I am with you. First, my bias, I own a chain of stores that sell their stuff. So, imagine how frustrating it is to try to help (i.e. protect) your customers when it is almost impossible to reliably know which CDs have DRM and which don't! I think once they clearly label the packages, the free market will drive them to really change the way they handle DRM -- because I think music fans will be far less likely to buy DRM-ed CDs because of this fiasco...and who can blame them!
SonyBMG's first reaction to us (the retailers) was abysmal. They sent out a notice pontificating about their rights to protect their copyrights, yada yada yada. It was such a shameful response.
Now, they have woken up in their response to us. They've given us lists of the DRM'd CDs and also have started giving financial incentives for retailers to pull all the rootkit ones off their shelves (it is amazing to me that not all retailers immediately pulled them off their shelves. We pulled them before sony said they would take them back... but some retailers didn't want that expense and kept RIGHT ON SELLING THEM. shame on them. I hope they get sued too.)
I'm with you. I also develop POS software for NT kernel based systems, and uptime is definitely not an issue. The big three for us are:
1. Ease of use 2. Stability 3. Efficiency of system (i.e. how quick can a clerk ring someone out)
#2 has not been an O/S issue since the NT kernel days. Probably 99 out of 100 issues with stability we run into are hardware issues (blown power supplies, failed hard drives, etc.).
It does matter what the EULA says. Since you are claiming to know something about law, do you want to represent the people who think they will sue over this? Come now.
I'm guess from his nickname, that he (she) may be from the UK... The UK charts are not as "accurate" as the US charts. Their charts for the most part are like the US charts pre-Soundscan - which means pay-offs can push a record falsely up the chart.
I agree with most everything you argue... Know that my "arms crossed" etc. was phrased that way to poke fun at the parent message by paraphrasing their message but changing a few words...
But, as a developer of a completely crappy tiny website and having also had the experience of my site working differently in different browsers (I'm too stupid to make different sites for different browsers), I think this could start the continuous pass the buck/hot potato method of responsibility. If the browsers are lousy, then the websites work around them, but now the browsers (i.e. Firefox) have to work around the websites that are buggy because of the buggy browsers that are buggy because of the buggy websites that are buggy because of the...
You get the idea. So, who should step up and take responsibility? MS won't, so we count on the marketplace to do it. And the most free part of the marketplace is opensource software and the tons of independent websites. So, ok, I'll admit, I blame you!!:)
We weren't saying the same thing. The original poster was arguing on behalf of accepting as a 'de-facto' standard the non-standard parts of IE that have become common on the web. I was arguing that while Firefox was smart to acknowledge those de-facto standards and put in 'fixes' for them so that they render ok, it is not a good long term plan for developers to add non-standard features to their sites because that 'feature-whoredom' that MS encourages is what got us in this mess.
I don't agree with the original poster, but it is an area that thoughtful people can disagree - So, he/she was pushing a reasonable point - just one that I disagree with. That original post shouldn't be marked as a troll post - they were making a decent point.
Note to Website developers: Stop sitting there with your arms crossed and insisting on making sites that aren't in compliance with public standards. Instead support the idea that if we -all- agree on standards it removes the power from proprietary software --- and that the mindset of "well it's just one cool non-standard feature" is exactly the mindset that got us in this mess!
For most DVDs, video games, and CDs you are far, far off. Disney DVDs that retail for 14.99 the first week, are wholesaled at 18 bucks. No, I'm not kidding. Video Games wholesale at about 40 bucks for the ones that sell for 49.99 (only a 20% margin). CDs that sell week one for 9.99 cost between 9.09 and 12.04 depending on manufacturer
I can answer the cost price question for you. Basically the margin is quite similar to before (those 12.98 CDs will cost stores 9 and change where the 18.98 CDs cost stores about 12 and change), but they also removed many of the discounts that could be associated with purchasing CDs.
The biggest one is something called co-op advertising. Our industry is so screwed up that the record companies generally pay us to advertise their records... I mean they pay more than just the cost of the ad - so you make money off of your advertising... One great thing that Universal did with this price reduction is completely killed off co-op. Co-op is really bad in the long run for consumers, because we are influenced to advertise not what customers would want, but what we're paid the most to advertise. Now retailers will have to rethink their strategy and start (here's a shocker) advertising based on customer need not some perversion of consumer demand.
If you had RTFA you would have seen that besides Verizon, Earthlink already caved in. Once you've got one ruling against one ISP, the rest will follow suit because the legal system has already ruled on this.
