LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  July 2007

ARSCLIST July 2007

Subject:

Re: Internet Radio Status Update

From:

Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 17 Jul 2007 19:24:51 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (95 lines)

I agree that the discourse is getting overheated, please turn down the Net-postal rhetoric. I don't 
agree with my friend Bob either. But I sure respect him and thus take his point of view very 
seriously.

I still stick to my point a while back -- musicians and their record companies flirt with disaster 
if they price themselves out of net-based streaming "radio." A simple review of the Arbitron books 
indicates fewer and fewer people listen to ANY music on AM or FM radio. The whole purpose of 
broadcast recorded music -- low-cost wide-spread publicity and resulting record sales and venue 
sell-outs -- is in jeopardy. I get the impression that Big Music and its allies confuse venture 
capital for profit. Most of these net "radio" companies are far from profitable. They are a series 
of niche business and ad revenue is appropriately small and spotty. I would dare say they are far 
from BROADcasters, rather they are amalgamations of narrow-castings. Interested parties might do 
some reading about Yahoo, which has been around long enough to turn out not nearly as profitable as 
its dot-bomb claims. Amazon, too, for that matter, but Yahoo is more akin to net "radio" since it is 
really a collection of narrowcasted snippets of "content" combined with allegedly targeted 
advertising that turns out to not be the great revenue stream assumed in the IPO days. Given that 
reality, Big Music and its allies will find that there is no golden goose to fleece, and killing the 
rather skinny sparrow that actually exists in the bush will be highly detrimental because it will 
forever wed them to a near-dead medium (music radio).

-- Tom Fine
(realist/capitalist)

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Abrams" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 2:27 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Internet Radio Status Update


>I am sorry Dismuke but you obviously DO mean to be rude.  Your posts have been abusive and personal 
>and now they are becoming incoherent.  I don't agree with Bob Olhsson, but I think he has argued 
>his case effectively and courteously.
>
> Steve Abrams (socialist)
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Dismuke" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 5:33 PM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Internet Radio Status Update
>
>
>> --- Bob Olhsson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Free Enterprise just
>>> isn't a good enough
>>> business model for these folks. Wouldn't it be nice
>>> if Congress also put a
>>> cap on our housing prices?
>>>
>>
>>
>> I have not had time to look though the many postings
>> you have put up on the previous thread on this over
>> the past weekend so I cringe to think of what might be
>> in those.
>>
>> I am sorry, I do not mean to be rude, but the above
>> statement is absurd and downright dishonest.
>>
>> FREE ENTERPRISE?
>>
>> You call a GOVERNMENT PANEL setting prices FREE
>> ENTERPRISE?
>>
>> I am sorry, but that is something that is done under
>> socialism/communism.
>>
>> You call an CARTEL of private corporations that have
>> de-facto control over a government sanctioned MONOPOLY
>> that the cartel's competitors have to go through in
>> order to transact business and get paid an example of
>> FREE ENTERPRISE?
>>
>> I am sorry, but that is actually an example of a
>> varient of socialism known as fascism.
>>
>> Free enterprise is where the only role of government
>> is to enforce legally binding contracts and allows the
>> voluntary decisions of all of the many millions of
>> players in the marketplace to determine how much all
>> of the participants get paid and what sort of prices
>> they are able to get away with charging.
>>
>> There is nothing free enterprise about this whole
>> sordid mess.
>>
>> I don't know why you shill for such dasterdly people -
>> but may the rest of your life be spent listening to
>> nothing but the sort of music one finds on commercial
>> FM radio.  You very richly deserve such a fate as that
>> is exactly the consequences you have been asking for.
> 

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager