Please see Part 1 here.

EO: I just saw a thread on one of the meta-chat sites saying "Ira Robbins works
for Clear Channel now"

The response: "That's okay, I love him anyway."

Any disconnect there for you that you would care to talk about? Any reward
exchange issues for you. Not that I wouldn't make the move in a moment.
We're buying a nice big new house and I have to start earning like an adult
again.

IR: I didn't go to work for Clear Channel. A couple of years ago, they acquired a small independent radio company I was working for (and that my brother in Trouser Press Dave Schulps had long worked for). My involvement with Clear Channel is quite removed. They didn't impose any direct management on us. I work with the people I've worked with for five years.

EO: No problem, I'm not concerned about Clear Channel, I have worked for them in a radio capacity; and like you said, they were so far removed as to be nonexistent.

Where do you think the recording industry is going to be in 5 or 10 years?

IR: I don't know that I have any valid perspective on that question. The only thing I've learned in 30 years of journalism is that knowledge of history is not the guidebook for the future that it is in other walks of life. Five years ago, I would never have believed that a generation would exist for whom albums are anthologies of MP3s, yet here we are. How the record industry adapts is anyone's guess, since money is the only driving force, and they sure as hell haven't figured out how to make any off the Internet.

EO: In your estimation, what would be the ideal relationship between an artist
and a label? Is such a thing possible?

IR: Sure. Artist makes the record with a its own money, raised from anything from a bank loan to shares sold to fans. Band leases it to the label for an advance against royalties, repays loans, etc.. label presses and distributes. Artist does its own press, label does the radio.