Bumblefoot on the music industry

[jarmo]

Why do you think there's so many artists marketed at kids?

Little girls don't download, they buy albums (or make their parents buy them).....






/jarmo

[freedom78]

Why do you think there's so many artists marketed at kids?

Little girls don't download, they buy albums (or make their parents buy them).....






/jarmo

Some adult males tuck it back, and then buy albums, too.  Or, um...that's what a friend told me. 

[Jackamo!]

Ron's such a nice guy. Good musician too.
I downloaded his "Normal" CD off of a torrent site and I liked it.

Thanks Ron for making music, and thank you Mr. Mp3 for giving it to me.

[slash2001]

I very rarely download at all, I buy all my cd's(I have about 900 at the moment) but if Axl or anyone thinks Im not going to download the leaks then they are mad.  I remember thinking in 2001 that I wasnt going to download the live performances of Madagascar, The Blues etc from Rock in Rio thinking that the album would be out soon and I could wait, but after waiting for an album for so long of course I want a sample of what is going to be on it. 

Im going buy the album even if it only had 4 songs and Axl farting for an hour. Ive waiting so long as we all have.  I want this album bad, im going to download any leaks and im going to buy tickets to see them live, buy merchandise and probably buy at least 2 copies of the CD when it comes out.  So they should quit with this whole "dont download the leaks" thing.

Also, being a musician myself, I think they should be happy with the feedback recieved from the leaks, its got people talking about them again, in a POSITIVE way, its been negative for so long but when I let people listen to the leaks they are blown away, and being in an unsigned band its hard to get your music heard and you spend alot of money making your masterpiece and you have to give it away so people can hear it, it hurts but thats what you've gotta do. 

To end my rant - The leaks are the best thing to happen to GN'R since ......well a long time anyway

Fire away with your comments -

[ARC]

Pop stars get millions from touring (their main source of income) and then complain about illegal downloading...

It's like a billionnaire crying after losing a $10 bill...

[Leddy]

I posted this at the BumbleForum;

RIP the music INDUSTRY - good riddance and fuck off.

As consumers we are fed up with being peddled substandard tat, repackaged tat and overpriced tat.  If only we could deal direct with the artist and cut out the untalented parasites that sit in the middle.

The future will be free music made available directly from the artist.  They will EARN their money by playing live shows.  This is a product that cannot be digitally replicated, only being there conveys the experience.  Artists will happily make their music available as an enabler to their live shows, luring the ticket buying public with their albums.

I know the above sounds unfair to the artist who pays for their production etc, but it's the only way.  The fight against illegal digitisation is a lost cause I'm afraid.

Being a recording artist will need to become a regualr roadshow, all active artists needing to be out and performing and offering a value-rich experience to their audience, evolving set-lists and such to get repeat purchases from individual fans.  I don't have too much sympathy with this lifestyle necessity, try diggin roads, arctic fishing, farming or other monotonous manual labour and see if that's more palatable.

We always hear that touring brings home the bacon far in excess of record sales for the artist anyway, so why not embrace that business model and make hay on the road?

I know this may be harder for the smaller artist, but surely those who deserve a good following through the quality of thier music will have no trouble making money from live shows, and those that don't perhaps shouldn't be doing it for a living anyway then?

If it's a part time thing, and more of a hobby, then simply reaching the small audience you have in the most effective way possible is reward enough?

[slash2001]

I posted this at the BumbleForum;

RIP the music INDUSTRY - good riddance and fuck off.

As consumers we are fed up with being peddled substandard tat, repackaged tat and overpriced tat.? If only we could deal direct with the artist and cut out the untalented parasites that sit in the middle.

The future will be free music made available directly from the artist.? They will EARN their money by playing live shows.? This is a product that cannot be digitally replicated, only being there conveys the experience.? Artists will happily make their music available as an enabler to their live shows, luring the ticket buying public with their albums.

I know the above sounds unfair to the artist who pays for their production etc, but it's the only way.? The fight against illegal digitisation is a lost cause I'm afraid.

Being a recording artist will need to become a regualr roadshow, all active artists needing to be out and performing and offering a value-rich experience to their audience, evolving set-lists and such to get repeat purchases from individual fans.? I don't have too much sympathy with this lifestyle necessity, try diggin roads, arctic fishing, farming or other monotonous manual labour and see if that's more palatable.

We always hear that touring brings home the bacon far in excess of record sales for the artist anyway, so why not embrace that business model and make hay on the road?

I know this may be harder for the smaller artist, but surely those who deserve a good following through the quality of thier music will have no trouble making money from live shows, and those that don't perhaps shouldn't be doing it for a living anyway then?

If it's a part time thing, and more of a hobby, then simply reaching the small audience you have in the most effective way possible is reward enough?

