Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011
Michael Arrington
Mar 8, 2009

I had a surprisingly candid lunch conversation last week with a big music label executive, and a good part of our talk focused on the future of music. I asked the usual question: Why are you guys so damned clueless? Your business is disintegrating before your eyes, and all you do is go for short term cash gains (lawsuits, mafia-style collection rackets from venture backed music startups, etc.). The long term costs are horrendous – an entire generation or two of young music lovers feel no remorse at outright stealing music. Particularly since most online streaming is now free, it’s hard to understand why downloading or sharing songs should be a crime.

His response: It’s all part of a master plan. The labels fully understand that recorded music, streamed or downloaded, is going to be free in the future (we’ve argued this relentlessly). CD sales continue to decline by 20% per year, and the only thing that’ll stop that trend is when those sales reach zero. Nothing will replace those revenues.

They also understand that recorded music will largely be little more than marketing collateral, meaning that the Internet services being sued today for copyright infringement will be embraced in the future as ways to get the word out on hot new music. These services pay for the privilege today (either through high streaming rates or in court), but in the future they’ll be the ones getting paid by labels. Think radio payola at a whole new level, and there won’t be any more talk about social networks giving stock to labels and artists. Money will flow the other way, as it should.

By 2013 (maybe as early as 2011) it’ll make sense for the labels to finally reorganize their business models around the reality created by the Internet and person to person file sharing services. No longer will the labels be tied to revenue limited to sales of master recordings – by then most or all artists will be under 360 music contracts that give the labels a cut of virtually every revenue stream artists can tap into – fan sites, concerts, merchandise, endorsement deals, and everything else.

But until then, he says, the spreadsheets and financial models dictate that suing customers and partners just makes too much sense. Venture capitalists have directed hundreds of millions of dollars, via their litigation-mired startups, into the label coffers. To some extent those payments will continue, although the big payment days are likely over. Apple still sends a lot of money to the labels for paid downloads, and sites like MySpace Music, Imeem, Rhapsody and Last.fm pay big streaming dollars. Until CD sales really stagnate, all those revenue streams bring in more money than facing reality.

For most industries, embracing old revenue streams until they are completely petered out is a great way to open the door wide open to competitors with more innovative business models. But the Innovator’s Dilemma problem doesn’t necessarily apply to the music industry. The big labels have a lock on talent, and there’s no reason to believe that new artists won’t continue to strive to lock themselves in to one of them.

What this means for us music consumers – don’t expect much to change for the next few years. But sometime in the next decade we’ll see a real renaissance in how music is distributed and consumed. And who knows, a decade after that we may have all forgiven the music labels.

Advertisement
  • Related Topics
Advertisement
  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael_Martin/508010100 Michael Martin

    Soooo, by the picture are you saying Big Music are Nazis? :)

    ,Michael Martin
    http://www.googleandblog.com/

  • http://www.crunchnotes.com Michael Arrington

    are those nazis?

  • http://www.rajajasti.com/2009/03/08/does-music-industry-get-it/ Does Music Industry Get It? « Raja Jasti’s Blog – Renaissance Thinking

    [...] Arrington writes that music industry will surrender to the inevitable, but not until [...]

  • Evan

    Sucks that it should take so long, though. Why don’t one of the big guys start the trend early? Get one up on the competition?

  • http://www.socialgoodcompany.com Chris Bates

    Interesting that they’re still dragging their feet.

    I have a feeling though that they will not have that luxury of waiting. Sure, they have a lock on talent. But all you need is a new company like YouTube/MySpace Music that wants to become their own music label. These new companies have mastered the new distribution model, and I don’t understand why they allow themselves to be locked in.

  • http://ontechnology.blogspot.com Robleh

    Why don’t they try discounting before accepting that nobody will pay for downloaded music? Allofmp3 showed plenty of people will pay if the price is right.

  • Lou Natick

    So…you’re saying I’m going to have to sell my body to get a ticket to a concert in 2-4 years?

  • Jim Guardian

    I personally think CD sales are dropping more because of the CD being an outdated media format, rather than publicity.

    At least in NYC, enumerate the people around you everyday using Discmans vs using iPods, or other digital players.

    The Digital format is just more convenient. If they don’t want to be part of the distribution mechanism, oh well… People are realizing you don’t need to buy a whole CD if you only like two songs. I think that plays more against them than piracy.

    If you look at it from a numbers perspective, you have 135 million people using the internet every day, out of those, it’s really a tiny fraction of people that actually go through the pain of installing p2p applications, searching, downloading, organizing and burning music into CDs (or putting on their ipods). Let’s say you had what… 50million of those actually doing that.

    50 million people is probably a small fraction of people compared to the global market of the music industry. Instead they should focus on making it easy for the other 120 million people to get their music conveniently, I guess that’s the opportunity Apple saw and why iTunes is successful.

    The same goes to the movie industry. Create your own digital distribution networks and stop crying.
    That’s the advice that the pirate bay has for them, create your own torrent site and make money on ads. They’d get plenty of decent advertisers paying them.

    Another solution would be to create a “License to share”, you pay a fixed amount of money per year to the RIAA or MPAA, and you download and share to your heart’s contempt.

  • Jim Guardian

    “rather than publicity” -> “rather than piracy”

  • Jim Guardian

    10 cents a songs. I’d certainly buy lots of albums if they costed $1.5-$1.99, I already do that on amazon by buying used CDs.

  • http://www.myspace.com/bmblack34 Brandon Black

    Very interesting. I think we all knew they were on their way out and there wasn’t room in the future of music for these industry dinosaurs, I didn’t realize they had a backup plan.

    I’m curious to see how this pans out. Great article! Thanks for sharing.

  • http://www.sebastienpage.com Sebastien

    I really don’t see why you call them nazis. Could you please explain?

  • http://www.brainbankhq.com Melvin Ram w/ BrainBank

    Hmm sounds like they really are waiting for 100% of the artists to be under the 360 contracts first before proceeding to a new business model.

