RIAA site hacked - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-13-2003, 04:15 PM   #31
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Popmartijn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 32,543
Local Time: 10:55 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by whenhiphopdrovethebigcars
Great to see you´re working on your thesis.
Erm...
I'm still here...

But I promise I'll be offline soon! I really do.

In the meanwhile, I also found the other article. It was actually MCA that spend millions on a pop 'star' that did not sell.

-
Pop Singer Fails To Strike a Chord Despite the Millions Spent By MCA
Here's the link to the original article (WSJ requires registration and I don't know if the link still works):
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,4286...l?mod=Page+One
Here's a link to a message board that has the full article:
http://velvetrope.starpolish.com/ubb...rue#Post140294

C ya!

Marty
__________________

__________________
Popmartijn is offline  
Old 01-13-2003, 04:36 PM   #32
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 09:55 AM
I confess to not being as technically inclined as many others here when it comes to computer technology. More about that in a second.

Back in the 70s and 80s, if you were to copy a cassette or record to another cassette, there would be significant degradation in the quality of the music. I never new anyone back in the 80s that decided to give up buying music from the store because they could copy it from a friend on cassette. I now have friends that will probably never buy another compact disk ever because of the ability to download and burn ones own CDs. It is my understanding that one can download music from another persons harddrive and burn it to a CD without any degradation in soundquality. I've been told this by a friend who works for EDS and is a musician with his own recording studio. I consider him to be very knowledgable on this techincal issue unlike myself.

I understand that the recording industry was still making mountains of money with Napster around, but I would still say there were thousands of people who decided not to purchase and album because they could get for free from Napster.

The Key here is what will things look like 10 years from now, with these technologies more available and used by the general population. What will the effect then be with file sharing and other exchanging of undegraded music on the music industry.

This year, it seems that the impact is starting to be felt. More and more people are getting this technology and learning about Kazaa and other things and this is starting I think to impact the industry. If it has not yet, I think it will in the future.

There is simply no incentive to go to the store to buy something when you can get it for free without leaving your house.
__________________

__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 01-13-2003, 04:39 PM   #33
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 11:55 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Popmartijn


Erm...
I'm still here...

But I promise I'll be offline soon! I really do.

In the meanwhile, I also found the other article. It was actually MCA that spend millions on a pop 'star' that did not sell.

-
Pop Singer Fails To Strike a Chord Despite the Millions Spent By MCA
Here's the link to the original article (WSJ requires registration and I don't know if the link still works):
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,4286...l?mod=Page+One
Here's a link to a message board that has the full article:
http://velvetrope.starpolish.com/ubb...rue#Post140294

C ya!

Marty
Who R U on the Rope? Do tell
__________________
hiphop is offline  
Old 01-13-2003, 04:57 PM   #34
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 09:55 AM
Music sales dip; Net seen as culprit


By Jim Hu
Staff Writer
April 16, 2002, 8:15 AM PT


Global music sales declined for the second consecutive year, a dip the recording industry blamed on the proliferation of free music swapping on the Internet.
In 2001, worldwide music sales dropped 5 percent to $33.7 billion, according to the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI), a record industry lobbying group. That figure is down again from the 5 percent drop in 2000 to $37 billion.

For a more accurate comparison, the IFPI adjusted all 2000 sales figures to 2001 exchange rates in calculating the percent differences.



The recording industry maintained that demand for music has not waned, but that sales have been hurt by the presence of free file-swapping services, such as Kazaa, Morpheus and LimeWire, and by the proliferation of CD burners.

"The industry's problems reflect no fall in the popularity of recorded music: Rather, they reflect the fact that the commercial value of music is being widely devalued by mass copying and piracy," IFPI Chief Executive Jay Berman said in a statement.

As proof, the IFPI said a survey conducted in three of its top markets--the United States, Japan and Germany--showed a direct comparison between CD burning and file swapping and a smaller appetite for music purchases. In the United States, about 70 percent of people who downloaded songs and burned them onto CDs and 35 percent of people who downloaded more than 20 songs a month bought less music. In Germany, 18 percent of 10,000 people surveyed said that burning CDs caused them to buy less music.

However, some industry analysts are skeptical that file sharing and CD burning on their own are hurting CD sales. They say the market share slide may highlight the cyclical decline from the late-1990s boom instead of the presence of new technologies.

"I think it's a very convenient scapegoat, but in reality...is more complex," said Aram Sinnreich, an analyst at research firm Jupiter Media Metrix. "The least statistically relevant factor is file sharing because there's very good empirical evidence to show that file sharing alone without a CD burner has a salutary effect on CD sales."

Still, Sinnreich agreed that combining file sharing with CD burning could dampen the desire for someone to buy CDs.

