The days of illegal downloading are drawing nearer to a close. . .

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
Aug 5, 2004
2,279
48
48
41
www.myspace.com
#21
There is no way too change the behavior of the consumers. Just have to switch the hustle. Your better off giving your music for free and being the direct host and make money of ads then to you put your shit for sale and still have it stolen from you. Might as well profit of those who are gonna take it either way. That's the future/now.
 

Mac Jesus

Girls send me your nudes
May 31, 2003
10,771
54,050
113
41
#24
If record industries were smart they would pool together and start their own torrent sites where you have to pay a monthly subscription or something.

Even then I'd continue to get the shit for free from other sources. But I garnette you some motherfuckers would be hella willing to give up downloading shit for free if they had a reasonable alternative. Look at how many people pay for rapid share accounts.

But so long as I'm a student without much money I'm going to optimize my resources and only pay for shit that is necessary. Fuck buying MP3s, movies, cable, etc if I need to pay for school, rent and food each month and there is a free alternative. If it wasn't for this internet shit I'd barely have any music. How the fuck am I supposed to fill an 80gb ipod at a dollar a song?
 
Apr 26, 2006
4,496
3
0
39
#32
Warez 4 Life, breh!


:cool:





Seriously, I get so much shit for free. Especially software. Shit would cost thousands. Sometimes I feel guilty, but in reality, FUCK IT!
 
Aug 5, 2004
2,279
48
48
41
www.myspace.com
#34
What you're saying is true but not justified. The reason the industry has changed is because it's gotten easier to STEAL. We, the musicians, shouldn't have to accept that our music will be stolen, thus having to abandon retail as reliable revenue.

So average industry albums sell about 30k or 200k if they are lucky. But these albums get 2 million downloads.

Would you rather sell 200k records or get 2 millions hits to your website and get 5-10 cents a visit for a free album?

Artist/Labels will benefit from being the direct supplier wither is paid for or free.

You need to know your fan base and if you have a secret fan base that is stealing form you then how do you know where to tour at?

If you are the direct supplier you will know where where to tour/sell merchandise
I have downloaded plenty of albums for free but if I respect the artist and love the album I will pay to go to the show.

At the end of the day Rapid Share and Host file are making more money of music then the actual artist due to ads and pop ups so artist need to be their own host companies.
 
Aug 5, 2004
2,279
48
48
41
www.myspace.com
#35
Do the math on this tell me which one you would prefer:

200,000 album sales w/ a $5 royalty = $1,000,000

2,000,000 website vists @ $0.10 per hit = $200,000
now that analogy was for a major label artist who's album points would be really low like 5 cents an album.

But either way you would benifit more but make less money up front but at least you would know where your fan base is located and multiply the money by touring.

Now realistically if your an independant artist you would be lucky to get 200k downloads or let alone sell that musch "Tech doesn't even do that anymore".

A lot of independent artist are selling 1-10k units but are getting 100k downloads but don't know where their fanbase is at so they don't tour.

So 100k downloads at 5 cent per visit plus a are real inside look at your fans geographically is going to be way profitable.
 
Aug 5, 2004
2,279
48
48
41
www.myspace.com
#36
Dog, that's what I'm saying. People aren't buying music because it's easier for them to steal it. There's no incentive to buy. An independent artist used be able to sell 200K with a $5 royalty. It wasn't uncommon, especially if they were attached to a bigger name.

I feel what your saying but it's to late it is what is it. No law in the world is going to stop people from stealing anything "music included"

I agree that there are ways to make money despite this. Touring, merchandising, and adspace can be decent alternatives to retail. However my point is that we shouldn't have had to move to a new model when the old model worked fine. The methods that you mentioned used to be secondary to retail and have only become a higher priority because the government has failed to prevent and discourage pirating.
Realistically technology and music go hand in hand. The Technology got better and changed at a really fast rate but the music industry try to hold on to old technology for too long and got left in the dust.

If you don't change the consumer will change you. And the industry has failed to realize that because it's a whole bunch of dinosaurs at the top making decisions.

I feel what you are saying but at the same time you have to think how downloading can benefit the industry at the same time especially for independent artist.

People have been stealing music for years way before mp3's. Yes its easier now but before you had no idea where these fans where located now we have the ability to know but as an industry we don't take advantage of that. Internet marketing is one of the few business models that are growing in this recession so in reality artist/labels need to be there own napster/rapid share/hostfiles.