    This seems unwise. If they wait 5 years, the patterns of discovering new music will change drastically and they’ll miss out on the power of momentum.

    Today, YouTube & social networks are becoming great ways of discover new musicians. If this pattern continues to evolve to become habit, the role of labels will begin to shrink… and so will their ability to negotiate with artists.

    It’s likely that there will always be packaged artists like Britney who don’t have a musical fanbase before the labels get a hold of them. They’ll likely be the bread & butter of labels but artists that come with a following of 100,000 subscribers on YouTube will expect different treatment/contracts.

    Labels should consider developing partnerships in a way that allows them to add value to both, the distribution partners and the artists… beyond just managing rights and collecting money.

  • http://www.sp4ngle.com/2009/03/08/big-music-will-surrender-but-not-until-at-least-2011/ sp4ngle » Blog Archive » Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011

    [...] via Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011 . [...]

  • http://inthebox.webmin.com Joe

    As you’ve pointed out, this requires the labels to have a monopoly on the best talent. And, there is already strong evidence that they no longer have a monopoly, and that their share is in decline. There are hundreds of reasonably well-known artists now who don’t do the majority of their distribution through labels or traditional channels. Radiohead is just the best known example of this.

    The Innovator’s Dilemma certainly applies to the recording industry. They may still be in denial about it, and their strength may be such that they can effectively convince themselves that they’re on top of this paradigm change and will be kingmakers forever, the facts just don’t add up that way. At this point, I don’t think there is a happy ending possible for the majors. They’ve always been hostile to the artists (ask anybody who has a major label deal whether they would choose to deal with the label if they had another way to reach as many customers, the answer will always be an emphatic “no!”), and now they’re being hostile to partners, customers, and anybody else they can extract money from. Why would anyone want them in the loop when there are alternative models that don’t include them at all?

  • http://www.dailyhack.net Charlie Flowers

    Exactly! I don’t see why they have to sit back and wait. Taking a page out of the Nine Inch Nails/Monty Python playbook, by offering up some free content, could actually help increase sales or at the very least help bolster their reputation. I know I’d feel a lot better about a company who at least tries to innovate, than one who is content to wait until they are forced to change.

  • http://www.powergay.com.br gabriel

    great blog

  • Dan

    Pay to play is already returning to online radio. http://tinyurl.com/d6oy4z

    The reversal of revenue streams between copyright owners and copyright users will complicate the decision-making process for artists who want to “recapture” the copyright to their musical compositions and sound recordings.

    It is so very wrong for publishers and labels to have been given the opportunity to extract revenue from their signed artists and then, when it comes time for the artists to retrieve their copyrights (32 years after assigning them away), the business reality is that those artists will have to pay to have their music played.

  • Tom

    If 360 contracts are what the RIAA labels are counting on to save them, they are even more doomed than we previously thought. Of all the independent labels and bands I’ve talked to, not one would ever think about signing a 360 deal. The services offered by labels are increasingly becoming commoditized, and it would be foolish for any artist to trade equity in their band for so little in return.

  • http://www.collierclan.net/mark/ Mark Collier

    The big labels do NOT have a lock on talent.

  • history lesson

    The image of surrendering racist Nazis is appropriate in the context that it is well documented that in the early days of rock history African-American musicians were routinely underpaid and cheated out of their contracts by the recording industry execs. The “copyrights” of many original works by African-American musicians were signed over to record companies in significantly lower compensation relative to their white colleagues.

    Sure, today record companies can claim they totally embrace African-American musicians, because they’ve come to realize that the latter have made huge contribution to their bottom line and indeed possibly are the only reason why the record companies continue to survive in this digital age.

    Next time, when record companies tell you they “own” copyrights of music by rock legends like Nat King Cole, Chuck Berry, etc, you know how they “acquired” those rights.

  • Timo

    I don’t understand this, If I’m an artist what incentive is there to sign with a record label if everything is moving over to the internet etc

    Thanks

  • http://sutros.com tim

    music is much more than the top 40. Think of the 12 year old recording his first performance…. The majors are only seeing the profit that comes out of music, and therefore constrict and control it. New methods of distribution are already breaking that monopoly. It’s time to see the whole picture. It’s time for the listeners to go straight to the creators. (or vice versa)

  • tomg

    yes they are German troops, although they are not surrendering but rather breaking out into a rendition of “YMCA” by the village people.

    It happen during the Seige of Bastone – look it up, its on Wikipedia.

  • Mr. H

    this is a load of crap.

    no one would steal music if it was 10c for a non-drm song (1$ album). given that this is a pure digital format rather than physical CD that needs stores and distribution – music can make as much money as always.

    also – those people that think the revenue will come from performances and commercials, clearly don’t understand the theory of the long tail.

  • http://opponent.de/ Marco

    Man, are all Germans Nazis to you? Get off your collectivist mindset.

  • http://opponent.de/ Marco

    Same answer to you, reactionary racist.

  • http://www.seriousvanity.com Dana from Serious Vanity Music

    It just seems like once again they’re making the mistake of thinking that for the next 2-4 years, things will stay static…that the 360 deal is here to stay. That no NEW technology will be developed that isn’t already in existence. That innovation will continue to happen.

    It almost makes you feel sorry for them, if it wasn’t such a great opportunity to be the new innovators.

  • http://www.seriousvanity.com Dana from Serious Vanity Music

    Oops…make that “That innovation “won’t” continue to happen.” Not enough coffee yet today.

  • Mark

    So Basically, this exec is saying that if we ALL stopped buying CDs right now… steal the music and donated money to the bands instead… Their business model will fail earlier… and they would stop litigation and get with the times???

