Current mood:

aggravated

i'll tell you what's bogus
if you are a fan of music, have seen or used the iTunes Music store, or use any other service for legal song purchasing via the internet i suggest you read THIS.

It is an example of how much people really do not understand the entertainment industry whatsoever and I thought you should all know that the plan suggested in the article will NEVER WORK. Labels will continue to exist in some form for a long time to come.

Fired up for some hott debate?

Coming from somebody who works at a reasonably sized independent record label, I personally hate the structure of the music business and how major labels operate in general. Here is an example of something that is going on these days, taken from Buddyhead's gossip section and true as could be. I know because I am unfortunately a part of it:

"The cutest little trend now with new bands and major labels, is to sign young bands, and instead of them sitting around for awhile doing nothing, they get them to put out fake indie albums… usually on their own fake indie labels, or perhaps any indie label willing to take a check under the table, and that way they can build up that “indie cred” that “money can’t buy” in an “organic” way. Right. This is especially popular among many local L.A. bands of the moment who have played like… 5 shows, but are already living fat on the major label payroll. The funny part is that some of you idiot kids out there either can’t tell this is happening, or don’t care. Well here’s the thing, to all the bands that put out albums on independent labels cos there’s no other way to put out their records, and tour in vans cos that’s the only option there is, not cos it’ll make them look like “troopers” in their major label debut’s one sheet, IT’S HUGELY FUCKING OFFENSIVE. FUCK OFF. So next time you hear about a band where somebody says, “awwww, naw dude, they didn’t really sign with $8#2% Records, that’s just a rumor”, and then see full page ads in every magazine on the face of the planet for their “independent” record, YOU ARE BEING FUCKING PLAYED. "

They are right. You are being fucking played and you have no idea how deep it runs. How does this all tie in to the URL referenced above and the iTunes Music Store?? It ultimately comes down to the band's choices.

Ok, so the article claims Apple takes 35%... fair enough! Wouldn't you know that when you buy your favorite new indie record in a record shop, almost 50% will be going to the store itself (yes, that's indies. chain stores get way more than that)... it's a funny little thing called "overhead".

Apple has employees that sit there and update and fix things in the site all day long. They are busy ripping new albums and listening through for pops and clicks. They are updating the store which is a highly sophisticated site on it's own, dealing with customer service, developing the Windows version of iTunes, and also paying for the enormous chunk of bandwidth that is used to transfer 50,000 songs daily from their servers.

Do they make a profit when you buy music? You fuckin' bet they do! That's why for-profit businesses in this country exist, to earn a profit for the shareholders. It's the first thing you learn in any business class. Anyone trying to sell stuff below cost is either trying to gain market entry, or a bunch of morons. That's where the labels come in. They're both.

Major labels spend an average of 1-1.5 million per release. If that tiny plastic box on your shelf has a major label logo on it, then some serious cash went into it! It is much harder to estimate the cost of an indie release since they vary so greatly, but just know that it is far, far less. How much did the band put into the record? More often than not, NOTHING! This is how labels work. They INVEST in a band in order to make a profit. At the same time that labels should never have to spend $1.5 million to release a compact disc, they do it because as long as the record sells, it's not their money. When you get a record at Best Buy for $6.99 the day it came out, it's not like that goofy asshole in the big yellow tag suit wanted to see your shiny smile... the label payed cash through the nose for that!

Most of this money is defined as "recoupable." That is a term that labels simply love. It means they can spend money and never have to pay bands squat for royalties until the million or so dollars has been paid back to the label through record sales. This is harder to do than it sounds like. Only a small amount of each sale will count back towards the band's "recoupment" because of things like promotional and packaging costs, which are a lot of times totally inflated in the label's favor.

What about mechanicals? Yeah right! Those are taken directly against a band's merchandise debt with their label. You think those cds they're selling at the show came to them free? In theory, the band should be able to sell them and pay the label back, but then gas money and van repairs come into the picture. Lovely.

But wait... Aaron. I thought you said this actually WAS fair? Unfortunately, it is. The band never has to agree to any of this. They signed the contract. They hire their lawyer and their manager. You can't play the "I didn't know" card. Read thoroughly. Get second opinions. If you are not happy with what the contract stipulates simply don't sign it. Nobody has ever been signed to a record contract by gunpoint with the possible exception of Death Row Records.

To the people of downhillbattle.org: Why don't the bands just circumvent the labels altogether? I am so glad you asked... Here's the skinny:

-Playing music is really fun but it's really fucking expensive! Equipment that sounds good does not come cheap. Studio time (at a respectable place) is out of the question for a lot of very talented bands.

-Bands make much more profit playing shows on tour through merchandising and ticket sales than they do through royalties, but an unknown band will be more likely to lose money since due to low attendance.

-Having a label supporting the band will most likely bring attention to the band through advertising, publicity, store promotions, hooking up tours with bigger bands, or just guerilla marketing in general. Remember that band names more or less

-It is too hard for most unknown bands to compete for popularity with bands on labels because of the above promotions.

This is not 100% fool proof and a few bands have broken through on their own. On the other hand, try and think about what percentage of the records you as a listener buy that are self released and not a friend of yours?

There is a free model available to bands and it's called putting your own music on Kazaa, your own website, or mp3.com. Get your ass in the van and book a tour. Post about your record on some messageboards and do some guerilla marketing on your own. It's very rewarding to see that you have gained new fans through this hard work.

Do I give my music out for free over Kazaa and mp3.com? Yes.

Would I take 11 cents from Apple for each download? Hell yes.

What about 48 cents(downhillbattle.org's model)? Sure, but when you subtract the cost of bandwidth, publicity and promotion required to sell the same amount of mp3's of the same record, it probably comes out even worse in the end. You can do this without spending the money on pubiclity or promotion, but don't expect as many sales or people at your shows until you've done some serious touring on your own.

Destroying the music industry as a whole is a pointless and useless endeavor. Bands who gain popularity or money on their own will incorporate the same ruthless business tactics that the labels employ today to ensure their continuing popularity. Also, bands who come from the richest families will ultimately have a big advantage over bands from lower income families.

While i know plenty of people who download music, I have yet to hear from any of them that they just Paypal'ed their favorite band a few bucks for the songs they got on Kazaa. This is the musical equivalent of anarchy, which has been shown to sound much better in theory than in practice.

The industry does need to be reformed and regulated. However, just as important for the music fan is their own education and not sloppy misinformation as provided by sites like downhillbattle.org.

NOTE: This article does not go into the difference between an artist and and entertainer or the choice made by the band over which path to take. The article assumes the role of entertainer as is the path chosen by the greater portion of bands. Also assumed is that the bands understand the fundamentals of running a business, promotion, publicty and booking.