Julian Cope presents Head Heritage

Head To Head
Log In
Register
U-Know! Forum »
More Bono bashing (never enough IMO)
Log In to post a reply

135 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
Loopy Lumbago
Loopy Lumbago
95 posts

Re: More Bono bashing (never enough IMO)
Oct 15, 2010, 09:50
IanB Quote: "What the Nowegian study fails to show is that with more artists being paid direct for ther recordings of course their GROSS has gone up but they then have to absorb all the costs that were previously borne by the record company. Manufacturing, mechanicals, printing, video, photography, tour support, warehousing, shipping, promotion, marketing, the massive expenses associated with distribution, international development / licensing etc etc."

Well can you show me where in the study it says it's about gross income or where in the study it says that artists net income has declined?

Quote from the study: "The reason why the artist revenue has gone up much more than the industry, has to do with where the artists get most of their revenue from. Looking at record sales to artists, these have gone from NOK 37 million in 1999 to NOK 57 million in 2009, which is a 54% increase. The reason why Norwegian music artists earn more from record sales today, even though total sales have dropped, has to do with the increased share of Norwegian music being sold. Collecting remunerations to artists have gone from NOK 53 million to NOK 137 million, a 158% increase, and live income to artists have gone from NOK 66 million to NOK 191 million in the same period, creating a 189% increase. State subsidizations and grants have increased from NOK 51 million in 1999 to NOK 160 million in 2009, an increase of NOK 109 million or 214%.
According to this, Norwegian artists have seen an increase in all four of their income sources during the past eleven years. This goes contrary to the common belief that artists have seen a decline in income because of the digitalization of the industry."

Most of the costs you mention are connected to the production an sale of physical cd's, not the digital sale of music.

And while we are on the topic of production costs:
Quote: "A lot of production costs go into any song or album produced today, but these costs decrease according to the availability of technological equipment, making it cheaper and more accessible. However, production costs are still present and significant in most cases. Today the cost of making copies of this original piece of information is approaching zero. Not only is this copy cheap to produce, it is almost a perfect copy. In addition, most costs concerning the product are mostly sunk-costs when the first copy is made, these cannot be recovered. Eventually this means that products must be priced according to consumer value, and not the production cost. In an attempt to preserve the same level of prices post-digitalization the record labels have continued to price their products at the same cost as they were when physically distributed through CD´s when sold digitally through the World Wide Web."

When it comes to promotion and marketing I will once again quote from the Steve Albini interview:

"This is a terrific time to be in a band. Every band has access to the entire world by default. I know quite a few bands that have been able to establish themselves internationally based on nothing other their web presence. It's an incredible tool. It's also revived the careers of a lot of bands that came before the Internet era and never had enough penetration to find their natural audience. But because the music survived, some people were interested in disseminating it for no other reason than because they like it. People put stuff on YouTube or torrent clients or whatever, not because they're going to make money off of it, which is the only reason the mainstream industry would do something, but because they think it's good. It's a like a worldwide mix tape. An awful lot of bands that had no audience in their first incarnation were able to revive their careers and have a second lap. It's so exceedingly rare that somebody gets more than one bite at an apple like that. I think it's fantastic."

IanB Quote: "The Norwegian "study" also supports my key point. This process is forcing musicians into a state of semi-professionalism."

No it doesn't!
Nowhere in the study does it even indicate that musicians are being forced against their will into the wasteland of "semi-professionalism" you seem to imagine.
That is a mere assumption on your part.
I guess musicians are able to make their own decisions and choices same as most people.
And I haven't in any Declaration of Human Rights seen "The Right to be a full time, well paid musician for anyone who wants to" listed.
I put up the link to the Torrentfreak article because it was an easily accessible summary of the study and also had a link to the actual study.
I assumed those interested in the topic would be able to click the link and read the study. That seems to have been a bit difficult so here is the direct link served on a silver platter:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/37406039/Thesis-Bjerkoe-Sorbo

IanB Quote: "I hope all the people being laid off by the Tories have greater success adjusting to the market in the coming years than having to work two jobs."

I honestly don't get what you're on about! What has The Tories laying off people got to do with the topic at hand here?
I guess the reason for laying off people is that good old capitalist mantra: "Cut public spending for the good of the economy".
In other words: a part of "the laws and dynamics of capitalism" you so willingly have accepted in other postings. Or is it to be understood you accept "the laws and dynamics of capitalism" in theory but not its practical consequences?

IanB Quote: "You want to know how it is? Make a record."

I don't believe it is necessary to have a personal economical interest in the business to have serious opinions about it.
On the contrary; a personal economical interest might cloud the judgement a wee bit.

When all this is said; it's clear to me that the present situation with illegal downloading, companies spending huge sums of money on lawyers and lobbyists, tabloid politicians wanting to choke the internet to protect the entertainment industry from dealing with the real world etc, can't continue. In the long run it won't be good for anybody.
But I'm afraid it will not change until the entertainment industry pulls its head out of its overly obese butt and enter the modern digital world.
To a large extent this is also about consumer power.
Topic Outline:

U-Know! Forum Index