    I find hard to believe… the would probably sign up to get Bailed out by the Governments and blame the Crisis

  • tomg

    heres the link:

    http://xrl.us/bffo9

  • http://www.globalgeeknews.com pcnerd37

    If this means that concert and merchandise prices are going to go up, I am going to be pissed. I am already irritated at the rising cost of concerts and only once have I ever been willing to pay $30 for a t-shirt that ended up being way too small. I certainly wouldn’t pay $40 for one just so the RIAA can top off the fuel tank’s on its fleet of limos.

  • http://routenote.com Steven Finch

    I think these major labels really need to focus on actually controlling the distribution of their music and where it is used.

    Making a site and provide all your music for free is a great idea, and getting revenues from ads is the way forward. As shown by Google. Provide free services and then slap ads on them.

    I also do think that people are willing to purchase tracks but of course at the right price.

  • http://routenote.com Steven Finch

    I think you have a point. Labels now need the artist more than the artist needing the label. This will continue to grow. This I think is mainly because Labels are trying to sign artists to crazy deals, when the artist can make more money by themselves.

    I simply cant see the major labels sorting out their business models. If they do and music becomes 100% free then how will independent or unsigned artists make big bucks??

  • zato

    I wouldn’t believe anything from a big music exec., and the story above has huge holes in it: Big Music has made themselves into the universally hated enemy of young people who buy most music. How does that help them in 2011? And 360 contracts? Sounds like making even more enemies to me. It’s time for these hustlers to get out of the music business, and return it to the musicians, recording engineers, and patrons.

  • http://MarkCarras.com Mark Carras

    This paints a pretty grim picture for artists. The 360 deal is the most anti-artist invention in history!

    Artists need to ditch the labels and keep their money.

  • jimmy

    Of course, you’re forgetting that ALL artists were ripped-off since day 1. Don’t believe it? read “The Real Frank Zappa Book”….

  • http://soeet.com ChrisATSo33t

    By writing this article you are painting a big bullseye on yourself when it comes to the RIAA.

  • Arjen

    I am interested to see what Ethan Kaplan, VP of Technology for WBR has to say about this article? Micheal, can you ping him for his feedback and comments?

  • Que

    I agree at $1.99 or 2.99 albums would sell like hotcakes; at that price some people wouldn’t even buy the $.99 or $.10 songs they would just pay for the albums because they perceive $1.99 as a cheap price and most spend that daily on different things such as bottled sodas and chips.

  • http://www.myspace.com/overxdosed Jrod

    nothing is going to change unless we do something about it. there is no place for great bands to become huge and make a change in music. the industry is dominating the decisions on what makes it or not. and it is not a problem of artists dropping their record labels, as much as it is the fact that the record labels fall into this corporate hierarchy that is “the music industry”. when music becomes about music again, instead of about money. we will see the change. never has music changed, in every aspect, than it has in the last 10 years. we can’t blame technology. there is still someone, some human being running the show. whether or not you like actually going to the record store, looking at all the music and buying records or cd’s, you should still have to buy a full album online even if you only like 2 of the songs. the thing with that is, those two songs that you like because you heard them on tv or the radio, would probably end up not being the 2 you like the most anyways. all in all, if you only want 2 songs off of an album, then you don’t deserve to listen to it in the first place. plain and simple. remember people, majority rules and that is what the industry is feeding off of. which makes it hard for us dedicated, true fans of music to stand up and have a voice. it is my rage and my dying devotion to music that will push me to help make the change for music that it so desperately needs. this is my life now, but i can’t do it alone. so who’s with me!

  • Matt

    Anyone who has anything to do with the music business knows that they run on 5 year business plans so this is just part of the current cycle while the next 5 year plan is being worked on .

    The same could be said for other content industries like TV or even Movie studios ,

  • http://www.retailzip.com William Blanchard

    There has been more than enough technologies developed to help the music industry, but for the past 10 years they have continuously ignored the efforts of the development community and only chased Apple who only used them to sell iPods.

    Today, there is nothing a record label can do that an artist/manager can’t do for themselves.

    Indie music and Hollywood tech development is where the prosperity is, Hollywood who has a history of adapting new technologies without arrogance.

  • captain obvious

    @Martin

    Goodwin as spam tool? Why not just show us your tits?

  • http://www.victorcaballero.com Victor Caballero

    Big music exec with Universal, Sony, WBR, EMI?

    Independent music makes more than 30%( This is a larger share than any of the “big labels”) of sales and is growing, more releases from independent labels/musicians than most of the majors combined.
    When people stop buying CDs then the majors will change their ways(market forces). They are milking every last penny from the traditional model. You can’t really blame them. And there are still lots of people buy cds, enough to have them produced still.

  • mp

    Sounds to me like the majors are still damned clueless. Looking forward to seeing them go the way of the dinosaurs.

  • http://darwinweb.net Gabe da Silveira

    Are you saying that you think 93% of the cost of a $15 CD is reproduction and distribution?

  • http://arandomurl.com Dale

    lol, I remember that music will be free article, its pretty ridiculous, I mean you compare the zero marginal cost to software, which begs the question why do people still pay for software?

    merchandising and live shows will become more important, but royalties through subscription services and plain old selling though online stores will still be staple for the average band.

    and how long will it take the labels to catch up? they already have, aka spotify

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Richard_Tafoya/500108965 Richard Tafoya

    Digital delivery only deals with the physical manufacturing overhead in the business today. Licensing and royalties, particularly in juggling the realities of terrestrial vs online outlets, are mired in complications that don’t appear to be on a fast track to resolution.

  • Unscene

    Why 2011/2013?

    My best guess is it has something to do with building out the infrastructure along with the ISPs to rollout tiered net services (aka “Bye, Bye Net Neutrality). God how I wish TPB bought Sealand.

  • http://www.seventhings.co.uk SevenThings

    In Uk-currency speak, labels tend to sell their CDs to distributors for £4.50 – £5 a copy (if they’re lucky). About £1 – £1.50 of this goes to the artist via the label, £3 – £4 stays with the label (who normally pay for reproduction, marketing, yadda yadda yah). If the CD sells for e.g. £12.99, then 62% ish goes to the distributor and end supplier, 30% ish goes to the label, 8%ish goes to the artist. So yes, that is what he’s saying. Backwards, huh?