Totally... For all the pissing we do on record companies (and they deserve *a lot* of it!!), every now and then they come out with stuff that is actually a very fair (or even good) deal. The new Metallica is a good example - the free DVD, the long length of the album, IMHO a very good album, and the reasonable price... It shows what happens when you've got tough competition and a free market working - Metallica (contrary to popular opinion) is a very, very savvy band. They knew to get their fans into the store that they'd have to offer them some cool stuff that isn't easily transmitted via KaZaA and such. And they knew that their fans wanted it to be a decent price.
Just a heads-up, I'm biased as I work at a record store...
The Eagles just released a single and instead of selling it through everybody, they only are selling it through one retailer! So even though the "price fixing" lawsuit finished, by selling through only one retailer, the music consumer ends up paying a higher price because the retailer doesn't have to compete for business. Using this Eagles single and the new Metallica as an example:
The new Metallica: loads of competition. Best Buy price for first week: 9.99. Wholesale price to record stores (and Best Buy): 11 bucks and change. Net Margin? Negative!
The Eagles DVD single. no competition. Best Buy price: 6.99. Wholesale price to record stores (and Best Buy): 4-5 bucks. Net Margin? 28-40%
Also, compare the price of that DVD single with others --- a lot of DVD singles have run only a couple of bucks (heck, the last McCartney DVD single was actually FREE to encourage people to buy the full length) --- so in this case the manufacturer actually raised their price also because there would be no competition on it.
The frustrating thing about this is that the Eagles are directly responsible - they made this big deal about leaving all the major record companies - but when they did, they made even worse decisions than the major record companies did - independent record stores like mine are locked out from selling the record, while the one major company makes big bucks on it. Considering all the BS Don Henley gives about fighting corporations and such, he's just a washed up hypocrite.
You're right - I did overlook those two. Hybrid Theory (which had to be renamed) got signed almost solely because of MP3.com - I'm not as sure about Drowning Pool's deal, but it I believe you.
Yes, I am sure about it... and it's a conservative #... The reason small bands keep doing it is so they hope they get "discovered" and think that getting signed is this massive road to riches. Where getting signed will raise the bar for you (meaning some cash may be put behind you) it is by no means a sure thing...
The reason most people don't believe the # when they first see it (I think it was pollstar that put the losing show estimate at 99% a couple years ago) is that they're only looking at big shows! Take a look at your local alternative paper and see how many bands that you've never heard of who are playing dive bars trying to make it big. In decent sized cities, those bars make you *buy the show out* before playing... so you only can hope to break even if your show sells out...
It works like this:
club owner: i've never heard of you. I don't want to risk losing beer sales. band: we'll promote ourselves. club owner: b.s. band: we swear club owner: well, ok, then my club has 200 capacity. at 10 bucks a head, that's 2K. I'll let you play but you have to give me the 2k up front. I'll give you the full door for that. band: time to call up grandma and borrow more money.
I don't know where you shop at, but man are they ripping you off:)! The store I work at averages 9.99 to 11.99 on release week for major new releases (like Madonna this week is at 9.99 and last week Godsmack was at 9.99) and none are really over 13.99. A lot of developing artists (i.e. new bands) are at 6.99...
But you're right on about video games... They start at 49.99 list, but drop to 39.99 - 29.99 pretty quick and a lot are 19.99. They are very sharp and very aggressive at discounting them quickly. The margin as far as the retailer goes is incredibly low (the 49.99 games cost us about 41 bucks - but they're one way, so if you don't sell them all and the price goes down....) but the video game companies have their pricing pretty figured out.
DVD companies, otoh, are all over the map... warner is incredibly aggressive on pricing while some others are pretty high for the most part...
As somebody working in the music biz, I feel a little bit like I work at a buggy whip manufacturer or something as we are perhaps a business destined for the history books...
Anyway, I agree with your three points--- especially #2. At the store I work at, DVDs and games are going through the roof. Some in the music biz argues that that's because they can't be pirated, but I think it's simpler than that: customers like video games better than a CD and would rather spend 50 bucks on a game than buy 3 CDs.
If that was the case, MP3.com would have some huge successes... They haven't... Because, sad as this is, most of the value in big name artists is in the marketing --- *not* the music.
The idea of that sounds great, but unfortunately in reality, over 95% of bands do not make money touring. I work with tons of small localish bands, and can say here is how the current biz model works for small, medium, and large bands.
Small (i.e. local bands) 1. May break-even on their CD after recording costs. Some even make some decent cash on the CDs if they sell more than 2K of them. 2. Unlikely to get any decent amount of ASCAP/BMI money. 3. Lose money playing out. Lucky to get a beer for a show.
