I don't think he is saying "everything is old sucks," or if he is it's not
the main import of his message. As a consumer, I am hopelessly out of step
with the world he is trying to explain and always will be. That was
apparent to me even at Rovicorp where they were explaining how they could
set
up a product whereby the Rovi data would migrate to everything in your
home, and I said, "No; you will not be able to infiltrate my phonograph, my
Edison, etc." And they looked at me like "What the hell is wrong with you?
Why are you here?" Indeed, I didn't even have a cellphone then; I do now
and I mainly keep it on me to talk to my daughter and to call AAA when my
car breaks down. I was there because my knowledge of the old rep and
skills gained with that first page of distributors was still valuable to
them. Ultimately, that changed, but so did the distro, and now that company
isn't
even listed with Pandora and the others on the second page. I was
attempting to get them to deal with files in the years before I left, and
now this
fellow is saying that downs are on their way out, and it appears that they
are. So that's two steps behind; but I'm getting off my point.
However we are not only consumers on this list; many of us are producers
and content providers of a kind. I have a catalog of over a thousand things
that
are mine that I find difficult to keep active, promote, distribute. He is
really right in that the offerings are so vast that it is hard to be heard
above all of
the choices. And I would never listen to music over a phone, willingly, but
if that's what gets you in the door these days, then so be it. What he's
saying
may be b.s. if you are the highly specialized type consumer that I am, but
I don't represent the mean -- as I use mainly traditional media for my
entertainment, I am now very, very exceptional. But as a producer and
provider of content, it may not be bad news to me. It might be good news to
someone like Karl Miller on this list, who is sitting on a heap of great
catalog that has a shrinking market to contend with. I just know that I am,
in a
sense, most firmly connected with that first page of distro, particularly
with Tower Records, and I was a little crestfallen that he stated that he
would
rather be on the second page, given my devotion to that cumbersome,
top-heavy, slightly underhanded way of doing things. It had its flavor. But
that
doesn't mean that I wouldn't want to be connected to the second page, if
possible, and that if even the tiniest fraction of the projections he was
putting
forward were somehow available to me a result, it would help, rather than
hurt.
Uncle Dave Lewis
Lebanon, OH
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 6:32 AM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
> There have been plenty of "Everything old sucks! This is the new paradigm!
> Go there or die!" statements over the past 20 years or so. Most of them
> have turned out to be BS and those who "went there" lost time and money in
> their failure. Streaming is just radio without airwaves (well, actually
> it's radio if it's done over a cellphone). The main difference is that it's
> customizable radio, because we now have a generation of listeners who want
> robots to pick their music rather than human taste-makers (who pretty much
> ceded the field in the age of Clearchannel and Evergreen). Many, many
> people, myself definitely included, will still want to OWN and HAVE
> good-sounding digital files or physical artifacts (ie CDs and/or LPs with
> real graphics and liner notes). Yes, your best way to digest Mecklemore or
> Gaga may be via your cellphone, but permanent music will always gravitate
> to permanent formats. I am quite confident I will be proven right in 24
> months, and 24 years.
>
> For what it's worth -- and I know my "model" is unlike any kid, but I bet
> I actually spend more on music so the industry should be paying at least as
> much attention to me -- I have never bought lossy downloads unless there is
> no other option to hear the music. The ONLY non-physical format I am
> willing to spend any significant chunk of my money on is high-resolution
> downloads, which I think are great as long as they start out as a great
> transfer/remaster or original recording. I buy, on average, a half-dozen or
> more CDs per month. And in recent years, I'm buying nearly as many vinyl
> platters, both used and new. What I spend is many times what a kid will pay
> per year for one of those streaming services. I consider those things less
> appealing that satellite radio, and would never pay for either. I do use
> the free version of Pandora sometimes, but it often gets stuck in a rut or
> only plays stuff I already own so it's marginally useful at best. The folks
> behind Beats headphones now have a streaming service, so there is big money
> trying to strongarm the record companies into giving away music, yet again.
> If I were them, I'd sit in the room with Dre and Iovine and stick to my
> guns that they will pay artistic, performance and copyright royalties for
> everything they stream, every time it's played. Or, probably a better deal
> is to demand a direct percentage of gross revenue. Figure each record
> company should get a piece of the pie based on number of offerings, so if
> Warners offers up 1000 tunes it gets X% and if UMG offers up 10,000 tunes
> it gets XX%.
>
> -- Tom Fine
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Lewis" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Monday, February 03, 2014 11:09 PM
> Subject: [ARSCLIST] Interested in Emerging Trends and Distribution Models?
> Watch this
>
>
>
> You might not agree with Marc Geiger (of William Morris) has to say. But
>> this sure provides a lot of food for thought.
>>
>> http://www.billboard.com/biz/articles/news/global/5893871/
>> wmes-marc-geiger-stresses-streaming-in-vision-of-100b-recorded
>>
>> Dave Lewis
>>
>>
>>
|