 I dont agree with your post at all, I dont think artists should make all their money from touring, what about the ticket touts?? I gig sells out in minutes then the tickets are on ebay over priced aswell,  so no that is not the way forward for music my friend.

[Leddy]

What about the touts?  The artist is getting the same amount for the tickets regardless of whether they are sold on.  Plus, touts only succeed when a venue is sold out, which suggests the artist is getting the maximum return from that performance anyway.

I'd like to hear your alternative solution to the problem.

[ARC]

The only solution is thus:

- get rid of digital music, cd's, legal mp3's etc
- bring back vinyl and tape but in better quality than yesteryear.

I hear that the major players in the music industry are thinking of doing this, seriously.
It won't stop illegal downloading but it would seriously curb it.

[slash2001]

What about the touts?? The artist is getting the same amount for the tickets regardless of whether they are sold on.? Plus, touts only succeed when a venue is sold out, which suggests the artist is getting the maximum return from that performance anyway.

I'd like to hear your alternative solution to the problem.

As far as im aware the Goverment are planning to take action against the touts, so I guess we'll see what outcome we get form that, there are various ways they could work something out but this isnt the section for that discussion, I have ideas on how to stop touts but am gonna bore you with them.
And touts only succeed when gigs sell out???..... the touts buy most of the tickets then sell them at an inflated rate, people are more out of the pocket and the band miss out on extra revenue.
Ive went to get tickets for gigs, sells out, randomly check ebay(I dont even have an account or buy anything from ebay) and the tickets are stupidly expensive and over priced.  Have I ever bought form a tout? Only when the tickets were face value.
Im sticking to my guns on this one, touts are a problem.

[Leddy]

What about the touts?  The artist is getting the same amount for the tickets regardless of whether they are sold on.  Plus, touts only succeed when a venue is sold out, which suggests the artist is getting the maximum return from that performance anyway.

I'd like to hear your alternative solution to the problem.

As far as im aware the Goverment are planning to take action against the touts, so I guess we'll see what outcome we get form that, there are various ways they could work something out but this isnt the section for that discussion, I have ideas on how to stop touts but am gonna bore you with them.
And touts only succeed when gigs sell out???..... the touts buy most of the tickets then sell them at an inflated rate, people are more out of the pocket and the band miss out on extra revenue.
Ive went to get tickets for gigs, sells out, randomly check ebay(I dont even have an account or buy anything from ebay) and the tickets are stupidly expensive and over priced.  Have I ever bought form a tout? Only when the tickets were face value.
Im sticking to my guns on this one, touts are a problem.

How does the artist lose out if the show is sold out, regardless of who bought the tickets first hand?

[freedom78]

The only solution is thus:

- get rid of digital music, cd's, legal mp3's etc
- bring back vinyl and tape but in better quality than yesteryear.

I hear that the major players in the music industry are thinking of doing this, seriously.
It won't stop illegal downloading but it would seriously curb it.

I've got an mp3 that was only released as a 7" vinyl b-side. 

In other words, that's only a very short term solution, I'm betting.

[slash2001]

What about the touts?? The artist is getting the same amount for the tickets regardless of whether they are sold on.? Plus, touts only succeed when a venue is sold out, which suggests the artist is getting the maximum return from that performance anyway.

I'd like to hear your alternative solution to the problem.

As far as im aware the Goverment are planning to take action against the touts, so I guess we'll see what outcome we get form that, there are various ways they could work something out but this isnt the section for that discussion, I have ideas on how to stop touts but am gonna bore you with them.
And touts only succeed when gigs sell out???..... the touts buy most of the tickets then sell them at an inflated rate, people are more out of the pocket and the band miss out on extra revenue.
Ive went to get tickets for gigs, sells out, randomly check ebay(I dont even have an account or buy anything from ebay) and the tickets are stupidly expensive and over priced.? Have I ever bought form a tout? Only when the tickets were face value.
Im sticking to my guns on this one, touts are a problem.

How does the artist lose out if the show is sold out, regardless of who bought the tickets first hand?

Because the tickets are getting sold at an increased rate, its still money that they are not receiving that is gong to the hand of a random who has nothing to do with the band.  if touts sold tickets at favce value then there wouldnt be a problem.
example - T in the Park ?140 a ticket, sells out in a couple of hours, they appear on ebay for around ?300 less than an hour after they sell out, and the prices only ever go higher.
example - Arcade Fire - Glasgow - ?20 a ticket, gig sells out, they appear on ebay for ?75 less than an hour after they sell out.
wnat more examples, go check ebay....

[Leddy]

What about the touts?  The artist is getting the same amount for the tickets regardless of whether they are sold on.  Plus, touts only succeed when a venue is sold out, which suggests the artist is getting the maximum return from that performance anyway.

I'd like to hear your alternative solution to the problem.

