smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | Steve Alter <shteevea@yahoo.com> |
| Subject | Re: for Stewart and the subscribers to eMusic |
| Date | Tue, 8 May 2007 13:36:43 -0700 (PDT) |
[Part 1 text/plain iso-8859-1 (5.1 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
Really interesting discussion that cuts to the core of what the ideal model and price point is for the next generation of music distribution.
The iTunes comparison is not completely apt; Apple is not in the business of selling music, they're in the business of selling hardware that has a huge profit margin. The music just enables their core business, and they can provide reaonable terms -- hell, they'd sell it at a loss -- because they're not reliant on that revenue stream.
Which is not necessarily a defense of eMusic; the digitizing fee seems particularly onerous. But their business model is very different from any of their mainstream digital music competitors. They can't rely on selling a million downloads of a new U2 or Dave Matthews record to subsidize Lewis Taylor's Lost Album, which maybe 50 of us here will download (and I'm not even going talk about the really obscure stuff they make available.) They've tried to differentiate themselves by investing heavily in editorial, and while I would rather see them spend less there to up the payout to labels, I know David Pakman would tell you that's one of the core reasons they're subscriber base has grown significantly during the last year.
I've been a subscriber since Day One, and I pay even less than Stewart; only .18 a song for 90 a month, so God only know how many pennies are left for you after that. Would I pay more? Sure, but definitely not .99, and each .10 increase would definitely have an attendant decrease in consumption. I stopped buying CDs because the prices just kept getting jacked up by a sclerotic and declining industry, and what I do by now I either get used or buy new, rip and sell used, which means the cashflow back to the artist gets cut off anyway. Sorry.
So what's the answer? Digital distibution (let's not get into the sound quality arguement, OK?) theoretically enables lower production and operational costs, as well as providing a more direct connection to your audience. What's the price point and distribution method that's equitable for musicians and consumers?
Jaimie Vernon <bullseyecanada@hotmail.com> wrote:
At Date: Tue, 08 May 2007 14:05:27 Stewart wrote:
>>That leaves $0.125 per song for the artist/label to share....remove the
>>mandatory $0.085 for the mechanical royalty to the songwriter and you're
>>left rubbing four pennies together.
>>
>>The iTunes model is $0.99 per download. iTunes' fee is $0.18 per track
>>leaving $0.81 to be divvied up. Subtract the mechanical royalty and that
>>leaves a healthy $0.725 between artist/label.
>>
>>THIS is why the indie labels are pulling out of eMusic.
>
>It's still kinda shortsighted.
>
>The number of whole albums I have downloaded via eMusic in the last six
>years undoubtedly numbers in the low four figures by now. However, because
>I consider eMusic downloads the rough equivalent of those cassettes I used
>to make of my friends' albums in high school, I've since purchased "real"
>CDs of a huge number of those downloads, and usually, if I like an artist I
>took a flyer on via eMusic, I purchase the proper CD of their later albums.
> The labels and artists may not make much money out of the downloads
>themselves, but the PR value is inestimable.
>
>Number of whole albums I've purchased through iTunes since 2003: big fat
>goose egg.
>
>In fact, total number of single songs I've purchased through iTunes since
>2003: 79.
>
>I hope the labels and artists aren't spending that $57.27 all in one place.
Did I mention the digitizing fee to get the songs ONTO eMusic in the first
place? It's $50.00 USD per album (whether it's 6 songs or 17 songs per
disc)...versus $0.08 per song on iTunes (that's part of the $0.18 they take
off the top).
That means we need 1250 downloads from any given album just to break even.
Promo tool or not, we're losing money just being ON eMusic (never mind
giving away the songs dirt cheap)....which is why Bullseye never signed up.
Or to Puretracks in Canada where the digitizing fee is $100 CDN per CD.
You're in the minority in your buying habits, Stewart. Most of the people
I've sold downloads to on the cheap or I've given stuff away to have NOT
gone back to purchase full CDs. They've gladly taken the material and run
off with it....gratis. You really want to test-drive songs before a full CD
purchase? We offer plenty of streaming material at Yahoo, MusicNet and our
own Live365 radio station.
Jaimie Vernon,
President, Bullseye Records
http://www.bullseyecanada.com
SWAG:
http://www.cafepress.com/bullseyecanada
BULLSEYE LIVE 365 RADIO:
http://www.live365.com/stations/bullseyerecords
Author, Canadian Pop Music Encyclopedia
http://jam.canoe.ca/Music/Pop_Encyclopedia/
http://www.myspace.com/jaimievernonsmovingtargetz
_________________________________________________________________
Don’t waste time standing in line—try shopping online. Visit Sympatico / MSN
Shopping today! http://shopping.sympatico.msn.ca
---------------------------------
Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos.
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.