Why I don't feel sorry for the music industry-

Milestone

I hear read alot of moaning and groaning by the record industry hurting due to internet/file sharing, ect...

Well, I remember the late 1980's when we switched from albums to cd's.....and the cd's cost MORE. Oddly, it actually cost more to manufacture a record than a cd....but they knew they could gouge on prices because everyone wanted cd's.

I say, Fuck 'em.

intodeep

Milestone wrote:

I say, Fuck 'em.

me2

drew0

Not to mention that record companies keep promoting such shitty artists as Nickelback, Fall Out Boy, etc. and then wonder why their record sales are down. Yes, sales are down due to file sharing. They're also down because you're only promoting shitty artists who all sound the same.

soulsinging

Milestone wrote:

I hear read alot of moaning and groaning by the record industry hurting due to internet/file sharing, ect...

Well, I remember the late 1980's when we switched from albums to cd's.....and the cd's cost MORE. Oddly, it actually cost more to manufacture a record than a cd....but they knew they could gouge on prices because everyone wanted cd's.

I say, Fuck 'em.

they lost a huge price fixing lawsuit. they've been fucking consumers for years. they phased out singles and then screwed people with $18 cd's, forcing them to buy the whole thing to get the one song they like. i've never known any industry aside from oil/gas that seems to care so little for its customers. people will buy cd's. they will buy singles. and they do buy from download services like itunes. the record companies need to shape up or die out. they chose a business plan that treats its customers like shit, and now they're crying foul when the customers wised up and told them to piss off. the biggest consumers of music are teens and college kids. and they expect these people to shell out $20 for every song they want? fuck that.

tybird

soulsinging wrote:

they lost a huge price fixing lawsuit. they've been fucking consumers for years. they phased out singles and then screwed people with $18 cd's, forcing them to buy the whole thing to get the one song they like. i've never known any industry aside from oil/gas that seems to care so little for its customers. people will buy cd's. they will buy singles. and they do buy from download services like itunes. the record companies need to shape up or die out. they chose a business plan that treats its customers like shit, and now they're crying foul when the customers wised up and told them to piss off. the biggest consumers of music are teens and college kids. and they expect these people to shell out $20 for every song they want? fuck that.

They are also losing payola lawsuits. It seems that the reason that radio plays such shitty music is that the recording industry was paying them under the table to do it. So, greed killed two industries at once....the recording industry and terrestrial radio.

Milestone

tybird wrote:

So, greed killed two industries at once....the recording industry and terrestrial radio.

Dirty rats.

JaneNY

I agree with the original poster.

Also, you guys should look up the Bob Lefsetz newsletter - he has a lot to say along these lines about the state of the music industry.
http://www.lefsetz.com/

TVVNCYBRAPJ

Terrestrial radio really blows now...it wasnt so bad five years ago. Theres a commercial thats been on the radio for awhile, it starts off with a weather report and then abruptly ends with the payphone style "Please deposit 50 cents". And then an announcer says "radio, you shouldnt have to pay for it" I always said after that, "radio, it shouldnt suck so much!"... sure radio sucks anyway, but the commercials make it even worse. I quit listening to the radio about two years ago, I still buy cds, but not many. I'll eventually get Sirius.

tybird

TVVNCYBRAPJ wrote:

Terrestrial radio really blows now...it wasnt so bad five years ago. Theres a commercial thats been on the radio for awhile, it starts off with a weather report and then abruptly ends with the payphone style "Please deposit 50 cents". And then an announcer says "radio, you shouldnt have to pay for it" I always said after that, "radio, it shouldnt suck so much!"... sure radio sucks anyway, but the commercials make it even worse. I quit listening to the radio about two years ago, I still buy cds, but not many. I'll eventually get Sirius.

My wife loves her Sirius.........me??? I have a six disc changer in the ride.

somebodyelsessky2020

this is why i don't feel sorry for the music industry
http://youtube.com/watch?v=jvz0bvYmnto

itsevobaby

record companies are also shotting themselves in the foot with their release timings. we live in an age now where the consumer expects to get what they want when they want it & with the internet they can, anything you could possibly want at the click of a mouse. but labels continue to 'tease' audiences by releasing a song to radio & tv up to a month before anything is actually physically released to the public!? so of course people are going to bypass the record companies! it's cheaper & faster. fucken record companies, idiots :rolleyes:

Cosmo

There's a reason why there are 50 Britneys out there... and all RAP music sounds the same... and everyone looks/sounds like a poor facsmile of a cross between Green Day and Blink-182.
Britney's sell... RAP Music Sells... and record company execs gave up trying to find/manufacture the next Beatles and Nirvana and have settled for blurry copies of Blink-182.
Fuck the Monster Machine. Let it Bleed.

