CD prices... they pay my bills!!!
I have been keeping fairly quiet on the list as of lately, but this is all too much for me to handle... so I'm using Giovanni's email as the basis for this. First of all, let me start out by posing the following scenario... when you walk into Macy's and see a Ralph Lauren jacket, do you walk out of the store with the jacket in hand without paying? Anyone that tries to justify the illegal download of one, two, or seventeen songs from a P2P server (like Kazaa) has absolutely NO CLUE as to who you are truly hurting. I, like Giovanni and a few other members on this list, make my living in the music industry. My friends know that I busted my ass to get to where I am now, with internships, contacts, interviews - this was a dream of mine since a young age that I never lost sight of, much in the way that many dream of being successful doctors, attorneys, accountants, brokers, etc. after college. I have about an hour and 45 minute commute (door to door) each way EVERY DAY to my office in New York City, spending many a train ride next to the smelly guy or the loud cell phone talking woman, the snoring old man or the drunk day-trippers at the end of the night. On a good day, I might get home in time to catch the Final Jeopardy question. But I usually watch the sun set over the Chrysler Building, as all of my daylight hours are spent in the city. I keep regular contact with many record label and music publishing personnel. I've shared elevators and chatted with artists that the average 15 year old girl would probably die over. And, unlike the artists whose products we produce, promote, license, distribute, and market, we do NOT make a fortune for what we do. We make an average salary, which just like in any other field, should increase modestly over time and/or level of experience or position. Unfortunately, because of the ignorance in society that stealing our product because one "only likes one or two songs" is somehow justified, many jobs have been lost in the past three years. Partly because of a suffering US economy, but moreso the fact that CD sales have been down in the past three years because of rampant infringement. I've talked to friends on a Friday that I've made through work/contacts, only to find their extension and email gone the following Monday. I have met people who have been successful, who are now still receiving unemployment from the state of New York or California because of cutbacks at labels. And to hit home - my company just laid off 25% of our workforce (about 30 people) last week because of this. I was one of the lucky ones who survived. After reading the series of emails about this, let me enlighten those of you who may not know - the recording artist is the LAST one to get paid. Even Sting, despite his superstar status (which dictates the rate of royalty he receives), does not see a penny until the record company (A&M Records) recoups its advances; these advances pay for recording, mixing, and mastering. It pays for independent promoters' fees and for promotional video (i.e. music video) production. For a new artist, it even provides for tour support. Once advances are paid off, the artist will begin to receive his or her royalties. But not before the mechanical licenses are paid for. This is the money paid by record companies to music publishing firms (and, ultimately, to the songwriter) for the right to use a song (copyrighted material) in records manufactured and distributed. As a well-known country songwriter put it at an industry symposium I recently attended: "This is how I make my living." I read all of these replies to Jeremy, Giovanni, et. al., with comments like, "I will give $1 to the artist for the few songs I download," or, "I don't want to spend $18 for one song that I like," and it gets to me... So then, what about the promotions reps who are on the phone for 10 hours a day trying to convince music directors at radio to pick up an artist's latest single that they are working? * (radio, by the way, is out there to sells cars, trips, Trim-Spa, etc., NOT music - music just happens to be the medium to get someone to stay tuned to a station long enough to get the commercials for the above examples. If people know that that hot new song that has been stuck in their heads is coming up, they are more inclined to keep that station on...... but this is a completely different issue, and I don't feel like getting into my personal opinions of ClearChannel at the moment...) What about the artists and photographers involved in photo shoots for the cover art? What about the publicity people that help spread the word about the artist and his/her forthcoming album by coordinating interviews with your favorite magazine or television show? What about the licensing people that make sure that the hot sample that you use in your new song (assuming you are an artist now) has all of the proper licensing deals so you don't get sued years down the road and have to live in a 7 room cardboard box? Or the marketing people that come up with the ideas for the enhanced content, bonus discs, bonus DVDs, etc. that you find nowadays? Or the special "exclusives" found at Target, Best Buy, Wal-Mart, etc.? What about the people employed by the recording studios, music publishing companies, record distributors, among other miscellaneous entities? Lastly, what about the A&R people that coordinate all of this?? To those