Medium (i.e. developing artist - sales under 900K) 1. Lose major cash on the CD. Label invents big dough in videos and stuff hoping to push them to Large sized act. 2. Make a bit of dough from ASCAP/BMI if they get radio play. 3. Band breaks even playing out generally because the label generally underwrites their shows (called a guarantee) in hopes that it will drive CD sales. If the label has given up on CD sales, the band loses big touring.
Large Act (over 900k): 1. Either make huge cash or no cash on their CDs. The no cash ones are like MJ where the label spent massive dough promoting and producing the album but saw sales that would make money with most artists, but because they poured so much dough into the album, they lose. 2. Almost all large acts make good dough off of ASCAP/BMI. 3. Only the acts who have a number of huge selling albums or extensive, extensive touring history make huge cash here. but when they do get to that level (i.e. rolling stones) they make massive, massive cash.
>I am not going to buy anything that limits me in any way.
Have you ever bought a MS O/S? Talk about limiting! At least CDs you can play on a bunch of CD players... If MS ruled the music biz, you'd have to buy one CD for each CD player you had. And if you CD player broke, you'd need to buy a new one since your CD's license is attached to your now defunct CD player.
Your comments are very insightful and I understand your points... However I doubt the Senators/entertainment companies could give a crud - if you don't buy they don't care... our country worships the almightly dollar anyway, and they're betting that you'll cave in some day - and if not they'll have plenty of other lazy sheep to buy their products. I mean, we're the country that is happily paying over a buck for a drink of water. We are become greater and greater suckers every year. So now I need to get into my overpriced SUV with my overpriced Latte... If our country showed any willpower at all, I'd feel like there was a chance for real change, but the fact is that we don't.
>I'm just waiting for ONE major artist (Madonna, >Phil Collins, Elton John, etc.) to publically refuse to resign with the RIAA and to go to a pure Internet-based distribution system and playing concerts.
Wait no longer. The Artist formerly known as Prince did. He (it?) failed miserably.
Slashdot Mirror
Please read something about black bodies before you expose us to more of your ignorance :o)
You can absolutely make ice when the surrounding air is above freezing.
This link is more colloquial/easier to read than the wiki entry:
http://www.kilty.com/freeze.htm
I am with you. First, my bias, I own a chain of stores that sell their stuff. So, imagine how frustrating it is to try to help (i.e. protect) your customers when it is almost impossible to reliably know which CDs have DRM and which don't! I think once they clearly label the packages, the free market will drive them to really change the way they handle DRM -- because I think music fans will be far less likely to buy DRM-ed CDs because of this fiasco...and who can blame them!
SonyBMG's first reaction to us (the retailers) was abysmal. They sent out a notice pontificating about their rights to protect their copyrights, yada yada yada. It was such a shameful response.
Now, they have woken up in their response to us. They've given us lists of the DRM'd CDs and also have started giving financial incentives for retailers to pull all the rootkit ones off their shelves (it is amazing to me that not all retailers immediately pulled them off their shelves. We pulled them before sony said they would take them back... but some retailers didn't want that expense and kept RIGHT ON SELLING THEM. shame on them. I hope they get sued too.)
I'm with you. I also develop POS software for NT kernel based systems, and uptime is definitely not an issue. The big three for us are:
1. Ease of use
2. Stability
3. Efficiency of system (i.e. how quick can a clerk ring someone out)
#2 has not been an O/S issue since the NT kernel days. Probably 99 out of 100 issues with stability we run into are hardware issues (blown power supplies, failed hard drives, etc.).
It does matter what the EULA says. Since you are claiming to know something about law, do you want to represent the people who think they will sue over this? Come now.
I'm guess from his nickname, that he (she) may be from the UK... The UK charts are not as "accurate" as the US charts. Their charts for the most part are like the US charts pre-Soundscan - which means pay-offs can push a record falsely up the chart.