  • http://www.seventhings.co.uk SevenThings

    The trouble is that (as youtube / myspace / etc have proved) it’s still the big bucks that get you the reach. You don’t think all of those ‘featured artists’ are selected on a purely talent basis, do you? Or if you do, you’re all very, very naive …

  • http://skazman.wordpress.com Simon Paul

    Unbeleivable just how arrogant the major (soon to be minor) record labels are. They are already losing out on new talent finding new and innovative ways to bring their music to market. Expecting musicians to give them (the labels) a slice of all their action is verging on madness.

  • Marcello

    Your headline is misleading. “Big Music” isn’t surrendering. It’s reorganizing. Corporations do it all the time. So much for the revolution, eh?

  • Movie Industry

    Not so Fast!!!! Today free music, use it as a marketing tool, and earn money on tours, bla, bla, bla,….., what will happen then to the movie industry when high broad band makes it equally easy to download a song or a movie???????????

  • domainer

    Like this: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10191324-93.html

    REALLY interested in that one.

  • http://www.tinycomb.com jason@tinycomb.com

    Mike,

    I also had a sit down with some high level music executives in the past two weeks from EMI. To me, they are still obsessing over the idea that they will be able to bundle a music subscription fee into either your phone or cable bill. They were against the idea of music being entirely free.

  • Chris

    Everyone always brings up Radiohead and Nine Inch Nails as examples. You seem to forget that these bands largely became popular under labels.
    There are not many artists who have gone from obscurity to popularity just through their efforts alone.

  • http://cheeseontoast.co.nz/wordpress/?p=460 Cheese On Toast Updates » THE FUTURE OF BIG MUSIC VS TEH INTERWEBZ

    [...] THE FUTURE OF BIG MUSIC VS TEH INTERWEBZ – check out this article on TechCrunch – kinda interesting to realize that there is a “materplan” after all. [March 9, [...]

  • https://spideroak.com Daniel Larsson

    My only source of surprise in this entire ‘candid interview’ is that the music industry are so stupid (slow, old, sluggish etc) that they can’t even back a single micro payment standard.

    If I could save a small amount ($20) though PayPal or CC payment onto a browser integrated payment system and click a button to pay $0.10-$0.50 for a song as I download it (or better, pre-listen to 50% and pay for the rest) I would have no qualms about paying.

    Amazing that an industry that is so heavily vested into trends and tech is so slow when it comes to such basic things as payment processing..

    Well, they’ll learn I guess..

  • http://popurls.com/pop popurls.com // popular today

    popurls.com // popular today…

    story has entered the popular today section on popurls.com…

  • Pierre

    Those are german soldiers.Doesn’t mean they were Nazis.

  • http://www.latindigitalconference.com Jack Hernandez

    Ok, Here is my opinion on this topic.

    First of all, the indies account for the most number of songs in the marketplace. At the rate we are going, its not going to be a matter of the majors suing online services why? well because technology is leading the way here.

  • lilricky

    I call BS on this one, are you telling me, in 2 short years, the RIAA will admit defeat? Not bloody likely. Come on Techcrunch, is this some sort of attempt to brush the whole Last.FM thing under the bridge? I doubt making these fantastic stories will let anyone forget about what happened there. Nuff said.

  • Phool On The H(DD)ill

    I never knew that Jewish was a race. I just figured they were megalomaniac misled murderous dudes who went on to build Volkswagens and typewriters and be modern and self-loathing.

    DUH. get yer h8 on straight.

  • Phool On The H(DD)ill

    I thought that only worked for Pink Floyd or REO Speedwagon…besides, I didn’t have a girlfriend who could show them.

  • http://iphone.rosscoops.com Ross Cooper

    “The big labels have a lock on talent…” – But why would the next generation of artists sign a deal with a label that takes say 70% when they could sign a deal with Apple that takes 30%?

    Back in the day labels offered value by having great A&R guys that loved music and invested in artists over the several albums it might take to establish them. Nowadays A&R has been replaced by MySpace or Twitter; recording requires only a computer and sequencer software; and distribution is either free on the internet or inexpensive via Apple, etc. What are the labels offering anymore that can’t be done (better? certainly cheaper) elsewhere?

  • DaTruff

    Right, the music execs have a well-crafted, insightful, long-term plan…..And Ford, GM, & Chrysler actually have warehouses full of really reliable, cool looking, well-priced cars. They have just been sitting on them intentionally to make their books look horrible so they can get all this government cash…

  • Phool On The H(DD)ill

    What’s a kidney, man? It’s the new thing!

  • Phool On The H(DD)ill

    Not enough salt, but yeah.

  • DaTruff

    If the Ticketmaster/Live Nation merger goes through, there will be one giant “music label” in two years. Indie artists will be forced to play in the street and even then Ticket Nation will call them “pirates” and sue them because people are not paying a 10x “convenience” surcharge to Ticket Nation to listen to the live music…

  • Phool On The H(DD)ill

    And the broke people pay HOW–Paypal? eBay basically shut me out after 320+ purchases on money orders because I won’t blow off my bank account of 20 years like that. Forget fixing my vintage stereos quickly.

    All you New World Orderers better stick to the drive-thru and get the junior bacon cheeseburger. Maybe we’ll have toilet-paper militias killing for Charmin someday. Never mind.

    It’s D2. New Depression. bye

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Philip_Kaplan/5518735 Philip Kaplan

    Partly spam, partly illustrative.

    See how a major label removed my mega viral music video for one of their artists from YouTube:

    http://ask.pud.com/2009/03/05/record-labels-squashes-popular-music-video/

  • http://www.jaypurcell.net Jay

    You know I do love the convenience of downloading music just like any other person, but as a musician there is still one thing that nag’s me about MP3′s and that is the quality is worse than CD’s!!