that feel about giving the money straight to the artist neglects the countless number of individuals involved in putting that CD into your hands... and the music into your ears. Furthermore, the money that a record label earns from CD sales does not simply line the pockets of executives - it helps provide the overhead costs for finding and developing new (and existing) talent. Some may argue that the A&R reps out there scouting clubs until 4am every night for new acts are getting second-rate bandss signed to a recording contract... but when the amount of money to invest in this decreases because CD sales have decreased, what do you expect?? They are working with the most that is available to them. If someone cuts your thumb off on your writing hand, you can still write... but your handwriting will not be as distinct as it would be if your thumb were still there... I will not deny the fact that we are seemingly returning to a "singles market," where album sales are driven by one or two hit songs. Yet each completed *album* by an artist is his/her artistic vision come to life. Whether or not one likes the entire contents of an album is personal opinion........... but what would Leonardo da Vinci's "The Last Supper" be if one took Jesus out of the fresco and left the Disciples behind because that was the only aspect about the painting that he/she liked?? (this is the reason why artists such as Metallica refuse to allow digital licensing for their works - they wish to keep the artistic sanctity of their songs as an album, in this respect) Fred mentioned that the Universal Music Group did indeed lower its base price on CD sales. Other labels will soon follow, as there will be competition. But many do not realize that CD prices, like other products, reflect a retail markup. Even I do not shop at music stores that charge SRLP (suggested retail list price, about $18) or above. Best Buy seems to be the best out there - $9.99 (sometimes less) on the day an album is released, $11.99 - $13.99 afterward. Circuit City and Target also seem to have comparable prices. And what about the thrill about going to the music store the day the album comes out... popping it into your CD player for the first time, discovering the other stuff that you haven't heard on radio? If you are still one who does not wish to purchase the entire album, there are better means to acquire a song than through infringement mediums. Many new artists still release domestic singles. Otherwise, more and more legal download sites are appearing each day, whereby those of us on the industry end still get paid. The Apple iTunes Music Store is now available for both PC and Mac - $0.99 for a song is not unreasonable. Think about the amount of money you spend out at a bar on a Friday night. Napster has been relaunched in a similar manner - there is even talk about colleges including Napster subscription fees as part of students' computer fees. And Microsoft has now announced that it is planning its own music service. And yet, with all of this said, there are probably some of you reading this and stealing songs off of Kazaa at the same time. It is the same thing as walking into the music store and pocketing the CD without paying... you are not just stealing the circular piece of plastic contained in the jewelbox, but also the content contained on that piece of plastic. Technology has just given thievery a new twist these days. I really have no pity for anyone being sued and in litigation with the RIAA for copyright infringement of this sort. Anyone who downloads from Kazaa is not just stealing from Sting, or A&M Records...... they are stealing from me. But hey... I am more than happy to forward you on my Mastercard bills or my student loans... Furthermore, I do not come into your houses/apartments and help myself to your Playstation 2 games, food, electronics, clothing, jewelry, etc. I suggest to anyone reading this to visit the following website: http://www.musicunited.org. Read about what your favorite artists *really* think about what you are doing... To conclude, I wish to add the thoughts of what one record company executive said at the symposium I mentioned earlier: "Giving your friend your CD you bought to check out is sharing. One person is sharing... 50 million people?... that's infringement." And this same person also enlightened us on how he has 150,000 screenshots of individual users downloading music from Kazaa........ so don't say you haven't been warned... On that note, I need to get to sleep.... to wake up in 6 hours to go to work... in the music business. I hope parts of this email changed some perspectives out there on CD prices and illegal downloading. Steve
From: "Giovanni" <giovanni.pollastri@libero.it> To: "police list" <police@mailman.xmission.com> Subject: R: [Police] cd prices Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 01:25:27 +0100
Hello everybody, I don't want to start a debate on the price of the cd but I would simply tell that working in the music biz for some years (started working in themusic field in 1989) and seeing how it goes on different levels of this industry (being an artist as well) I justify the price of the cd. Why don't you ask a lot of artist that says the price is high to low down their requests??? I can tell you prices on promotion are incredibly high, and artists of all kind don't usually take care about this....and what about contracts?