The decline in CD sales varied by region: Sales declined by 4.5 percent in the United States, 9.6 percent in Canada, 9.2 percent in Germany, 8.6 percent in Italy, 9.8 percent in Austria, 14.8 percent in Denmark and 9.4 percent in Japan.

Meanwhile, sales in France and the United Kingdom were up 10 percent and 5 percent, respectively. The IFPI attributed the increases to strong demand for local artists despite the decrease in demand for artists outside those countries' borders.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 01-13-2003, 05:02 PM   #35
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Popmartijn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 32,543
Local Time: 10:55 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by whenhiphopdrovethebigcars
Who R U on the Rope? Do tell
First, I want to declare that I was offline for a short while and did what I had to do.

Now, on the Rope I'm just a lurker, not registered. What's your nickname there?
For the moment Interference is enough for me. The Rope is also more for people in the music business and I'm just an IT guy.

Sting, you are partly right about some people not buying CD's because of Napster (and the rest). That happens, always (back in the days I think there were also people who copied records on blank tapes and never bought those records). The interesting part, however, is that many studies point out that 1) many people buy more because of file-sharing (discovering new music, testing music first, not being discouraged by shelling out a lot of money for a worthless CD) and 2) that heavy users of those file-sharing programs buy more than 'light' users (and buy more with a significant factor, x6 or so).

OK, time for me to go to bed. I have to be able to listen to music tomorrow!

C ya!

Marty
__________________
Popmartijn is offline  
Old 01-13-2003, 05:19 PM   #36
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 09:55 AM
I dispute the studies which show that heavy users of file sharing buy more CDs than non-users. Remember, thats based on unscientific survey. Most heavy users of file sharing would say anything to defend the practice including that it makes them buy more music which is illogical.

If you can get something for free without leaving your house, there is no reason to leave your house to get it again and in the process pay for it. My friends celebrate file sharing because they say they no longer have the need to buy CDs.

Think about it, any product that can be duplicated and then distributed for free by others is not going to good sales wise the more available the free distribution becomes.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 01-13-2003, 05:52 PM   #37
Blue Crack Addict
 
meegannie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Norwich, England
Posts: 15,798
Local Time: 09:55 AM
Fiel-sharing DOES lead to many people buying more music. I wouldn't have 90% of the cds I own if I hadn't been able to download a copy first. Most of the music I listen to is foreign, and the albums are released six to twelve months later in the US, if at all. Instead of paying $25+ to order it from overseas, I download it and burn it to CD. Then I buy it when it's finally released in the US. Why do I buy the CDs at all? Because I like liner notes, and because I like the bands enough to contribute to their album sales in the US. I love music, and it's aesthetic to own a real CD, just as a lot of music fans also buy releases on vinyl.

I also would not have gone to ANY of the dozens of concerts I went to last year and spent hundreds of dollars on merchandise if it hadn't been for file-sharing.
__________________
meegannie is offline  
Old 01-13-2003, 06:08 PM   #38
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 09:55 AM
I understand what your saying and thats great for you. But most people are not hardcore fans of any artist and don't really care about the liner notes. All of my friends usually lost their CD cases or booklets.

Most people care about the music. If they can get for free without paying 20 dollars, their going to do that. Only the minority care about the liner notes. One of my best friends is a hardcore U2 fan. He has met the entire band, been to Bono's house and Windmill lane studio's.

Yet, his sister sent him a burned copy of ATYCLB two weeks before it was released. Its a perfect copy, I have listened to it and compared. He has never gone out to purchase ATYCLB despite the fact that U2 is his favorite band. If he can get for free, he feels no need to go out to the store and purchase it. I imagine that are many more casual music listeners or U2 fans who feel the same way.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 01-13-2003, 09:39 PM   #39
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
U2Bama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Gulf Coast State of Mine
Posts: 3,405
Local Time: 03:55 AM

STING2:

I agree with a lot of what you are saying simply as a matter of "right and wrong" according to what I believe. Personally, I don't download anything off the net that is commercially available as a matter of principle (I won't get into the reasons right now), plus I am somewhat of a CD collector and I like to have the genuine copy. But can't you agree that CDs are WAY overpriced? The records companies would still make their money and there would be more units sold and fewer pirated copies if they priced them more reasonably at $9.99 - $11.99 as opposed to the $17.99 - $19.99 that they sell for at Sam Goody or Coconuts. I do not agree with it and I do not participate in it, but I do see the piracy trend as a response to the ridiculously high pricing trend for music; hell, you can get 2-disc DVDs for less than some single CDs these days.