    During the years, the various formats (Tape, Vinyl, CD, etc) have all developed out of a need for either convenience, better sound quality or both. With MP3 we have taken a step backwards in quality but a leap in convenience.

    Maybe one day someone will create a better format than MP3 so we can get back to better quality sounds. Until then lets enjoy how the codecs sound through a good home stereo system.

  • N-Train

    Has anyone mentioned The Boxer Rebellion’s success story here? Their example is such a sign of the times, I have been following it with great interest. Still unsigned, yet they’re selling out venues across the UK, Europe and, now, the US after iTunes liked them and decided to promote the album globally on their homepages. http://www.myspace.com/theboxerrebellion

  • VC

    >”you pay a fixed amount of money per year to the RIAA or MPAA, and you download and share to your heart’s contempt.”

    “Contempt” is right. I see no reason to pay a tax to the RIAA/MPAA for the right to download and share music. First, it would unfairly pay them when I share music that did not come from them. Second, it keeps artists and small, non-member labels from seeking out new business models in order to compete with RIAA members. Third, we’re still not paying the artists directly — and the labels are only going to keep digging deeper with 360 deals and the like.

  • E28

    The idea that although the major labels are going to lose their core business that made them so dominant (CD distribution and sales) while simultaneously tricking artists who can now record their own professionally mixed music at rapidly falling rates into giving them a cut of all revenue streams, including concerts, is beyond insane.

  • Drew

    Have you seen this website? http://www.mybandstock.com . that makes so much more sense. Give artists the power to distribute ALL their content to bands, and allow the people who buy stock in them to exclusive videos, music, blogs, and other stuff.

  • Dkarma

    I agree. Once CD sales dry up completely in the next 5 years the record labels will be completely out of business. Basically the only reason they still are able to sign artists at rediculously low contract rates is because of their ability to advertise for said artists (ie: “you sign w/ us and we’ll get you on the next disney movie soundtrack” or ” you’ll get radio play if you sign w/ us”)

    Basically the recording industry is going to slowly turn into a gigantic extortion racket…well more than it already is.
    By 2030 net-labels and micro studios will have the same production capacity as any current mega-studio. Technology has phased them out and they’re just grasping at straws until the final boot drops.

  • http://www.theplugg.com Charbarred

    It’s never been about the “best” talent. It’s always been about the talent that has the most money. The majors know that no matter how many new Radioheads will pop up, if they throw loads of money on an inferior product like, say, Coldplay, they’ll still shift more units.
    And yes, Radiohead did get to where they are backed by a major label.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael_Martin/508010100 Michael Martin

    Nazis in this sense is an over generalization of the German Wehrmacht (army) who were not all Nazis per se, but had to make a personal oath of allegiance to Hitler (not Germany)

    Ok, bit of a tangent, but yes this is an image of German soldiers surrendering in the closing days of WWII – if my History/Military Channel memory serves me right.

    ,Michael Martin
    http://www.googleandblog.com/

  • Marcello

    But their “core business” has never been distribution and sales. Their “core business” has always been promotion and marketing. And that’s not going to change.

  • Please explain

    “But sometime in the next decade we’ll see a real renaissance in how music is distributed and consumed.”

    Umm, havent we already seen a dramatic shift in the way music is distributed (p2p or itunes) and consumed (physical-less media aka the ipod)?

    What else should we wait for? It doesnt matter to the end user how the music is created; they only care about acquisition and consumption; which we’ve already seen change dramatically.

  • TonsoTunez

    SMALL MUSIC. It’s time to stop worrying about what Big Music is going to do because the public has spoken and said they are no longer interested in supporting anything Big Music has made possible since the ability to record music came into existence.

    So, it’s time to think small.

    Forget about super stars and the mega concerts – they will be relegated to the past. Woodstock .. never happen again.

    Ancillary industries based on the drawing power of major artists -including YouTube, MySpace – radio, TV will find their audiences for music waning and will commit fewer resources to its presentation.

    Those considering the creation of music as a way to make a living – will opt to devote their lives to other endeavors.

    While, in fact, while we actually might have more choices in music … most of those choices will be provided by amateurs; and, as Big Music stops funding the creation of music we’ll find the available pool of music bigger and bigger and less and less enticing and interesting.

    Once Big Music stops focusing the public’s attention on artists through their marketing efforts, the music that will be left will be set adrift to find its on level in a global ocean of music – some of which might find small online groups of people spread across the world, who, because the market will be so deluted, will have little or no impact on the development of artist’s careers.

    Technology has made all this possible, and we’ve voted in the way we download music that this is what we want.

    So, great. Think small. For those of you who remember what music meant to you in the past… you’re good ’til Alzheimers sets in. For those of you who’ve never lived the great musical adventure of yesteryear … what do you know and why do you care.

    It’s your world, kids, you’ll never know the difference.

    So come on everybody… let’s get small.

  • http://www.crunchnotes.com Michael Arrington

    well of course they’re against the idea of music being entirely free. :-)

  • http://www.mmtercan.com Melvin M. Tercan

    I can hardly believe this comes from a ‘big music label executive’ as you might assume that a executive has a reasonable level of intelligence instead of being a retard.

    What this executive essentially is saying is, we know that we aren’t operating on the optimal level yet (better yet: a declining level), but instead of improving and working our ass off to save the future, let’s play dumb and NOT innovate, unless the market forces us to.

    Imagine a big oil company say that they make enough money already (lesson 1 in business economics: you never make enough money). Let’s sit back and do nothing until the oil reserves run out and then we will take a look what to do else.

    You probably see where I’m getting at… (I hope so, for your sake).

    Economics 101 for big label music executives: at the moment you realize that you’ll run behind, you’re essentially to late already and so you’ve got to get your act together and do the best you can to close that gap.

  • http://www.mmtercan.com Melvin M. Tercan

    Also, I do not get that whole intimidate-our-future-partners-first-because-we-need-to-rely-on-them-in-the-future thing.