As far as im aware the Goverment are planning to take action against the touts, so I guess we'll see what outcome we get form that, there are various ways they could work something out but this isnt the section for that discussion, I have ideas on how to stop touts but am gonna bore you with them.
And touts only succeed when gigs sell out???..... the touts buy most of the tickets then sell them at an inflated rate, people are more out of the pocket and the band miss out on extra revenue.
Ive went to get tickets for gigs, sells out, randomly check ebay(I dont even have an account or buy anything from ebay) and the tickets are stupidly expensive and over priced.  Have I ever bought form a tout? Only when the tickets were face value.
Im sticking to my guns on this one, touts are a problem.

How does the artist lose out if the show is sold out, regardless of who bought the tickets first hand?

Because the tickets are getting sold at an increased rate, its still money that they are not receiving that is gong to the hand of a random who has nothing to do with the band.  if touts sold tickets at favce value then there wouldnt be a problem.
example - T in the Park ?140 a ticket, sells out in a couple of hours, they appear on ebay for around ?300 less than an hour later, and the prices only ever go higher.
example - Arcade Fire - Glasgow - ?20 a ticket, gig sells out, they appear on ebay for ?75 less than an hour after the gig.
wnat more examples, go check ebay....

No, you are misunderstanding my point.

I know this happens, and agree that is despicable to exploit the desperation of the fans.

This is essentially an issue of revenue loss for the band by people downloading their music, instead of paying for the album, or paying for a legal download.

The business model I suggested originally, is based purely of concert revenue, you are arguing touts are hurting the band by inflating the ticket prices, I am arguing they are creating revenue the band would NEVER HAVE GOT.  I am NOT defending these parasites, I am simply saying touts, in this instance, are irrelevant to the bands revenue.

I could possibly concede that paying an excessive amount for a ticket, could potentially stop someone seeing the band multiple times, but thats clutching at straws.

[slash2001]

What about the touts?? The artist is getting the same amount for the tickets regardless of whether they are sold on.? Plus, touts only succeed when a venue is sold out, which suggests the artist is getting the maximum return from that performance anyway.

I'd like to hear your alternative solution to the problem.

As far as im aware the Goverment are planning to take action against the touts, so I guess we'll see what outcome we get form that, there are various ways they could work something out but this isnt the section for that discussion, I have ideas on how to stop touts but am gonna bore you with them.
And touts only succeed when gigs sell out???..... the touts buy most of the tickets then sell them at an inflated rate, people are more out of the pocket and the band miss out on extra revenue.
Ive went to get tickets for gigs, sells out, randomly check ebay(I dont even have an account or buy anything from ebay) and the tickets are stupidly expensive and over priced.? Have I ever bought form a tout? Only when the tickets were face value.
Im sticking to my guns on this one, touts are a problem.

How does the artist lose out if the show is sold out, regardless of who bought the tickets first hand?

Because the tickets are getting sold at an increased rate, its still money that they are not receiving that is gong to the hand of a random who has nothing to do with the band.? if touts sold tickets at favce value then there wouldnt be a problem.
example - T in the Park ?140 a ticket, sells out in a couple of hours, they appear on ebay for around ?300 less than an hour later, and the prices only ever go higher.
example - Arcade Fire - Glasgow - ?20 a ticket, gig sells out, they appear on ebay for ?75 less than an hour after the gig.
wnat more examples, go check ebay....

No, you are misunderstanding my point.

I know this happens, and agree that is despicable to exploit the desperation of the fans.

This is essentially an issue of revenue loss for the band by people downloading their music, instead of paying for the album, or paying for a legal download.

The business model I suggested originally, is based purely of concert revenue, you are arguing touts are hurting the band by inflating the ticket prices, I am arguing they are creating revenue the band would NEVER HAVE GOT.? I am NOT defending these parasites, I am simply saying touts, in this instance, are irrelevant to the bands revenue.

I could possibly concede that paying an excessive amount for a ticket, could potentially stop someone seeing the band multiple times, but thats clutching at straws.

I dont download much at all, to be honest the only songs I can remember downloading are the leaks recently and last year, so am not big on that but at least you could download some tracks and buy the album and singles if you like it.  You cant do that with gigs, you either get a ticket at face value or some ridiculous increased price, and fair enough the band arent losing that much money but still there is a middle man walking away with X amount of money that he doesnt deserve.
Downloading music can and possibly will be the way forward, Touts however are not, they are a parasite and maybe ive put my feelings into words incorrectly and thats why you are replying like you are, I just dont like them, I have my reasons, and thats that.

[freedom78]

No, you are misunderstanding my point.

I know this happens, and agree that is despicable to exploit the desperation of the fans.

This is essentially an issue of revenue loss for the band by people downloading their music, instead of paying for the album, or paying for a legal download.

