Gość: kitty-kat
IP: *.acn.waw.pl
06.03.05, 17:33
Genialny wątek na forum RYM można znaleźć tutaj:
rateyourmusic.com/board_message/message_id_is_151238_and_board_id_is_1&show=20&start=0
W skrócie najważniesze twierdzenia [choć lepiej przeczytać całość żeby
wiedzieć o co chodzi]:
- Płacenie za coś co na siebie nie zarabia, nie do pomyślenia w każdym
normalnym przemyśle.
- Bunt wytwórni przeciwko secondhandom i kupowaniu płyt po obniżonych cenach.
- Artyści zarabiają nie tylko na płytach ale w dużym stopniu na koncertach.
- Sprzedawanie tego samego produktu kilkakrotnie - remastery, bonusy,
wydawnictwa kolekcjonerskie - czyli czystej krwi złodziejstwo.
- Rozdęte wytwórnie zatrudniające tysiące niepotrzebnych ludzi na
niepotrzebnych stanowiskach odciągające ich pensje z cen CD.
I w końcu genialny wycinek o tym jak ściąganie pomaga sprzedaży muzyki i
czemu majorsi tego nie lubią:
I'd like to add a portion of an interesting article I read about six months
ago from fastnbulbous.com about the declining album sales figures (of 2003)
which I found to be an interesting take and which also comments on the
monopoly of the music industry giants.
"...those of us who find solace in music found it increasingly difficult to
do so, as the music industry waged war against its best customers. A very
tiny proportion of the population are music geeks with large collections.
The majority of the industry's profits are made from blockbusters that people
pick up from Wal-Mart. People who buy no more than a few albums a year. It
is obvious that if a lot of those people download a couple of those albums,
it might be half or all of what they would have paid for, and that would
certainly affect profits. In contrast, I know a lot of people who buy
anywhere from forty to over four hundred albums a year. Just imagine if even
a few percent of the casual music-buying public decided there was enough
music worth buying to dramatically increase their collections. The music
economy would be revolutionized, and more artists than ever would be
sustained by their income. This is what was happening at the peak of Napster
a few years ago. 20 million people were regularly downloading music, and
discovering that there was a whole world of good listening other than what's
on Billboard's Top 100. Music sales was at an all-time peak. But the major
label industry didn't want that, because the sales were spread throughout a
wider variety of artists, including, god forbid, more artists on independent
labels. They would much prefer all consumers bought the same dozen chart-
toppers like good automatrons, maximizing efficiency and profits. They
stamped out Napster and other filesharing networks and destroyed their most
brilliant promotional tool without realizing it. Post-Napster, sales have
plummeted. People went back to buying the chart artists, but with less
enthusiasm, and in fewer numbers. Despite only a fraction of filesharing
taking place compared to Napster, the industry continued to blame
filesharing. Many of the people targeted had over a thousand songs on their
hard drives - the same people who spend their hard-earned income on forty to
four hundred albums a year. The industry's best customers, but least
important demographic, the music geeks. Meanwhile in this litigious culture
of cowedness, downloading has decreased even more. And so has sales".
Myślę że warto poczytać o złodziejstwie z drugiej strony przemysłu muzycznego
i o pazerności ludzi którzy sami pod sobą dołki kopią i podpisują na siebie
wyrok.