~U2Alabama
__________________
U2Bama is offline  
Old 01-13-2003, 10:12 PM   #40
Blue Crack Addict
 
meegannie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Norwich, England
Posts: 15,798
Local Time: 09:55 AM
The majority of people who don't buy CDs, these casual listeners, are downloading music like Britney Spears and Eminem, who aren't exactly hurting for cash or record sales. The "struggling artists" benefit from file-sharing because more people are able to hear their music and spend money going to shows and buying the CDs that the casual music fan couldn't care less about.
__________________
meegannie is offline  
Old 01-13-2003, 10:57 PM   #41
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 09:55 AM
meegannie,

I have yet to hear of a band go platinum because of File Sharing. I have friends that have struggled to get something going, and File Sharring sure has not helped. Again, there is no reason for a consumer to go out and pay 20 dollars for a product that he already owns through file sharing.

U2Bama,

I might could see one getting CDs at the Military PX for $ 11.99, but there is no way that a retailer could profit if he only sold the product for 11.99. If you adjust for inflation, Compact Disk cost the same as they did in 1988. The list price for most Compact Disk in 1988 was 15 dollars. Inflation easily explains the increase. You can't expect to pay 1988 prices in 2003. So I really do not see there being any high pricing trend although I'd have to sit down with the the actual average retail list price from the particular year and then the math with the annual inflation rate from each year to determine if Compact Disk cost more or less than they did 10 or 15 years ago.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 01-13-2003, 11:02 PM   #42
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 09:55 AM
I'll just add that file sharing is basically impossible to stop. The only solution I think is CD encryption. If that is not possible then be prepared to say goodby to the music business and the process that has brought us great artist in the past like U2.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 01-14-2003, 02:07 AM   #43
Refugee
 
bonoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Edmonton, Canada- Charlestown, Ireland
Posts: 1,398
Local Time: 02:55 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2



I might could see one getting CDs at the Military PX for $ 11.99, but there is no way that a retailer could profit if he only sold the product for 11.99. If you adjust for inflation, Compact Disk cost the same as they did in 1988. The list price for most Compact Disk in 1988 was 15 dollars. Inflation easily explains the increase. You can't expect to pay 1988 prices in 2003. So I really do not see there being any high pricing trend although I'd have to sit down with the the actual average retail list price from the particular year and then the math with the annual inflation rate from each year to determine if Compact Disk cost more or less than they did 10 or 15 years ago.
IMO this is totally untrue. I as you know live in Canada. Prices for Cds here are, for new releases, 14-18$ CND. This translates into 9-12$ US. How can you explain this? And on the other side of the spectrum in the UK they pay much more for cds then NA's do.

There is alot of money in the MI and if they had lower prices they would be able to sell more copies. The highest priced cds in Canada are usually 20-25$ for classics or double discs, why are they so low here?
__________________
bonoman is offline  
Old 01-14-2003, 02:41 AM   #44
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Popmartijn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 32,543
Local Time: 10:55 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
I have yet to hear of a band go platinum because of File Sharing. I have friends that have struggled to get something going, and File Sharring sure has not helped. Again, there is no reason for a consumer to go out and pay 20 dollars for a product that he already owns through file sharing.
In several year-end lists last year there was this album Yankee Hotel Foxtrot by the band Wilco (released in Spring or so). Some other magazines, however, did not count the album as a best-of-this-year as it had been out for almost 2 years. When they recorded their album their label (Reprise, IIRC) did not deem it commercial enough and decided not to release it. The band then put the whole album on the Internet as a free download. Months (to a year) later and the album was finally released (on Nonesuch, IIRC, with a very ironic twist as it is a sublabel of the original label that did not want to release the recording). The result? It is their highest selling record of their carreer (entering the charts around #15 and immediately selling more than their last album had sold in its entirely in the USA). So file-sharing does increase sales and there are many people who want to buy an album even if they have MP3's of it.

Oh, and there is Weezer. They have also put their songs (or at least demo's of their songs) online and still continue to sell well (their last album Maladroit is Gold).

C ya!

Marty
__________________
Popmartijn is offline  
Old 01-14-2003, 05:34 AM   #45
Refugee
 
ThatGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Vertigo
Posts: 1,277
Local Time: 01:55 AM
Lots has been said to dispute STING's argument, but these quotes really put it in perspective:

Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
I dispute the studies which show that heavy users of file sharing buy more CDs than non-users. Remember, thats based on unscientific survey.
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
My friends celebrate file sharing because they say they no longer have the need to buy CDs.

This next one has less to do with file-sharing as it does with cd-burning. If it's an exact copy (read non-MP3 sourced) then it's likely that your friend's sister had a copy from an original source, like an advance CD. In which case file-sharing had nothing to do with it.

Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
One of my best friends is a hardcore U2 fan. He has met the entire band, been to Bono's house and Windmill lane studio's.

Yet, his sister sent him a burned copy of ATYCLB two weeks before it was released. Its a perfect copy, I have listened to it and compared. He has never gone out to purchase ATYCLB despite the fact that U2 is his favorite band. If he can get for free, he feels no need to go out to the store and purchase it..

So, where's your argument? How is file-sharing hurting the record business?
__________________

__________________
ThatGuy is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com