Schoki

Strange! Felt the same today when i saw that a music company released another Clawfinger album. Listenend to it just for curiosity and they sound exactly the same, well even worse than 15 years ago! Stop producing such shitty output and save that money for bands worth it.

Kann

drew0 wrote:

Not to mention that record companies keep promoting such shitty artists as Nickelback, Fall Out Boy, etc. and then wonder why their record sales are down. Yes, sales are down due to file sharing. They're also down because you're only promoting shitty artists who all sound the same.

You have a point there, 10 years ago we had no choice but to listen to the radio/tv to discover new stuff (not counting the small gigs and/or festivals with nice surprises). Today with internet I can bypass these shitty mediums and easily find stuff I actually like. An advice for the majors, look at what is downloaded => this is popular : air it!
Also after fucking with the customers for so long no one has any remorse to see them suffer.

glasshouse

Milestone wrote:

I say, Fuck 'em.

:cool:

DOSW

The problem with record companies is that they're not adapting. They've been using the same basic principles of selling music for the past couple decades. But now the industry is changing, and the change is INEVITABLE... but instead of changing their ways of business, they just whine and complain about how filesharing is ruining their lives. I say shut the fuck up. You don't like it, DO something about it.... besides those little lawsuits you love so much.

lalalalaaaaaaaa

Every argument presented on this thread (and every thread I've seen on this) basically boils down to the conclusion that it's ok to steal. It's a bullshit argument no matter how you slice it. No record company ever fucked me over...it's not like they're selling me air to breathe...it's records. You want records? Pay for them, don't steal them. No one is entitled to have all the music they want. If you think they're too expensive, don't buy them, and pressure the industry to sell them cheaper...pressure artists to stay on indie labels...march in protest if you want...it's still wrong to steal music, and in the end, you're only hurting the artists that create it for you. Anyone CAN avoid getting ripped off by record companies by buying direct from the artist or buying singles on itunes. I'd bet $100 that even with these options available, most people bitching about the record industry still steal their music.

You ever notice how most artists remain rather silent on the issue? There's a reason for that. They hate that people download music, but they don't want to look like assholes like Metallica did by speaking out against it. They're in a really tough spot, and they just want to make a living. Yeah, I know they make most of their money touring, but it still doesn't make it ok for you to not pay for their cd.

I don't feel bad for record companies either, because their business practices are shitty in general. They hurt artists and they hurt consumers. But it's still wrong to steal music.

transplant

Saturnal wrote:

Every argument presented on this thread (and every thread I've seen on this) basically boils down to the conclusion that it's ok to steal. It's a bullshit argument no matter how you slice it. No record company ever fucked me over...it's not like they're selling me air to breathe...it's records. You want records? Pay for them, don't steal them. No one is entitled to have all the music they want. If you think they're too expensive, don't buy them, and pressure the industry to sell them cheaper...pressure artists to stay on indie labels...march in protest if you want...it's still wrong to steal music, and in the end, you're only hurting the artists that create it for you. Anyone CAN avoid getting ripped off by record companies by buying direct from the artist or buying singles on itunes. I'd bet $100 that even with these options available, most people bitching about the record industry still steal their music.

You ever notice how most artists remain rather silent on the issue? There's a reason for that. They hate that people download music, but they don't want to look like assholes like Metallica did by speaking out against it. They're in a really tough spot, and they just want to make a living. Yeah, I know they make most of their money touring, but it still doesn't make it ok for you to not pay for their cd.

I don't feel bad for record companies either, because their business practices are shitty in general. They hurt artists and they hurt consumers. But it's still wrong to steal music.

right on dude.

itsevobaby

Saturnal wrote:

I don't feel bad for record companies either, because their business practices are shitty in general. They hurt artists and they hurt consumers. But it's still wrong to steal music.

agreed

soulsinging

Saturnal wrote:

Every argument presented on this thread (and every thread I've seen on this) basically boils down to the conclusion that it's ok to steal. It's a bullshit argument no matter how you slice it. No record company ever fucked me over...it's not like they're selling me air to breathe...it's records. You want records? Pay for them, don't steal them. No one is entitled to have all the music they want. If you think they're too expensive, don't buy them, and pressure the industry to sell them cheaper...pressure artists to stay on indie labels...march in protest if you want...it's still wrong to steal music, and in the end, you're only hurting the artists that create it for you. Anyone CAN avoid getting ripped off by record companies by buying direct from the artist or buying singles on itunes. I'd bet $100 that even with these options available, most people bitching about the record industry still steal their music.

