Janis Ian Is Not A Fool
Published August 12, 2002
Hey, RIAA: I'm willing spend money on music. I still buy CDs, new and used but mostly used. I subscribe to EMusic. I'm open-minded and fair, and there is money to be made here.
Don't serve me feces and call it filet mignon. You want to milk every last penny you can on every song, and you're not even very smart about it. If you were, you'd be listening to people like Janis Ian, who has a great idea for you to make money on stuff sitting untouched in your storage vaults.
Stop worrying about the college pirates - you're never going to stop them, you can only hope that they'll grow out of it. Think about the rest of us that want to do the right thing. You're making it difficult. In your futile rush to try to stop the few percent of people who will steal music from Wal-Mart if you ever manage to make it impossible to download from the net, you're setting up obstacles for the rest of us who are honest and just want to have a little bit of say about when and where we listen to our music.
It has seemed like an impasse. We want music on our terms, and you want to give it to us on your terms. Janis Ian has come up with a compromise that costs you little or nothing and certainly doesn't negatively impact your current sales. Give it a try. You might be surprised.
Of course, that's just my opinion, and I could be wrong. But we won't know until somebody tries it.
- Janis Ian Is Not A Fool
- Published: August 12, 2002
- Type: Opinion
- Section: Culture
- Writer: Phillip Winn
- Phillip Winn's BC Writer page
- Phillip Winn's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
Chuck, so far Movable Type is the only TrackBack-capable blog out of the box, although various other tools are being implemented for Blogger, Radio, and so on.
Anyway, I appreciate the defense, though following the trackback above and then the trackback within that will eventually get you to a follow-up article I wrote after spending some time emailing with Greg offline.
Bottom line: Greg has found something that works for him, and while it doesn't work for many people, it has managed to sneak in under the radar, so people should check it out. And I'm sorry I was so mean to Greg. <grin>
"Why do many DVDs cost less than many CDs? Take a movie that cost 60 times as much to film as it takes most CDs to produce, before you even begin to count promotion costs and so on. I can buy it on DVD at Wal-Mart for less than $10. Or maybe $15. Some newer titles are more expensive, sure, but after a while, they slide down the cost scale."
Because CDs are the only way to recapitalize on the costs of production of an album.
Your blockbuster film can recoup much of its cost during it's domestic theatrical run, then export the movie to foreign theaters to recoup even more money. They can then get broadcast and cable TV networds to pay -- sometimes exhorbant fees for first broadcast rights, after the movie comes out of Pay Per View. And they can charge liscence fees for movies available at rental stores.
And then factor in how much more difficult it is to pirate DVD releases with current technology -- and, as importantly, current copyright protection measures -- and you can see how the costs of selling a movie on DVD could possibly, just possibly, be lower than that of an album on CD.
Er, CDs are by no means the only way to earn money from a musician. Many artists will tell you that they consider albums as marketing materials for their tours. Considering albums as promotional materials that often pay for themselves (like logo t-shirts) puts a slightly different spin on things, doesn't it?
Of course, it's by no means that simple, but it's certainly not as simple as you make it out to be either. Granted, there are more revenue opportunities involved with movies, but the scales are much larger as well. A movie might make back 95% of its total budget during the worldwide theatrical run and still have to earn far more than an album in sales and rentals.
Of course, it's hard to compare apples and apples, since the music industry is generally difficult to get information from, while the movie industry is more open about some things, but doesn't tend to include some of the costs that the music industry does, and so on.
Still, I think that it's an apt comparison, obviously.
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/10)
Heh. LiveJournal, as near as I can tell, is NOT a TrackBack-capable blog.
Either that, or I'm just clueless. :)
Anyway, see http://www.livejournal.com/talkread.bml?journal=drchuck&itemid=10023 and enjoy and stuff.
Bottom line: Phillip's right, G. Beato is wrong, but it's hella nice to track down G. Beato anyway. :)