  • http://MarkCarras.com Mark Carras

    Of course every featured artist spot on any major website is payola! But that doesn’t take away from the fact that the 360 deals about as anit artist as it gets.

    A major part of bands surviving the “artist development” stage has always been the money they made from tours and merch. Since only a tiny percentage of bands ever make a single penny on any cd sales, that touring and merch money has always been the only way a band made it from town to town.

    Now if a band doesn’t hit it big on the first cd they will fail. The 360 deal kills any and all artist development.

  • http://zedequalszee.com debcha

    The big labels have a lock on talent, and there’s no reason to believe that new artists won’t continue to strive to lock themselves in to one of them.

    Actually, there’s every reason to believe that artists won’t lock themselves in. The purpose of the major labels is to provide two things: distribution and publicity. The Internet has already supplanted physical distribution, resulting in decentralization of music listening – who listens to Top 40 radio anymore? So no matter how much the majors jump up and down yelling, they’ll never be able to ‘push’ bands the way they could before music listening became so splintered.

    If major labels no longer have anything to offer them, why would artists sign on? They can either make a go of it themselves (like Jonathan Coulton) or they can work with an indie label who actually understands the dynamics of the digital world, and who won’t be ripping them off with an outdated model of music sales.

  • http://wikiaudio@gmail.com Mr Turner

    So ,

    In short the future “role” of record labels according to this article will be having the hyper effective resources, connections and infrastructure to plaster artists music and faces all over the internet in a manner that cuts through the zillions of myspace profiles…. and in return for this privilege artist are expected to give the “label” a cut of everything they make.

    If this was coupled with a social & class order of “artists development” , real-world interaction, education and structure it would be pretty cool – in effect an artists development school that just happened to CALL itself a “record label”.

    But I have a feeling it will have about as much “structure” and “class” as the world depicted in the film “idiocracy”

  • http://medianewsnow.wordpress.com/2009/03/09/146/ media news now

    [...] Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011 by Michael Arrington March 8, [...]

  • Nicholas Paredes

    There are a couple of roles that labels, as well as radio stations so to speak, play and that includes being taste-makers in essence filtering through the endless amounts of garbage created. The diamond in the rough is quite the money making opportunity. The large labels find themselves in a bind where sales decrease and competition increases. But there are incredible opportunities.

    We are working with smaller labels on iPhone applications and new packaging products. Our platform just so happened to work well with the business model, and although we have only been selling locally in Chicago for several weeks, we have picked up three labels already. The small labels will bring the innovation.

    JMA, one of the country’s largest music marketing agencies, is upstairs, and they are interested in means to approach the required demographics. So, people are working on different models. As an aside, one of my clients, a label owner, gave a talk to grad business students and out of 30-some people, nobody had ever purchased a CD, although there were four people who purchase vinyl.

  • Adam

    “the reality created by the Internet” (from the article)

    reality is when you are off the internet ; )

  • Agile Cyborg

    “But sometime in the next decade we’ll see a real renaissance in how music is distributed and consumed.”

    If this includes the wanton destruction of IP rights then we may, in fact, witness a massive drain of talent due to the inability of even exceptional creatives to profit from their labors.

    Artists have always battled the corporate juggernaut. Sadly, this juggernaut now includes a distinct collective consumer which ravages rather than lawfully acquires- which only compounds the problems facing the creative class.

    The ilk that Arrington espouses care not one whit about the reproduction rights of an artist. Many of these fools package their rank theft as some strange defense of the artist against the Giant Evil Music Corporation.

    Fact is, every single band who is held up as great examples of this ‘new’ way (NIN, for example) were ALL successful due to early recording deals which they then chucked down the toilet after they were no longer needed.

    Perhaps TechCrunch should consider removing their copyright symbol from the bottom of this page because I, as a user of this site, am now ready to commence demanding how your information should be distributed- with or WITHOUT your approval.

  • g
  • deleo

    Labels are going to get the bulk of their money through concert tour receipts and licensing the music to Guitar Hero, commercials, movies etc. Sure they’ll still press up cd’s and sell songs on itunes, but that $ will just continue to evaporate. Many bands/artists still make a great living by touring. No technology is going to get in the way of a live show. Labels know this and will go after that piece of the pie tooth and nail. Once they get that $ they will loosen up on music streaming. 360 deals will change the music business more than anything else and they are just starting to happen now.

  • http://www.natkoll.se/2009/03/09/presstop-skivbolagen-vet-att-det-ar-kort-stamningar-kalkylerade-intakter/ PRESSTOP: Skivbolagen vet att det är kört, stämningar kalkylerade intäkter | Nätkoll.se | Nyhetsbloggen om nätets affärer

    [...] Läs Arringtons orginalartikel på TechCrunch. [...]

  • http://crazysaint.blogspot.com Jeet

    I keep wondering what will happen to artists and music bands if all the music suddenly becomes free? They deserve the money they are earning because they are talented, record labels are gambling with new artists, spending million in marketing of new albums so in a sense they are not getting paid for nothing.

    Imagine if there are no music labels and each artist tries to promote his/her music on internet using social media or advertising. I think there are lot of talented musician with bad business acumen; I will never be able to hear their music.

    I don’t mind paying for my music. I just don’t like to pay for the same content again and again :)

  • http://www.brandingyp.com CPB

    Record labels should reduce prices at considerable rates.. They entertain and they need to be paid for the entertainment they gave but not too much.

  • Mort

    There is no getting around the fact that the arts will be seriously degraded if no way is found to protect intellectual property.

    Clause 8: To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

  • http://www.aigcmiddleast.com/ aigc

    well am happy you return to post , back to music for them it means money

  • http://amityadav.com Amit

    Labels still can do far better marketing than Independent Artists but now that many Artists are already working directly with Distributors, there are probably less number of reasons for the Artists to go for a 360 degree deal….

