Previous Next Latest

The Fall of the Record Business: What Next?

6/21/07, 6:12 pm EST

On Tuesday, RollingStone.com ran Brian Hiatt and Evan Serpick’s special report on the decline of the music business. Today, for part two, we’re featuring interviews with forward-thinking executives, each with their own ideas on what the record industry might look like in ten years. Read on here.

Photo: Getty


Previous Next Latest

Comments

leo3375 | 6/21/2007, 11:52 pm EST

I predict that artists will sell their music directly to the consumers via downloads directly from their official website of MySpace page. Trent Reznor has stated that if he could right now, he would make the next Nine Inch Nails album available for download as soon as mixing is finished for a fee of less than $5, with a physical product available at concerts and other means for those who wish to have a physical copy of the music. Thus the waiting period between the end of the mixing process and the actual street date is eliminated, and the urge to “steal” an album before it drops is eliminated.

Record labels are still a good source for advertising and promotion but distribution channels have changed and the labels need to realize this and get with the times.

vasschu | 6/22/2007, 4:02 am EST

Trent Reznor can afford this, because he is already a legend. If you are a new band you have to fight with milions of artist in myspace to get popular.

kohanmusic | 6/22/2007, 11:10 am EST

There has always been a wary relationship between labels and artist managers, but that needs to be overcome in a big way for labels to have any hope of survival. The label, which owns the masters, is often slave to the artist manager in obtaining consent for use of those masters. The licensing of those masters must be streamlined so that licensees have incentive to seek out those masters. Despite a cadre of BlackBerry addicted execs the music industry still moves very slowly on this particular front. Believe it or not, this business affairs issue lies at the heart of the industry’s issues. Managers and estates dealing with the labels have to take the leap of faith, because otherwise the labels will decline and fall, and who will then be responsible for or dedicated to earning artists money for their recordings? Does any manager think that these labels will sell off their masters back to the artists?

Too many artists and managers have self-deluded themselves into thinking associations with particular brands are tantamount to a “sell-out.” Name me one band of significance you CAN’T hear on any chain retailer or restauranteur’s in-store music bed. I recently heard Bruce Springsteen & the E Street Band’s “Tenth Avenue Freeze-Out” while waiting in line at my bank. Does that make me think any less of “The Boss” than I did before? NO! And any fan who believes that any media where great music is featured has the ability to corrupt the artist or their perception of that artist is a fair-weather fan to begin with. Leave them in the dust.

And consider that the major labels are either publicly traded companies or divisions of publicly traded companies. Any shareholder who is interested in the value of his or her shares ought to call the labels out on the carpet on this issue. If profit and revenue maximization are issues to those shareholders, then the streamlining of licensing for all media ought to be a huge priority, but it’s barely been given any coverage at all.

Only a guy like Chris Anderson, who wrote “The Long Tail,” has really shouted from the rooftops about the antiquated licensing processes the industry employs.

Get into that and dig deeper.

http://appetiteford isruption.typepad.com

love it. | 6/22/2007, 12:20 pm EST

Apple rules!

Post A Comment

Caution: Off-topic comments will be deleted

Name:

Comments:



Advertisement

Advertisement