What I can also say is that the price might be too high if you compare it with the quality of the job done; in the seventies and in the eighties the records were fullof singles and great songs, inthe nineties, you can save just a few....
And don't tell me the price of a cd is high if you compare it to a night spent out in a disco or just eating somewhere...even eating a simple pizza....
The work behind a record is often hidden but you have to consider how many people work on it.
Ciao ciao Giovanni
Ps.: I've been working as mainbuyer at Virgin Megastore Italy, as buyer for different italian chain stores, as musician, as producer, as label manager....
-----Messaggio originale----- Da: police-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:police-bounces@mailman.xmission.com]Per conto di Gary Schmitz Inviato: giovedì 20 novembre 2003 5.48 A: police list Oggetto: [Police] cd prices
Amaryll hit the nail on the head. The record companies suck. I'd rather download the album from the net and send the artist a dollar rather than driving to the record store and spending an hour's labor for the cd, only a few pennies of which the artist will ever see from the record companies. I think the biggest reason for music piracy is the fact that cd's cost too damn much.
Amaryll said...
I remember when CD's were first introduced the record companies said that as soon as cd's became mainstream the prices would drop, because it is a LOT cheaper to manufacture cd's than the old LP's and cassettes. This never happened. The prices stayed the same, and even increased in some cases, with the record companies pocketing all that extra revenue. I have no sympathy at all for the record companies. And now, with two of the world's largest record companies, BMG and SONY , about to merge, ( that is, if the senate antitrust committee approves the merger) we will be all the more at their mercy.<<
_______________________________________________ Police mailing list Police@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/police
_________________________________________________________________ Is your computer infected with a virus? Find out with a FREE computer virus scan from McAfee. Take the FreeScan now! http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
But lets not forget, the record companies are diluting the market with pap from just about anyone off the street now (No disrespect to any decent artists - but when you look at Pop Idol, Pop Stars etc... you'll know what I mean), and they put records out deliberately aimed at making money. Nothing wrong with making money... but when you fill a market with rubbish, you shouldn't complain when you can't shift it.... The record buyers won't buy crap (although, looking at the UK charts in the last few years, it proves my own point wrong). I also read on the BBC news website that record companies are thinking about reducing the number of tracks on albums, because they say customers are fed up with 'fillers' rather than decent tracks. Another way to rip off the punter. Who decides if I like a track or not? So if I buy an album with only 8 tracks on it, I'll then have to buy all the singles and special editions to get the tracks they decided I wouldn't like. I don't deny the record companies are losing money - but in my opinion, it's not JUST down to illegal downloads. (I don't condone MP3 downloading, but I don't think it is entirely to blame). It's bad marketing, exploitation of teenage trends, exploitation of fans (Look at how many 'reissues' there have been shortly after the original albums have been released, all with 'bonus tracks', all designed to make you go out and buy it again... Sheryl Crow, Celine Dion, David Gray, Bjork, and they're just the ones that I've been caught out by... (Celine Dion was for my wife by the way). These marketers think of great ways to make more money "Ooh, lets repackage it as a tour edition", or "Hey, lets do a Greatest Hits album, and put ONE new track on there....", and when their ideas turn out to be not as good as they first thought.... it's the music buying (or not, in this case) public who are blamed. Job losses are also inevitable in a market where big record companies merge, just the same as any other industry. When you bring together two stables, you don't need the same amount of staff as two separate companies. Why would record companies merge, if it wasn't to save money by cutting costs? They sure wouldn't do it if they weren't going to make as much money. Record companies should put their hands up in the air and admit it when their marketing plans don't come to fruition, rather than blaming their customers for EVERYTHING. J.
