|
Steve Angello Rant (pg. 5)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Yohan |
| quote: | Originally posted by mUSER
I'm with Dave.
You know what, if you aren't a big enough producer to make money out there performing, you're not big enough to live off your income anyways. Like anyone else making music because they love it, I have a regular job. I make sacrifices in life so that I can spend my personal time doing what I personally love to do.
If someone wants to listen to ANY of my tracks, it's a privilege as an artist. It's a blessing really. I'm happy to provide it to them. If they like it that much, they'll pass it on. To think, companies PAY to advertise, whereas an artist can get free advertisement for the low price of sharing his art.
If people like the music, they'll want to see you live. They'll want to show they like you with merchandise. They'll provide lots of other benefits to you as a patron. Music is a intangible good; it's always been a hard sell. But there are so many other things an artist can make money on.
And yes, I have been doing it a long time. I just don't believe that waiting for a return of the "Golden Years" is a productive use of time. |
this is all nice and good, except you're forgetting about the record labels who take time to give your tracks a listen, and promote them |
|
|
| mUSER |
Those labels have every reason to provide capital for merchandise and other revenue, which the artist couldn't afford to begin with. They can also adapt to provide promotion and booking services, as well as work harder towards liscensing, etc. There are all kinds of ways to make money, they just aren't all traditional.
It takes innovation. At the end of the day, if your business plan fails, it fails. |
|
|
| AceMan6 |
| steve agnello suchs at life and doesnt know the difference between there, their, and they're. go back to grade school loser. |
|
|
| ÖZmözis |
| quote: | Originally posted by AceMan6
steve agnello suchs at life and doesnt know the difference between there, their, and they're. go back to grade school loser. |
Steve Angello sucks at life and doesn't know the difference between there, their, and they're. Go back to Grade school loser.
You should join him. I'm sure you two would make great classmates lol |
|
|
| darouge11 |
| angello wil be at decadence 09 sweeeet |
|
|
| Skipper |
The spelling in that rant was ridiculous! wow.
You've gotta realize that there is leakage in every business. Theft in every store. My first reaction is that selling music online is like being a small manufacturer going through Walmart...except if Walmart had a massive theft problem. You need walmart to distribute your product but you're taking a huge cut on it because of the theft. But if you don't sell through them (ie you don't release your music digitally) you cut yourself off from a huge market. Sucks either way.
I believe that file sharing problem in the industry is much worse than theft in retail though. That is why I buy all of my music - I think the artists are getting screwed quite a lot. However, they can't expect it to be perfect either. |
|
|
| Dave Akermanis |
| quote: | Originally posted by Skipper
The spelling in that rant was ridiculous! wow.
You've gotta realize that there is leakage in every business. Theft in every store. My first reaction is that selling music online is like being a small manufacturer going through Walmart...except if Walmart had a massive theft problem. You need walmart to distribute your product but you're taking a huge cut on it because of the theft. But if you don't sell through them (ie you don't release your music digitally) you cut yourself off from a huge market. Sucks either way.
I believe that file sharing problem in the industry is much worse than theft in retail though. That is why I buy all of my music - I think the artists are getting screwed quite a lot. However, they can't expect it to be perfect either. |
I'm not sure that it amounts to theft ultimately though... yes, if you contextualize it based on existing law then sure - its theft. But then again, telecom law related to internet is nebulous and barely existant.
I think the situation is better described as a shift in consumer behavior that has come about as the result of new technologies. Content (read: music) is harder to control and harder to define in terms of units, copies, etc. than it used to be.
Other industries are feeling the same pain - the newspaper business for example. I can get my news online, for free. As a consumer, why would I pay for a newspaper subscription?
That being said, I do purchase every piece of music that I want to acquire because I want to support artists that I like. Supporting artists you enjoy is a no brainer, but I don't think that attacking the concept of file sharing is the solution to ensuring that they are properly compensated. Technologies have caused paradigm shifts in the content industries before - I don't see how this is any different - people need to stop resisting and get innovative. |
|
|
| Skipper |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dave Akermanis
Other industries are feeling the same pain - the newspaper business for example. I can get my news online, for free. As a consumer, why would I pay for a newspaper subscription?
|
The difference (and it's a big one) is that you get your news for free from other news sources. You are not finding someone's journalistic work on a free website when you should be paying - you are instead substituting a journalist that is asking to be paid with one that isn't.
and yes, I contextualize it based on existing law. Duh. That's what law abiding citizens do. |
|
|
| SgtFoo |
There are plenty of journalisitic artists that give their art for free on the web for the same reasons that music artist give away their tunes for free.
The paradigm shift of music sales already hapenned a while ago. If the labels or the artist haven't adapted to the new way to sell or even just market the music, they are bound to fall behind... rant or no rant. |
|
|
| Dave Akermanis |
| quote: | Originally posted by Skipper
The difference (and it's a big one) is that you get your news for free from other news sources. You are not finding someone's journalistic work on a free website when you should be paying - you are instead substituting a journalist that is asking to be paid with one that isn't.
and yes, I contextualize it based on existing law. Duh. That's what law abiding citizens do. |
Not true, those websites that publish news online, and are then subsequently republished by aggregators such as Google news are funded by profit models other than subscription.
My point is that there is a gap in existing law, the proper framework is not in place. When everyone is doing it, it amounts to more of a revolution than breaking the law, no? |
|
|
| mute79 |
| Is there a stat that shows what percentage of music is pirated? With the popularity of iTunes, it can't be much. Are we talking about like 10% or something? |
|
|
| Skipper |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dave Akermanis
Not true, those websites that publish news online, and are then subsequently republished by aggregators such as Google news are funded by profit models other than subscription.
|
Elaborate? |
|
|
|
|