You ever notice how most artists remain rather silent on the issue? There's a reason for that. They hate that people download music, but they don't want to look like assholes like Metallica did by speaking out against it. They're in a really tough spot, and they just want to make a living. Yeah, I know they make most of their money touring, but it still doesn't make it ok for you to not pay for their cd.

I don't feel bad for record companies either, because their business practices are shitty in general. They hurt artists and they hurt consumers. But it's still wrong to steal music.

bullshit.

1) the record companies are running a shitty business model and refusing to adapt

2) artists don't see a dime from albums sales, it only hurts record companies

3) a lot of bands encourage or at least don't give a shit if people download becos they know the more people listening the more people going to shows and buying merch (which is how they actually make money)

4) i buy almost all of my cd's from used shops... where not a cent goes to the artists anyway

5) downloading is hardly different from recording a song off the radio or taping it from a friend... which the industry also pissed and moaned about when cassettes came out. lo and behold, people still buy music

lalalalaaaaaaaa

soulsinging wrote:

bullshit.

1) the record companies are running a shitty business model and refusing to adapt

2) artists don't see a dime from albums sales, it only hurts record companies

3) a lot of bands encourage or at least don't give a shit if people download becos they know the more people listening the more people going to shows and buying merch (which is how they actually make money)

4) i buy almost all of my cd's from used shops... where not a cent goes to the artists anyway

5) downloading is hardly different from recording a song off the radio or taping it from a friend... which the industry also pissed and moaned about when cassettes came out. lo and behold, people still buy music

Again, it all goes back to the argument that it's ok to steal. You call it "downloading" or "sharing" or whatever else, but it's stealing. If we were talking about pills instead of music, we wouldn't say "some kid downloaded some oxee from the pharmacy and shared it with his friends....nothing wrong with that! these drug companies have been fucking people for years. fuck em."

soulsinging

Saturnal wrote:

Again, it all goes back to the argument that it's ok to steal. You call it "downloading" or "sharing" or whatever else, but it's stealing. If we were talking about pills instead of music, we wouldn't say "some kid downloaded some oxee from the pharmacy and shared it with his friends....nothing wrong with that! these drug companies have been fucking people for years. fuck em."

if you tape a song off the radio is it stealing? are the mixes we did in our cd swap on here contributing to theft?

Blackeyedangel

drew0 wrote:

Not to mention that record companies keep promoting such shitty artists as Nickelback, Fall Out Boy, etc. and then wonder why their record sales are down. Yes, sales are down due to file sharing. They're also down because you're only promoting shitty artists who all sound the same.

I love how you pick two bands that are completely different to use as an example for your argument.

transplant

soulsinging wrote:

if you tape a song off the radio is it stealing? are the mixes we did in our cd swap on here contributing to theft?

of course it is, however can you see the difference between trading a CD amongst 20 people and putting a CD on the internet to share with 2 billion?

I mean honestly, if you were a record label and you gave (insert band here) 40,000 to record, tour and promote their CD, don't you think they deserve to make that money back?

Is there anybody out there who really thinks Metallica makes the same amount of money per CD as Fall Out Boy?

soulsinging

transplant wrote:

of course it is, however can you see the difference between trading a CD amongst 20 people and putting a CD on the internet to share with 2 billion?

I mean honestly, if you were a record label and you gave (insert band here) 40,000 to record, tour and promote their CD, don't you think they deserve to make that money back?

Is there anybody out there who really thinks Metallica makes the same amount of money per CD as Fall Out Boy?

they would make that money back if they charged a reasonable price for the cd. but they have priced themselves out of their own market. and now they're whining about it. charge $10 a cd you'd sell 3 times as many and make plenty of money. but you charge $19 for a 10 cent disc and you can't be surprised when people look elsewhere.

transplant

soulsinging wrote:

they would make that money back if they charged a reasonable price for the cd. but they have priced themselves out of their own market. and now they're whining about it. charge $10 a cd you'd sell 3 times as many and make plenty of money. but you charge $19 for a 10 cent disc and you can't be surprised when people look elsewhere.

