Slashdot Mirror


Is Shawn Fanning's Snocap melting?

newtley writes "Rumors are swirling about the pending demise of Napster creator Shawn Fanning's Snocap, says former MP3.com CEO Michael Robertson. 'Articles mention a sale, but more likely it will be a shuttering and quiet bankruptcy,' he believes. 'Snocap represents a commonplace occurrence in the music business — an unprofitable retailer which withers and eventually dies.'"

11 of 93 comments (clear)

  1. Shawn Fanning, pioneer by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Without Napster arriving on the scene more than 10 years ago and opening our eyes to the power of p2p, I wonder what sort of world we'd be living in today. Would the record companies have been smarter in their online moves? Would we have a system of DRM that wasn't obnoxious? Would we even have a clear idea of what sorts of rights we'd want with regards to ephemeral data like music and movies? Shawn Fanning brought all these concepts to a head and we've been changed because of it.

    The only SnoCap that is any good is Pyramid's version, but I don't think we can easily share that online. It's really something better to be shared peer to peer.

    1. Re:Shawn Fanning, pioneer by pkadd · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Agreed. Without napster 10 years ago, we'd still have to buy overpriced albums, when all you really is to hear a few songs to figure out whether it's worth buying at all. I, as most people here i bet, download music in the old way of pirating, but good music always ends up being bought. If it wasn't for napster leading the way for p2p downloads, thus allowing me to easier find new music to listen to, my CD collection would have been tinyer than my penis..

    2. Re:Shawn Fanning, pioneer by cliffiecee · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Without Napster arriving on the scene more than 10 years ago and opening our eyes to the power of p2p, I wonder what sort of world we'd be living in today...

      One word. Usenet.

    3. Re:Shawn Fanning, pioneer by neapolitan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I remember when Napster emerged everybody said how Shawn Fanning was a genius, and that this was a game-changing product, even though the application itself was not original (numerous p2p clients at the time, and this was bogged by use of a central indexing server, and music-specific.) The whole thing IIRC was in a visual-basic type language.

      I am sad that his business ventures are going south, but it is a competitive industry, and frankly, not too hard to see the huge risk in this. They were not first on the line to the (legit) online music industry, nor did they get enough partnerships. Ability to code up a small VB / AJAX website does not make you a genius.

      --
      Slashdotter, ID #101. UIDs are in binary, right?
  2. China man by kamapuaa · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I hate to be Mr. Offended-too-easily. But I was slightly shocked to see the article describe the business model as "pair of sandals to every China man" - a racist epithet that would get you punched in the mouth in the wrong company! The article puts the term in quotes, but a Google search of the term just points back to the article in question. What gives? It's hard to believe a gentleman-CEO on a semi-respectable website would throw racist terminology around.

    --
    Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    1. Re:China man by Raideen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Chineseman" would be more akin to "Dutchman" or "Welshman". I think that part of the problem is the misappropriation of the term and the history of its use. I would be "a Chinaman" (or simply, "Chinaman" if referring to me directly) to many people who actually use that term, although I'm not Chinese. Have you called total strangers "Dutchman" or "Welshman"? Is there a history of usage of those terms that was derogatory? Have you ever used those terms to refer to all people of a certain skin color? Sure, there are worse terms, but I guess that most people who are saying that it's not racist at all haven't been alive long enough to have actually heard it used that way and have never been referred to as "Chinaman".

    2. Re:China man by heinousjay · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Oscar: Both my parents were born in Mexico, and they moved to the United States a year before I was born, so I grew up in the United States... my parents were Mexican.
      Michael Scott: Wow, that is a great story. That's the American dream right there, right? Um, let me ask you, is there a term besides 'Mexican' that you prefer? Something less offensive?

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
  3. Re:Geez, mister political correct by peragrin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The Napster model is failing.

    iTunes is a billion of cheap sales.

    Napster is you pay us money or we cut off your music supply. It's subscription radio. Satellite radio is trying that and is barely surviving. One company had to buy the other in order to have enough customers to survive.

    Subscription video/tv yea that works. subscription music will never work as people don't listen to music that way. At least Satellite subscription offered something unique.

    --
    i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
  4. TFA's problems by Smauler · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The sad truth is that while the music business appears glamorous - and certain parts may be - the business of selling recorded music is unprofitable for everyone. That's right - everyone. Big box retailers move mountains of CDs but it's typically a loss leader designed to get people into the store rather than generate a profit. Offline music only retailers such as Tower Records have largely vanished.

    If this is true (I haven't read up on all the figures), then this is what is wrong with the recording industry. If you can't make a profit selling millions of copies of something for £10 which costs (basically) nothing to replicate, and is the work of a few people over less than a year, your business is screwed. Seriously.