The business model I suggested originally, is based purely of concert revenue, you are arguing touts are hurting the band by inflating the ticket prices, I am arguing they are creating revenue the band would NEVER HAVE GOT.  I am NOT defending these parasites, I am simply saying touts, in this instance, are irrelevant to the bands revenue.

I could possibly concede that paying an excessive amount for a ticket, could potentially stop someone seeing the band multiple times, but thats clutching at straws.

Though scalpers piss me right off, I agree with your stance.  To compare it to album sales, the original ticket seller (the venue) is, at least for concerts that are in demand or, at the VERY least, for the best seats, like a wholesale distributor.  Scalpers and ticket brokers, on the other hand, are more like a store that actually sells an album to the public...they want to find that point at which to maximize profits, which is pretty damned expensive for an in demand ticket. 

The bands also don't receive any revenue from the stores that sell their albums.  They (and the label, mostly) receive it from selling TO stores.  So, complaining about lost profits from brokers/scalpers is essentially the same as the profits they don't get from stores selling their albums...the difference being that one is seen as slightly shady, while the other is perfectly accepted.

Of course, eventually a band will come along that is smart enough to say "Hey, we're getting $.25/cd sold to stores, while our label gets a lot more."  And then the band can sell it for, say, $8, which pleases fans, and puts more money where it belongs...in the BAND'S pocket!  It would take a MAJOR band to really get a trend like that going.

[Leddy]

I dont download much at all, to be honest the only songs I can remember downloading are the leaks recently and last year, so am not big on that but at least you could download some tracks and buy the album and singles if you like it.  You cant do that with gigs, you either get a ticket at face value or some ridiculous increased price

Yep, that's exactly my point, this is an area that simply isn't replicable.  Therefore perhaps this is the area that can be maximised financially for the artist.

 

[michaelvincent]

The music industry is in a transitional state at the moment, as power is beginning to slip away from the executives. People are starting to realize exactly how much control the executives have, how much money they are being overcharged for a cd, and how little of that money actually makes it back to the artists. To wish that the music industry was the way it was in 1987 is to basically say 'i wish we were ignorant all over again'. I'll be damned if I am going back to paying $20+ for a compact disc only to have pennies on the dollar go back to the artist. The major reason cd's are so damn expensive is the built in overhead from the label to cover the cost of every act they sign that doesn't make it.

Sure things are kind of messed up now, but that's because the paradigm is shifting. Consumers want some quality control over what they spend their money on, and the record industry execs only see their bank accounts getting smaller and are trying to do everything to not have to change with the times. It's insane. Go watch 'I Am Trying To Break Your Heart', the Wilco documentary for how far up it's own ass the industry has become. Long story short: Wilco makes Yankee Hotel Foxtrot, probably one of the most challenging, daring and all around great albums in recent memory. The label doesn't hear 'the hit', and gives Wilco an ultimatum. 'Fix the record, or we'll drop you'. They don't change the album and AOL/Time Warner drops them. The band signs to Nonesuch and puts the album out to rave reviews, and excellent sales. The best part, Nonesuch is owned by AOL/Time Warner. They basically paid for Wilco's album twice. It cost them twice as much money in the end to try and fight their way to control over the band, only to lose.

It's like any political overthrow or power shift. There is a shaky period. We are in the middle of it. In the end we will hopefully be better off as consumers, and have more control over the quality of music we are paying for. Unfortunately the industry has yet to really figure out that they need to step up the quality of music they are releasing. I think we'll all be happy to pay money for good music. But to wish it was the way it was back in '87? That's just sticking your head in the sand. You have to vote with your dollars if you want to see any change for the good in the record industry. And it will get worse until it gets better. Because as I once heard Henry Rollins say, it's only when nothing else works that the record execs will consider releasing better music or lowering their prices as a means to restimulate the record industry. We survived disco, we'll survive boy bands, teen girl pop singers, shitty music, overpriced music, and rampant piracy.

[Naupis]

Of course, eventually a band will come along that is smart enough to say "Hey, we're getting $.25/cd sold to stores, while our label gets a lot more."  And then the band can sell it for, say, $8, which pleases fans, and puts more money where it belongs...in the BAND'S pocket!  It would take a MAJOR band to really get a trend like that going.

But when you cut the label out of the picture though who gives the band the advance to record the album, market it, distribute, and all of the other things that go into an album? If it were just as easy as recording it and releasing it you would be right, but most bands don't have a couple million bucks sitting around to pay for every step mentioned above that would coincide with the release of a "MAJOR" band's album. Typically a "major" band has "major" costs that someone (the label) has to pick up so the band can focus only on making music instead of how to fund it or potentially running out of money and not being able to finish a project.

[madagas]

That Wilco documentary is great...I wouldn't be suprised if Axl was going through some of those issues right now.....