come on now, who the hell pays 19 bucks for a Cd? I pay less per CD now then I did in 1987. I can't remember the last time I paid more than 13. Best Buy sells plenty of CD's for under 10.00

soulsinging

transplant wrote:

come on now, who the hell pays 19 bucks for a Cd? I pay less per CD now then I did in 1987. I can't remember the last time I paid more than 13. Best Buy sells plenty of CD's for under 10.00

go to any cd retailer... virgin, fye, etc. best buy sells cheaper, but most are still 15 base price, and their selection is limited becos the music industry puts all their eggs into the most middling basket. they focus on the middle 50%, milk a fad until it's done, and then wonder why all their artists are so disposable.

i have no sympathy and i do not see downloading as theft. i think it's time the record companies wise up and change before they die. plenty of labels make money.

transplant

soulsinging wrote:

go to any cd retailer... virgin, fye, etc. best buy sells cheaper, but most are still 15 base price, and their selection is limited becos the music industry puts all their eggs into the most middling basket. they focus on the middle 50%, milk a fad until it's done, and then wonder why all their artists are so disposable.

i have no sympathy and i do not see downloading as theft. i think it's time the record companies wise up and change before they die. plenty of labels make money.

So if CD's were all priced at 9.99, I am going to assume you would not only stop downloading illegally, you would also consider it theft.

Bushleaguer28

drew0 wrote:

Not to mention that record companies keep promoting such shitty artists as Nickelback, Fall Out Boy, etc. and then wonder why their record sales are down. Yes, sales are down due to file sharing. They're also down because you're only promoting shitty artists who all sound the same.

Bingo - bands nowadays make "singles" rather then albums - they make songs that they can make a cheesy video for that can be run 100 times a day on mtv for a month, and then they move on to the next single. People dont buy albums because they can just download individual songs because the majority of the album is crap (actually i feel almost every new band makes 100 percent crap but thats another story) - and yes, so many of these bands sound the same its a joke.

PearlJamaholic

i see downloading as stealing. argue it how you like, but you are taking something that does have a value. just cause you dont like the price doesnt make stealing right.

i think sony is charging too much for a ps3, i should just take it, make sure i like it first. and if i do ill buy one, if not ill just keep it anyways. if its a good system ill buy the games anyways (ie see concerts, buy shirts)

pj tickets are going up too, i should start sneaking into shows. vedder messes up too many lyrics and wants more money, screw that. show me first that the show was worth it. when i leave the venue ill pay what i think the show was worth.

with that said record labels are just sitting by. obviously there are people that will steal songs if cds cost 50 cents. and these are some of the same people that call record companies greedy yet they dont seem to want to part with their money.

the whole itunes is also a joke. .99 a song doesnt work for me. for two reasons. one is its lossy. and second and this effects the first, im paying more per song as a whole with less quality. cds are what 21, 22k what ever and mp3s are like 16k. im not going into the lossy debate but i can buy a cd with 17 songs for $12 with art and all. a real physical object. downloading it i get a digital file i can make from the cd with no art or packaging for $17??? something is wrong with that. plus when i buy the cd i can make my own lossy versions. if i want to hear music through a tin can.

i think the solution would be to charge for songs based in length. get a band like tool or floyd and get a 9 minute song at the same price as a pixies tune thats 2 minutes??? i think like 5-10 cents per minute is the way to go. maybe 7 cents. let them figure it out. but make it worth it. and do specials if you get the whole album get like a 5% discount. that way if people arent willing to spend $4.50 for a digital cd they are just cheap. end of story. you dont deserve music if you wont pay for it.

youre paying less than half of a hardcopy cd cause you are getting less than half when it comes to package (packaging costs), art work (i really like reading the lyrics and looking at the pictures the artist felt were important) and sound quality (lossy). i dont really know what it costs to make cds so i cant say if $12-13 is fair to me. there is more than just production costs in there. they paid for studio time (sometimes), promotion, lawyers to set up contracts with the artist, etc. its more than blank cds and printer ink and paper.

and i think anyone that complains about record labels (like'em or hate'em) lawsuits at this point should be sued for being an idiot.

soulsinging

transplant wrote:

So if CD's were all priced at 9.99, I am going to assume you would not only stop downloading illegally, you would also consider it theft.

i still buy cd's. if i download, it's only to see if i like it. i listen for a week, delete, then either buy or move on. if record companies werent ILLEGALLY paying radio stations to only play their blockbuster babies, i wouldnt have to do this. if i like, i buy. but i buy from a used cd shop... which means the record company sees no money from the sale. am i stealing then?