    Selling music is like selling gravel. It's a commodity.

    No, selling music is _not_ like selling gravel. When was the last time itunes ran out of stock of a downloadable song? The entire idea is stupid. If itunes sell me a song which I download, do they no longer have the song?

  5. The market value of digital music: zero. by dada21 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As I said in the comments on the p2p site:

    Recorded music will always have a market value of zero, or close to it. Even $1 per song is too high, and this price will fall.

    All markets rely on supply and demand: as the supply of an item, prices fall. As the demand for an item goes down, prices fall.

    Digital music has a near-infinite supply. Transfering 3MB of data (say, one song), as a cost of less than 1/2 cents from a server. P2P the cost is trivial and far lower.

    Yet there IS a way to make money with music: it's called performing and value added items. When you go to work, say flipping burgers, you're paid for the act of working, the labor. The person who invented the burger doesn't charge fees for the act of making a burger. Music is no different. Making music, the act of writing it, is akin to learning how to make a burger. All of us get trained at no profit, and sometimes at great risk of a loss of time. Learning to make music is tricky, and it is artistic, but it should be no different in terms of learning how to make a burger, or learning how to fix a leaky faucet.

    Bands will soon rely only on the performance of their music. That's what differentiates one band from another: their ability to entertain. And entertainment has GREAT value. There are many ways for bands to make money entertaining. You can play live. Maybe sell your CDs and include 1 ticket to a live concert. Or sell a CD, and include 5 tickets to an online performance.

    Making money doesn't end there. How about selling CDs and offering CD purchasers the chance to win an hour of lessons in how to play their favorite song? Oh wait, the government prevents bands from offering contests in exchange for buying an item. It's the law that harms the musician.

    You can make money selling autographed albums, or selling DVDs or CDs of the actual concert people attended. The cost to record a concert, and burn 50 CDs in 10 minutes before people leave, is trivial.

    Don't complain about the zero value of recorded music -- its a market process that can't be worked around. Instead, find ways to MAKE MONEY WITH YOUR NEW AND ONGOING LABORS. Just like the burger flipper or the faucet-leak fixer.
    ---

    I own a small music production and marketing business, and I help quite a few local bands make money. How do we do it? We book them shows non-stop. We target cities in the middle of nowhere, visit there once, build a street team, and then go back over and over and over. We sell awesome and rare silkscreened posters that cost us $0.15 each but sell for $5, $10 with an autograph. We sell limited edition LPs (yes, records) and move to sell them out faster than we get them in.

    I designed a system that records a concert (music feed from the board, two cameras without cameramen) and burns DVDs of the show within 15 minutes of the end of the show. Those DVDs can be given away, or sold for a small price. Sell 5 DVDs for $5 and let people in the town give them to friends (or better yet, give them away freely). This generates more buzz for future shows.

    A band is no different than a plumber, a burger-flipper, or an architect. We all learn how to produce new labor on our own time and dime, and then we use that learning to generate income by working. Recorded music is marketing, and marketing has a cost, rarely a profit. You market yourself to get people to pay for your future labor, not your past.

    I see a future in my small market to generate millions, but not online, and not with the recorded music. Instead, we're talking about packing shows in Bertrand, Nebraska and DeKalb, Illinois, where there are thousands of teenagers and young adults who are seriously bored out of their minds sitting on the web all day long. They want, and pay for, good bands to come out and charge their lives with loud and fun music. Don't visit a town once, visit it 6 times a year. A tour van costs $15,000, and the gas is $100 or so a show. Pack a venue with 300 young adults paying $6 each, sell $1000 in completely

    1. Re:The market value of digital music: zero. by HairyCanary · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I can't 'perform' my software as a software developer, but it can be distributed at zero cost.

      You gave an example that refutes your own statement. We already live in a world where developers are paid to write software which is distributed at no cost.

      Books have a tangible value, so they will continue to be sold. Electronic copies of books have no value, but many of us LIKE the physical books and will pay for their continued existence, so I think authors are safe. Drugs are not electronic in any situation so I do not know why you included those in your argument. Musicians will perform for a fee, and the free distribution of their music will benefit that more than hurt it.

      Finally, as much as I hate to say it since I am a fan of the U.S. Constitution ... you need to understand that it was written two centuries ago and the founders had not the slightest inkling of what was coming. No amount of legislation will ever overcome the reality of the digital world. Fighting it is doing far more harm then help to our nation's economy. We will quibble about the intellectual property, companies will suspend forward progress while fighting patent holding companies that don't produce *anything*, and in the meantime other countries without such qualms will march right on by and take the lead.