smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | "Jaimie Vernon" <bullseyecanada@hotmail.com> |
| Subject | Re: for Stewart and the subscribers to eMusic |
| Date | Wed, 09 May 2007 18:33:51 -0400 |
[Part 1 text/plain (3.4 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
At Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 18:54:04 Gary wrote:
>A few more thoughts on this topic:
>
>If eMusic is such a losing proposition, why do 13,000 labels offer their
>music there?
>
>Jaimie, how can you conclude that eMusic wouldn't work for you without
>giving it a try? You may be surprised at the volume you achieve.
>You'll definitely get more people buying/listening than you would
>otherwise. And don't forget that if the quality is there, you've got a
>larger base of listeners (mostly passionate music fans, mind you) from
>which positive word of mouth can spread. (In fact, if you do give it a
>try, you have at least one guaranteed buyer right here. I promise to
>download the first album you put on there and extol its virtues here if
>I like it. How's that for an incentive!:)
If you missed my very first post on this topic you'll know that we wouldn't
make a dime. The digitizing of the album is $50.00 USD....and after someone
buys a song, we recover $0.04 from that download. We need 1250 downloads to
FIRST recoupe the digitizing fee before we could even pocket ANY of that
$0.04.
Sorry...word of mouth or not, we would need all of eMusic's 300,000
subscribers to download the 117 albums we represent to start seeing dime
one.
>And forgive me if this is an ignorant question, but why don't other
>indie retailers (Not Lame, Insound, Parasol, etc) offer download
>services to compete with eMusic? The writing is on the wall that
>digital delivery is the future. Seems to me that specialized retailers
>might be able to transfer their brand names and some of their other
>strengths to this new paradigm. For example, generally speaking, people
>have been willing to pay a premium to Not Lame because of its expertise
>in all things pop and its ability to offer a great selection of the
>genre in one place. Why can't this be replicated in the download world?
>Personally, I'd be willing to pay more than the $10/40 songs/month that
>I pay to eMusic if Not Lame offered a download service that had the same
>selection as its CD store. Again, I'd pay the premium for the expertise
>and specialization. The artist wins because my willingness to pay a
>premium translates into more money for them than they'd get through
>eMusic. Not Lame wins because the prospect of better returns would
>likely bring in artists that are currently eMusic holdouts, creating a
>point of differentiation. So when does the service launch, Bruce?
Can't speak for Bruce or the others but two reasons have stopped us:
1) Buying and maintaining servers big enough to handle the contents and pay
for the back-end banking/verification systems runs into the tens of
thousands of dollars per annum. I'm paying $500 a month now just to maintain
30 second streams of 100 songs plus URL security and upgrades.
2) Traffic to MY site isn't nearly big enough to warrant the costs above.
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
_________________________________________________________________
New Windows Live Hotmail is here. Upgrade for free and get a better look.
www.newhotmail.ca?icid=WLHMENCA150
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.