  • Brett

    15 years ago, the labels made the artists. Talented artists had to get signed before they could get big. It was the only way the musicians could get their music to enough listeners. In return, they gave up most of their CD revenues, etc, made all their money touring, etc. But, at the time it was a working business model.
    It doesn’t anymore.
    A 360 contract – the labels want more from artists? In return for what? What exactly are they offering artists nowadays? They need to stop thinking about milking every potential revenue stream and start thinking about their ‘value ad’. When they start offering worthwhile services to artists/consumers, perhaps then they will have something to base their revenue on.
    I lost my vinyl collection when I moved overseas, and I lost my CD collection when my baby started walking. Physical, optical media has been surpassed. If a monopoly on this media is all they’ve got, and this is all they can think to replace it, then they’re truly in their last death throes. No loss.

  • pit

    the problem today is the inherent protectionism of national royalty collecting agencies. its not the music industry but agencies like SoundExchange and to some degree lobbyists like NAB and RIAA which need to be forced to surrender as quick as possible. for the end consumer somewhere in the world, streaming music is a total puzzle game far from “everything available”. the best distribution by far are fan driven private torrent trackers. so watch the innovation coming from countries who have a strong torrent culture.

  • karlfest

    Bih record companies are similar to the marketing arm of any other industry. They are necessary, despite the mistakes they have made and the disdain the online community has for them. A great artist cannot be expected to market themselves to the same degree a dedicated marketing arm can. There’s a place for them, they need to find their way.

  • http://gadgets.ihouse.sg/2009/03/09/big-music-sera-remise-mais-pas-avant-au-moins-2011/ Big Music sera remise, mais pas avant au moins 2011 @ 工具及科技新闻

    [...] techcrunch Tech Industry [...]

  • paul

    The big labels will always be around. I hate it too. But the sheep need a shepherd and the labels are that. Someone has to filter the good from the crap (argue among yourselves which is which) … and so long as we have conglomerates (and that will be always) we’ll have the labels. Take Warners. That’s Time. That’s Aol. That’s magazines, movies, tv shows, major websites. No one can ‘push’ an artist like the majors. They have the relationships in place. Radio is still the largest and best way to break an artist. It’s just fact… and the labels have a lock on radio.

    The other fact is, 360′s are as good a deal as every other past deal the labels have offered, and there’s no shortage of people that were willing to sign those.

    The last fact, I’ve said here a lot of times – until these websites stop paying off the industry (propping them up), the industry as we know it will still exist – that means the RIAA – which the labels really need to stop making payments to because no other ‘trade’ organization has done more harm to an industry that the RIAA. The websites are fueling this fire with their multi-million dollar ‘settlements’… those benefit no one… least of all the artist and consumer.

  • http://iamrajendra.wordpress.com/2009/03/09/big-music-will-surrender-but-not-until-at-least-2011/ Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011 « I Am Rajendra – Watch The World With Me…..

    [...] Posted on March 9, 2009. Filed under: Music | Tags: Big Music, Music | By Michael Arrington, Techcrunch.com [...]

  • http://ontechnology.blogspot.com Robleh

    Doesn’t matter, the equation is get something vs get nothing.

  • http://boycottnovell.com/2009/03/09/zenwalk-60-released/ Boycott Novell » Links 09/03/2009: Zenwalk 6.0 Released, Glimpse at Fedora 11 Alpha

    [...] Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011 His response: It’s all part of a master plan. The labels fully understand that recorded music, streamed or downloaded, is going to be free in the future (we’ve argued this relentlessly). CD sales continue to decline by 20% per year, and the only thing that’ll stop that trend is when those sales reach zero. Nothing will replace those revenues. [...]

  • http://ontechnology.blogspot.com Robleh

    Erm, TechCrunch is free to its readers.

  • http://peteswords.wordpress.com/2009/03/09/piracy-to-re-model-media-publishers/ Piracy to re-model media publishers? « pete’s words

    [...] This article got me thinking about this idea. « Separation of content [...]

  • http://www.crafted.com.au James Gardiner

    I see a major floor in this.

    Why could artists keep going to the same old record labels. These gate keeps will no longer have as strong a grip on the distribution and promotion aspects of the industry.
    Maybe there arrogance has the best of them.
    But in the long run, they will be nothing more then a specialised Advertising agency that specialises on music.
    Lower barrier to entry etc.

    I still cannot see them making as much or controlling the artists as much as they use to.

    James

  • Agile Cyborg

    Child, due to the ‘express decision’ of Mike Arrington it is free and only because ol’ Arrington has decided to create money through other means.

    Notice these are decisions MIKE is making- not US, the consumers of this wonderful resource.

    Now, if the advertisements that clutter the sidebar were to disappear one day Mike would have a decision to make and I can assure you it comes down to three things fold, charge or get a day job in which the face of TechCrunch would change significantly to the worse.

    You haven’t addressed why Mike even needs a copyright symbol on this page.

  • Agile Cyborg

    I can assure you there are few visionaries willing to go down the road this thing is headed.

    It seems as if The Internet is a magic word which revels in its own effulgent possibility. I don’t see it this way. I see the web progressing into critical branches here in the coming years which will establish its apex-level relevancy in the collective existence of commerce and creativity or destroy it entirely.

    Frankly, the internet is reducing output into such a worthless commodity that it may well end up swallowing its own tail.

    When ALL digital content in the form of movies, music, art and more become open to total seizure the only option is for the creative class to discover new ways of protecting its ability to even make it worth producing.

    Fifty years from now the entire spirit of the creative industry could revert back to the dark ages once the brightest find out that to produce means to pour their brilliance into the gape from which a means to fund further brilliance doesn’t exist.

    Artists will only put up with so much shit.

    The internet should NOT become a vehicle that continues the cycle of creating chosen cream. The spirit of the internet should be one that embraces individual creativity and protects the artist’s ability to produce and rise ‘organically’ to the top through users having enough fucking sense in their heads (as you seem to have) to realize that talent (no matter how great) MUST be supported to be viable or ten years down the road your access to the amazing will shrivel.

