Simple Logic- Napster HELPS Non-RIAA artists
Apr 04 '00 (Updated Apr 06 '00)
I think we should break this into two categories- the behavior of the typical Napster user, and that of the RIAA, artists, and such.
First, the mp3 user. Most people do not download whole albums, because it takes up too much space, and is not portable. Typically, they download singles, which can be easily obtained from the radio, or friend's discs, anyway. I know very few people who actually buy whole albums just for one or two songs anymore. Many people also use Napster to find out more about artists they may have heard about. If there is a band coming to my town or if I have read about someone, I usually look up a few of their songs. Rather than take money away from the artist, this encourages me to see their show, and/or buy their CD. I also get a lot of things that are not available on CD.
Second, artists and their associates. A lot of artists make most of their money from live shows. Mp3s do not hurt this at all, and in fact probably help them. Next, the record companies- let's look at how a typical RIAA artists CD cost is distributed.
Production- $50,000
Album sells for- $16
Manufacturing- <$1
Retailer- $4 or $5
Record Company- $8
Artist- $2
Now a Non-RIAA artist
Production- $2000
Album sells for- $10
Manufacturing- $1-$3
Retailer- $2 or $3
Record Company- $2
Artist- $4
About the costs, I attended a lecture a few months ago specifically about how record labels mistreat artists, and the little numbers I gave are based on that presentation. I am not sure if those exactly right, but they seem pretty close. The only thing I can think someone would criticize about those numbers, is the retailer's take. That is not set in stone, and there are two explanations for it. Typically, the Non-RIAA artist is more likely to be carried by an independent record store with lower prices in the first place, and bigger stores are also less likely to have a higher mark up on something that is less likely to sell.
And guess who is going to sell many, many more albums anyway? If major label artists are making millions of dollars with the record company taking so much of their paycheck, what would happen if prices were lowered, and the label took less money? The artist would probably sell a lot more albums, and make much, much, more money.
Also, lower production costs do not mean lower quality music. It just means you have fewer people working on the album. Production cost are typically a loan the artist must pay back to the record label. I could go on and on about the evils of major labels, but so many people have already expressed themselves, and I don't want to get carried away. I think I have made my point.
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
PezKing
|
|
Reviews written: 105
Trusted by: 132 members
|
|
|
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.