I agree with most everything you argue... Know that my "arms crossed" etc. was phrased that way to poke fun at the parent message by paraphrasing their message but changing a few words... But, as a developer of a completely crappy tiny website and having also had the experience of my site working differently in different browsers (I'm too stupid to make different sites for different browsers), I think this could start the continuous pass the buck/hot potato method of responsibility. If the browsers are lousy, then the websites work around them, but now the browsers (i.e. Firefox) have to work around the websites that are buggy because of the buggy browsers that are buggy because of the buggy websites that are buggy because of the... You get the idea. So, who should step up and take responsibility? MS won't, so we count on the marketplace to do it. And the most free part of the marketplace is opensource software and the tons of independent websites. So, ok, I'll admit, I blame you!! :)
We weren't saying the same thing. The original poster was arguing on behalf of accepting as a 'de-facto' standard the non-standard parts of IE that have become common on the web. I was arguing that while Firefox was smart to acknowledge those de-facto standards and put in 'fixes' for them so that they render ok, it is not a good long term plan for developers to add non-standard features to their sites because that 'feature-whoredom' that MS encourages is what got us in this mess. I don't agree with the original poster, but it is an area that thoughtful people can disagree - So, he/she was pushing a reasonable point - just one that I disagree with. That original post shouldn't be marked as a troll post - they were making a decent point.
Note to Website developers: Stop sitting there with your arms crossed and insisting on making sites that aren't in compliance with public standards. Instead support the idea that if we -all- agree on standards it removes the power from proprietary software --- and that the mindset of "well it's just one cool non-standard feature" is exactly the mindset that got us in this mess!
For most DVDs, video games, and CDs you are far, far off. Disney DVDs that retail for 14.99 the first week, are wholesaled at 18 bucks. No, I'm not kidding. Video Games wholesale at about 40 bucks for the ones that sell for 49.99 (only a 20% margin). CDs that sell week one for 9.99 cost between 9.09 and 12.04 depending on manufacturer
The parent message should be marked as "wrong", not "informative"...
With almost all music (except that done specifically as work for hire like certain advertisements) the writers retain the copyright.
Had you patented it, you could now be firing up your lawyers.
I can answer the cost price question for you. Basically the margin is quite similar to before (those 12.98 CDs will cost stores 9 and change where the 18.98 CDs cost stores about 12 and change), but they also removed many of the discounts that could be associated with purchasing CDs.
The biggest one is something called co-op advertising. Our industry is so screwed up that the record companies generally pay us to advertise their records... I mean they pay more than just the cost of the ad - so you make money off of your advertising... One great thing that Universal did with this price reduction is completely killed off co-op. Co-op is really bad in the long run for consumers, because we are influenced to advertise not what customers would want, but what we're paid the most to advertise. Now retailers will have to rethink their strategy and start (here's a shocker) advertising based on customer need not some perversion of consumer demand.
32 bit memory addressing is 4GB not 2GB.
If you had RTFA you would have seen that besides Verizon, Earthlink already caved in. Once you've got one ruling against one ISP, the rest will follow suit because the legal system has already ruled on this.
Totally... For all the pissing we do on record companies (and they deserve *a lot* of it!!), every now and then they come out with stuff that is actually a very fair (or even good) deal. The new Metallica is a good example - the free DVD, the long length of the album, IMHO a very good album, and the reasonable price... It shows what happens when you've got tough competition and a free market working - Metallica (contrary to popular opinion) is a very, very savvy band. They knew to get their fans into the store that they'd have to offer them some cool stuff that isn't easily transmitted via KaZaA and such. And they knew that their fans wanted it to be a decent price.
Just a heads-up, I'm biased as I work at a record store...
The Eagles just released a single and instead of selling it through everybody, they only are selling it through one retailer! So even though the "price fixing" lawsuit finished, by selling through only one retailer, the music consumer ends up paying a higher price because the retailer doesn't have to compete for business. Using this Eagles single and the new Metallica as an example:
The new Metallica: loads of competition. Best Buy price for first week: 9.99. Wholesale price to record stores (and Best Buy): 11 bucks and change. Net Margin? Negative!
The Eagles DVD single. no competition. Best Buy price: 6.99. Wholesale price to record stores (and Best Buy): 4-5 bucks. Net Margin? 28-40%
Also, compare the price of that DVD single with others --- a lot of DVD singles have run only a couple of bucks (heck, the last McCartney DVD single was actually FREE to encourage people to buy the full length) --- so in this case the manufacturer actually raised their price also because there would be no competition on it.
The frustrating thing about this is that the Eagles are directly responsible - they made this big deal about leaving all the major record companies - but when they did, they made even worse decisions than the major record companies did - independent record stores like mine are locked out from selling the record, while the one major company makes big bucks on it. Considering all the BS Don Henley gives about fighting corporations and such, he's just a washed up hypocrite.
You're right - I did overlook those two. Hybrid Theory (which had to be renamed) got signed almost solely because of MP3.com - I'm not as sure about Drowning Pool's deal, but it I believe you.
Yes, I am sure about it... and it's a conservative #... The reason small bands keep doing it is so they hope they get "discovered" and think that getting signed is this massive road to riches. Where getting signed will raise the bar for you (meaning some cash may be put behind you) it is by no means a sure thing...