another great post, j. april 1, 2003: after working for sony music entertainment for 5 years, getting to work 2 hours early every day - literally turning the lights of my respective floor on each morning - i was unceremoniously "downsized" from the music industry - an industry that i loved, an industry that it took me 16 months worth of 100s of resume mailings and fruitless interviews to break into. i go back to what i said earlier this week - everyone involved is to blame - record companies, concert promoters and superstar artists alike. i believe they all act either together or alone to fleece us all. how many greatest hits albums will someone allow to be released. many artists of the stature of sting have a consent clause in their contract, basically that their respective record company must get their "ok" in order to release certain product. in other words, i think sting has signed off on each of the more than necessary GH albums of his/the police that have been released. and while my pal steve raised an excellent point about all the deductions an artist must pay out before he sees any $$$$ from a respective release, think about this: ONE, releases are usually of a worldwide nature, so the post-deduction money generated by record sales in the usa is added to that made in australia, that in the uk, that in japan, etc.; SECOND, on the matter of recording advances, virtually every new artist - many of them in the studio with no talent at all, having caught a talent scout on a good nite - run up exorbitant advances, the thought being that this may be the only chance they ever have to get any money at all from the company. so they ring up expenses, their album flops, they are dropped from the company and the company is out all the advance money - because the artist no longer records there. millions upon millions of dollars are lost in the industry every year because of this. someone of sting's status? i doubt he runs up advances like this - hell, he may even foot the bill out of his own pocket, which is a smart move. as for promotion, this is the area of the record business that is completely bogus to me. they run up all these costs and yet you never see acts promoted. A&M did NOTHING to promote BND - sting had to go out and do it himself, with the help of jaguar and compac. but you can bet the record company charged him boatloads for promotion costs. pete yorn is an even better example: he is fantastic, one of the best singer-songwriters out there today. he has released 2 records thus far, neither one of them have sold like them should because the record company barely lifted a finger to promote him. i have abandoned my desire to work in the music industry for life or longer - the reason? i have absolutely no confidence of ANY party involved in it to change things, to reverse the tide. piracy will continue to get worse, ticket prices will continue to go up. the industry is longer about artistry and creativity, it is about the accountant, the bank statement. the purity that was the industry of yesteryear is gone and lost forever... rich --- Jason Sheldon <jason@digital-solutions.co.uk> wrote:
But lets not forget, the record companies are diluting the market with pap from just about anyone off the street now (No disrespect to any decent artists - but when you look at Pop Idol, Pop Stars etc... you'll know what I mean), and they put records out deliberately aimed at making money.
Nothing wrong with making money... but when you fill a market with rubbish, you shouldn't complain when you can't shift it....
The record buyers won't buy crap (although, looking at the UK charts in the last few years, it proves my own point wrong).
I also read on the BBC news website that record companies are thinking about reducing the number of tracks on albums, because they say customers are fed up with 'fillers' rather than decent tracks. Another way to rip off the punter. Who decides if I like a track or not? So if I buy an album with only 8 tracks on it, I'll then have to buy all the singles and special editions to get the tracks they decided I wouldn't like.
I don't deny the record companies are losing money - but in my opinion, it's not JUST down to illegal downloads. (I don't condone MP3 downloading, but I don't think it is entirely to blame). It's bad marketing, exploitation of teenage trends, exploitation of fans (Look at how many 'reissues' there have been shortly after the original albums have been released, all with 'bonus tracks', all designed to make you go out and buy it again... Sheryl Crow, Celine Dion, David Gray, Bjork, and they're just the ones that I've been caught out by... (Celine Dion was for my wife by the way).
These marketers think of great ways to make more money "Ooh, lets repackage it as a tour edition", or "Hey, lets do a Greatest Hits album, and put ONE new track on there....", and when their ideas turn out to be not as good as they first thought.... it's the music buying (or not, in this case) public who are blamed.
Job losses are also inevitable in a market where big record companies merge, just the same as any other industry. When you bring together two stables, you don't need the same amount of staff as two separate companies.
Why would record companies merge, if it wasn't to save money by cutting costs? They sure wouldn't do it if they weren't going to make as much money.
Record companies should put their hands up in the air and admit it when their marketing plans don't come to fruition, rather than blaming their customers for EVERYTHING.
J.
_______________________________________________ Police mailing list Police@mailman.xmission.com
http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/police __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now http://companion.yahoo.com/
participants (3)
-
foxie -
Jason Sheldon -
Steve Agovino