could afford (and thus controlled) the manufacturing and distribution process. The record companies have been very sucessful at dictating what the public consumes for the past 40 years. This is what has created wealth. A small percentage of this wealth was shared with the artists, but the reality is that artists played a very small and easily replacable part in the wealth creation. I'm not saying that this is right, its just the business reality. Since most of the time a label "creates" the artist through marketing and promotion, "superstar" artists for the most part have been overpaid.
These days, manufactoring and distribution are now cheap enough for the individual to afford. Marketing and promotion are the only real barriers to entry, but these are already collapsing as well. The value of wealth creation is now swinging back to the artists. But there will be less wealth to create.
Once the RIAA is dead, surviving / new labels will make less money, but be much more effiecent.
On average, artists will make less money, but more of them will be able to make a living at it. Consumers will have greater choice in a much more competitive and fair environment.
Most of you all have seen the cartoon of a tree swing made by committee. (?)
p
r ic kell/
http://www.businessballs.com/treeswing.htm
It reminds me of the record business.
Seriously, some of the talent scouts really CAN tell what's really good just by listening (some got the job from their uncle/auntie).
That's where the trouble starts, no one can make a decision-much less a decent pitch without invoking the gods of pop for comparison.
The reason no one is buying is because they're picking stinkers.
Example:
Bonnie Raitt's Nick of Time.
http://www.bonnieraitt.com/disc_nick_of_time.ph
Took marketing totally by surprise!, she was deemed "washed up".
Surprise!
The listening public had NO trouble picking this little gem out and making it gold (what? double platinum).
Another artist they don't push:
http://www.universalrecords.com/quicktime/edieb
Brilliant stuff (for the genre).
If the recording companies were smart they let us pick the hits.
You know, a Fresh Artist, New release download area (with marketing pushing the site heavily).
Many Ears make for a NO Brainer(TM)
My favorite example:
http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/corinnemusic
These artists are hiding in plain site.
The record companies (why yes, I DO know of what I speak) need to fire some people a get with the program.
~hylas
Did Timothy actually read the article before greenlighting this?
post: interesting (perhaps hopeful) business predictions about Britney Spears' career.
article: Britney Spears as a pop artist is over.
That's interesting? That's even a prediction?
This article is a mixture of record company jargon -- "step deals... EA will clear 60 masters... buyout basis..." -- and outright bullshit -- "There is new music coming, real diversity of music, and it will be a rebirth of the record industry."
What a waste of space and time.
Despite the silly name, CDBaby rocks balls. I've ordered a number of amazing indie discs from them (The Big Creak's "Just Left Town" comes to mind) and they've always been inexpensive, friendly, and rediculously fast. I mean like ordered on Monday and the disc arrived on Tuesday type stuff. They're a model for all other music distributors.