"LTK" (wkoblinsky)
12/11/2014 at 09:36 • Filed to: None
2
5|
"LTK" (wkoblinsky)
12/11/2014 at 09:36 • Filed to: None | 2
| 5 |
Used car salesman or record company executive?
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
The music industry has faced a lot of financial pressure in the last fifteen years to offer more value and lower prices to consumers. Pirating and a huge variety of low cost entertainment options have left record sales struggling. Taylor Swift is one of the most successful artists of this generation, and as such, she throws around a lot of heft. That's why she made big news a few weeks ago when she !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , the largest of the streaming music models. She complains that they're not paying her enough for the artistic value of her works. She's wrong and I need only point to the modern automotive industry to explain why.
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
Truecar.com is the car industry's Spotify. We salesmen like to think of ourselves as car buying consultants offering service and expertise to our lucky customers, but in truth, our incentives are tied up in satisfying our particular brand and dealership. Truecar, Carfax, KBB, and other online services give consumers access to (relatively) objective information and advise on our products for low fees. NADA hates them. They rail against the lost profits and loss of customer-dealer relationships. In much the same way, Swift's label, Big Machine, is railing against modern streaming services cutting into their profit margins and perceived !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! .
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
The problem is that when you sell a product, your customers set the value of that product. If you ask too much for it, they won't buy. And despite claims that the music industry was !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , it's been in decline for decades now. The era of "record labels" is over. Much like I can't stop customers from using services like Truecar, labels can't keep consumers from finding the cheapest, easiest way to get their entertainment fix.
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
Spotify and other services have begun to recapture that lost revenue, and now the record companies want it back. Does Spotify pay enough? Are they victimizing Swift and other artists? Spotify pays 70% of its revenues, to the record companies who own the rights to the music. Labels typically !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! to artists, who then pay producers and managers and other costs. Record companies, like the auto industry, have enjoyed decades of decadent profits. It's time they, and Swift, face the future like the rest of us.
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
Roundbadge
> LTK
12/11/2014 at 10:11 |
|
I'm not a TS fan...
However, she's probably a bad example. People are willing to pay what's asked for her albums. The proof is in the fact that her CD sold X million in the first week (don't know the number, don't care), in an era when people don't buy CDs. The number of albums she sold hasn't been done for over a decade, and may never be again.
Right now, her popularity is at an all time high. Maybe someday in the future people won't want her music and she may have to return to Spotify just to get listeners. Right now, your suggestions to her are falling on deaf ears (mostly because she likely doesn't read Oppo).
She's doing this because she can .
PS...please don't read this as an angry disagreement. Your point is taken, regarding the far majority of artists, and your thoughts well expressed.
|
LTK
> Roundbadge
12/11/2014 at 10:40 |
|
Do you think 1989 sold $2,000,000 worth of more albums because of people not being able to access it on Spotify? And there's nothing angry at all about your post.
|
Roundbadge
> LTK
12/11/2014 at 11:05 |
|
I have no doubt that the controversy between her and arguably the largest music streaming service generated some hype and some record sales. She, however, is a singular record-sales force that has enough influence to say "this service doesn't pay satisfactorily, so I won't allow my music to be played here" and people will actually notice.
I can only see this protest of hers as a good thing for those who attempt to make a living playing music. Will it make a difference for other musicians? I really don't know.
|
LTK
> Roundbadge
12/11/2014 at 11:30 |
|
I don't think it helps smaller artists. With the caveat of not being an artist, I think spotify gives them access to a revenue stream they otherwise wouldn't. It doesn't replace touring, merchandise, and album sales. Outside of spotify, many small artists are doing self releases. Streaming services make the market bigger.
|
Roundbadge
> LTK
12/11/2014 at 12:10 |
|
There, I'd say you're right. It probably wouldn't help smaller artists. At best it might create a tier system for popular artists, but that would then lead streaming services to not play their music at random, unless specifically searched for, in order to save some cash.
You're also correct that Spotify does in fact give an additional revenue stream. It's not much, but it's something.