The reason most people don't believe the # when they first see it (I think it was pollstar that put the losing show estimate at 99% a couple years ago) is that they're only looking at big shows! Take a look at your local alternative paper and see how many bands that you've never heard of who are playing dive bars trying to make it big. In decent sized cities, those bars make you *buy the show out* before playing... so you only can hope to break even if your show sells out...
It works like this:
club owner: i've never heard of you. I don't want to risk losing beer sales.
band: we'll promote ourselves.
club owner: b.s.
band: we swear
club owner: well, ok, then my club has 200 capacity. at 10 bucks a head, that's 2K. I'll let you play but you have to give me the 2k up front. I'll give you the full door for that.
band: time to call up grandma and borrow more money.
I don't know where you shop at, but man are they ripping you off :)! The store I work at averages 9.99 to 11.99 on release week for major new releases (like Madonna this week is at 9.99 and last week Godsmack was at 9.99) and none are really over 13.99. A lot of developing artists (i.e. new bands) are at 6.99...
....) but the video game companies have their pricing pretty figured out.
But you're right on about video games... They start at 49.99 list, but drop to 39.99 - 29.99 pretty quick and a lot are 19.99. They are very sharp and very aggressive at discounting them quickly. The margin as far as the retailer goes is incredibly low (the 49.99 games cost us about 41 bucks - but they're one way, so if you don't sell them all and the price goes down
DVD companies, otoh, are all over the map... warner is incredibly aggressive on pricing while some others are pretty high for the most part...
As somebody working in the music biz, I feel a little bit like I work at a buggy whip manufacturer or something as we are perhaps a business destined for the history books...
Anyway, I agree with your three points--- especially #2. At the store I work at, DVDs and games are going through the roof. Some in the music biz argues that that's because they can't be pirated, but I think it's simpler than that: customers like video games better than a CD and would rather spend 50 bucks on a game than buy 3 CDs.
If that was the case, MP3.com would have some huge successes... They haven't... Because, sad as this is, most of the value in big name artists is in the marketing --- *not* the music.
The idea of that sounds great, but unfortunately in reality, over 95% of bands do not make money touring. I work with tons of small localish bands, and can say here is how the current biz model works for small, medium, and large bands.
Small (i.e. local bands)
1. May break-even on their CD after recording costs. Some even make some decent cash on the CDs if they sell more than 2K of them.
2. Unlikely to get any decent amount of ASCAP/BMI money.
3. Lose money playing out. Lucky to get a beer for a show.
Medium (i.e. developing artist - sales under 900K)
1. Lose major cash on the CD. Label invents big dough in videos and stuff hoping to push them to Large sized act.
2. Make a bit of dough from ASCAP/BMI if they get radio play.
3. Band breaks even playing out generally because the label generally underwrites their shows (called a guarantee) in hopes that it will drive CD sales. If the label has given up on CD sales, the band loses big touring.
Large Act (over 900k):
1. Either make huge cash or no cash on their CDs. The no cash ones are like MJ where the label spent massive dough promoting and producing the album but saw sales that would make money with most artists, but because they poured so much dough into the album, they lose.
2. Almost all large acts make good dough off of ASCAP/BMI.
3. Only the acts who have a number of huge selling albums or extensive, extensive touring history make huge cash here. but when they do get to that level (i.e. rolling stones) they make massive, massive cash.
>I am not going to buy anything that limits me in any way.
Have you ever bought a MS O/S? Talk about limiting! At least CDs you can play on a bunch of CD players... If MS ruled the music biz, you'd have to buy one CD for each CD player you had. And if you CD player broke, you'd need to buy a new one since your CD's license is attached to your now defunct CD player.
Your comments are very insightful and I understand your points... However I doubt the Senators/entertainment companies could give a crud - if you don't buy they don't care... our country worships the almightly dollar anyway, and they're betting that you'll cave in some day - and if not they'll have plenty of other lazy sheep to buy their products. I mean, we're the country that is happily paying over a buck for a drink of water. We are become greater and greater suckers every year. So now I need to get into my overpriced SUV with my overpriced Latte... If our country showed any willpower at all, I'd feel like there was a chance for real change, but the fact is that we don't.
>I'm just waiting for ONE major artist (Madonna, >Phil Collins, Elton John, etc.) to publically refuse to resign with the RIAA and to go to a pure Internet-based distribution system and playing concerts.
Wait no longer. The Artist formerly known as Prince did. He (it?) failed miserably.