Quote:
Originally Posted by gideongallery
including giving their fans permission to download all their stuff?
|
No. They should be allowed to give away anything new that they make, but the old stuff is still for sale in retail by the label so they should not be allowed to give fans permission to download that for free.
Quote:
i am not saying it unfair, i am simply pointing out that there is no downside risk for the record company. If you don't believe me, find one launched artist that has lost a million dollars (your number not mine) for the failed launch.
Record companies front cost is the advance and the recording time, the average markup on the recording time is 100%. The test launch is going to be small, and with itunes now in the picture, allowing them to test launch a single at a time, with NO UPFRONT COST. they pretty much know which bands they have to cut their losses on.
|
The modern era does allow them to test the market and see what happens before they put a big launch on an artist. Another tactic they use is having an artist guest on an established artists record and see what kind of reaction they get.
Finding the failed bands would not be easy because many of them are signed, record and never get released then are cut from the contract and nobody ever hears of them.
Here is one example I know of for sure from my past. The band was a local Portland band named Hazel. They had a couple of records out on a small indy label and were starting to build up a fan base. Elecktra records signs them. They get an 800K advance. They go into the studio and record the album. The studio cost ran in the area of about 75K. They hand the record into the label and the label hated it. They wanted a few more songs so the label pays for them to go back and record a few more songs and they don't like those either. This band was kind of a alt.rock band and clearly the label thought they could mold them into something more pop. After much arguing the the label dropped them. The label agreed to let them keep the record and do with it as they pleased. As per the contract they had to pay back 50% of the advance. So the label spent around 475K on them in advance and recording costs and never earned a penny.
Quote:
|
they are telling their fans that it ok to download their stuff, so what, mp3 quality is less then what could be bought on the cd. the old masters have life well beyond just as the bands music, dvd that layered all the different tracks, behind the scene photage, instremental tracks for karoke..... an let not forget about actually leveraging the bit torrent to promote their next big thing, by cross recomendation. There is tons of money to be made.
|
you cant be naive enough to think that most people will download an album online then listen to it and say, "oh, the quality isn't as good as the CD so I will go buy the CD." There is money to be made yes, but it is a give and take. The label provided the means to make this music so they should be allowed to have a say in how it is marketed and sold. If there is that much money to be made, the labels and the artists will find a common ground and produce the content.
Quote:
Even if there wasn't the record companies deal already paid them in full for the establish artist.
The ultimate point is should an artist have a right to give their fans permission to download their stuff after they have met the term of their contract.
You can't say it ok, and then complain about the next.
Either they do have a right to do anything they want (your first statement) or they don't.
|
My original statement still stands. If the satisfy their contract (part of which allows the labels to retain retail rights to their old CDs) they should be allowed to give away any NEW music or content they create. If they tell the fans to just download the old stuff from a torrent site they are harming the potential sales that the label has a right to and they shouldn't be allowed to do that.