Rss

Music Should Catch Up

September 26, 2002 - 8:17pm

Music Should Catch Up to the Market
I picked up a PC Magazine the other day at work. I don't normally like the columns John Dvorak writes because they're so opinionated. Yes, I realize they are opinion columns but he rubs me the wrong way. Yet, I'll still read his column when I pick up a PC Magazine. Go figure. Anyhow, in this article, titled "One Buck Forty or Die," Dvorak talks about how rampant music sharing has become. Anyone with half an idea about the Internet knows how rampant it is, even with Napster gone.

Basically, Dvorak tells the music industry to catch up with the times. Instead of putting out commercial after commercial chastising people for sharing mp3s, they should lower the price of music. "It's a matter of competition," he says. I completely agree. It's not a morality issue. People are simply trying to get a product for the cheapest price possible. Since the markup on music is insane, people are not buying CDs. Logically, if the music companies lowered the price of a CD, people would start buying them again. I know that if CDs were 4 or 5 dollars (rather than 15 or 20), I would be more than happy to go back to buying CDs! The industry just needs to realize that by being greedy and finger wagging, they're not helping themselves.

Comments

plus, most of the money of CD sales doesn't go to the artists. They make their money through concerts.
Posted by noor on September 27, 2002 - 2:32am
Sort of. Mostly t-shirts, stickers, etc. Merch, as it's called. Most large concerts cost thousands to put on effectively. And there's a ratio I like to use: larger the size of band, less the cd sales profit Most small bands make their living off of CD sales and merch. Concerts usually decrease money. At least, that's my experience in the music industry.
Posted by shaun on September 27, 2002 - 6:54am
i bought my first cd in the past year or so a couple weeks ago. i would probably buy more cd's if the industry promoted other bands besides what you hear on kiss or the edge.
Posted by jon on September 27, 2002 - 8:25am
it all boils down to greed. the records labels are not the victims, the consumers and the independent records stores are. i know this, i am a buyer for a record store and a former columbia/sony music employee.
Posted by smelly. on September 27, 2002 - 9:11am
I think it's easier to just download the songs you want instead of paying $20 for one good song and 9 crappy ones. Besides, who wants to go out of their house and deal with morons to buy a CD when you can download them at home in your underwear!
Posted by Kaeli on September 27, 2002 - 2:10pm
All of you have valid insight on the issue. The bottom line is this: The record industry, as it is, is obsolete. The RIAA are nothing more than bullies trying to hang on to their "turf". I know for a fact that many MAJOR artists have NEVER seen on dime in royalties instead getting an advance for their recording then nothing thereafter. And a $50,000 dollar advance for a CD that sold 3 million is pretty suspicious. Just ask the Dixie Chicks. They sued their record label for that exact reason and they won a big settlement.
Posted by RockerAce on September 27, 2002 - 8:04pm
web cam chat girl - http://web-cam-chat-girl.blogspot.com
Posted by web cam chat girl on November 9, 2006 - 12:52pm

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.