  • Agile Cyborg

    Most of you folks are talking from the pork hole. Listen, most artist want to produce. They LIVE to produce. The vast majority of creative people have become slaves to major players for a very good reason:

    They can sit in their mountain cabins or alleys or where ever in the hell it is they produce and just create without the massive distraction that business brings to the mind.

    Yes, there are a few genius artists who can do it all but these folks are not common.

    Some of the best creative output has happened with the big labels providing a cushion to many of our stars.

    As I’ve stated earlier some of these selfish pricks have spit in the eye of these labels AFTER they’ve gained their fame through the investment of untold millions in their careers.

    Only then do these ingrates have the financial capacity to strut around flaunting their digital awareness to an adoring and freeloading fan base.

    Sure, if you’ve got ten million in the bank (or more) you can certainly go onto doing whatever it is in the hell you want to do like, for example, give all your shit away.

    Now, the music labels are the antithesis of artists organically rising to tops of mini aggregates, I understand this.

    But to entirely dismiss the role of the label is to not at all grasp the concept of what goes into creative production WHICH IS a sense of artistic worth and solid financing to produce MORE.

    You kick this out and you get watered down shit.

  • http://www.retailzip.com William Blanchard

    “By 2030 net-labels and micro studios will have the same production capacity as any current mega-studio.”

    Where have you been? Digidesign with ProTools accomplished this with the release of the Digi001 back in 2001.

  • http://myspace.com/marylisbeth Marybeth

    Can someone explain to me why, when I invest a substantial sum of money to make a beautifully crafted album of my own songs in a professional studio with crack musicians, I should give my efforts away to people for free? Do you work all day at something just to give it away for nothing?

    I can’t make it up in performing fees, since I am not Madonna or Radiohead–who as some readers pointed out got known via the big labels. I can hope I am discovered and my digital sales explode perhaps. But the tiny amounts I get from that hardly dent the expenditures. Did I mention thawt last.fm currently owes me 7 cents?

  • http://11k2.wordpress.com/2009/03/09/die-zynische-doppelstrategie-der-musikindustrie/ Die zynische Doppelstrategie der Musikindustrie « 11k2

    [...] (techcrunch) (pic wikipedia gnu) [...]

  • http://markgslater.wordpress.com mark slater

    this is total rubbish.

    so labels are going to litigate their way in to extinction? and then turn around and embrace a model – who’s defining characteristics – are squarely aimed at that very disintermediation.

    you got duped. if this is really how delusional these tw*ts are, they should sell a reality show of their own demise.

    these limpets provide no future value in a highly connected and contexted world. if there was a derivative i would better ever dollar on their total removal from the value chain.

    very poor reporting – you’ve covered the music industry far better in the past.

  • Agile Cyborg

    Marybeth, it gets worse…

    IF you do happen to get discovered in the way Mike Arrington and his jolly gang recommend you actually won’t make but a few dimes from your music- you’ll end up making the monthly mortgage payment by selling ironic t-shirts, stickers and plush toys.

  • http://digitalcapitalism.com Kipp Bodnar

    You forgot to ask one important question. In a culture of Free music, why do Artists need big record labels? Why can’t they create their own value added revenue streams and build their own communities using the web?

    This needs to be discussed more, the record labels need to change their roles or die off…

  • http://www.guiaslocal.com Guias Local

    I have made my stance on The future of the music industry many times. They are very lazy and they keep relying on new start-ups for ideas. We all know the music industry have the money. Invest in a team that is concentrated on a new signal, platform exchange. Build a team!!

  • http://1vibe.net/technology/big-music-labels-will-surrender-but-not-until-at-least-2011/ Big Music Labels Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011 | 1VIBE.NET

    [...] and other interesting topics. Below is a quote from the article, and you can read the rest by clicking here. By 2013 (maybe as early as 2011) it’ll make sense for the labels to finally reorganize their [...]

  • Agile Cyborg

    For some, record labels offer distribution, marketing and a form of financial support through contractual agreements.

    In the culture of free music new and evolving artists will have to decide if selling t-shirts, stickers and plush toys is a good enough reason to produce music for nothing.

    Many hardcore artist will find this far less rewarding than actually being blessed with a fan who pays them directly for a piece of music, whether digital or disc-based and will accordingly opt-out.

    Artist can and do build their own communities but as these folks mature and create families and continue to invest in their productions the requirement to be fairly compensated far outweighs the fantasies perpetuated by articles such as this.

    You’ve mentioned something here that I can support- “record labels need to change their roles”.

    This will happen, no matter what.

    Here’s the problem: the outright demand for free music and the blatant theft of quality music by millions of thieves is JUSTIFIED by attacking the big evil music label.

    When the big evil music labels become invisible the collective tendency to rob artists of their work will continue unabated except at this juncture it will be a direct conflict between creatives and the robber packs.

    The obsession with record labels by the consumer is simply a distraction.

  • http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2009/03/09/3-count-remaxed/ 3 Count: ReMaxed | PlagiarismToday

    [...] 1: Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011 [...]

  • http://www.techfried.com Paul

    Man, I was in Best Buy a couple of days ago and walked past the new U2 for $9.99. I almost grabbed it but thought, I can download this on itunes for around the same price, and put it on my ipod, which is what I would do with the CD. Except I would have to rip it. Forget it. Give me the DD.

  • HAMA D

    Well first of all I am not 100% sure that this conversation you had Michael is real…

    If it is OMG the executive is “not well”

    And btw 360 deals are something that was a hype back in 2006?

    Future of music is in the hand of artists!

  • graphicartist2k5

    I personally see the music industry as a bunch of elderly people that want things done the way they used to be done, and all of us that use the internet know that’s not how things are done any more. To illustrate:

    Music Industry: Back in my day, we had to work our butts off just to make ONE music track, and we LIKED IT!

    Everyone Else On The Internet: You DO realize that nowadays all you have to do is record music through your computer using a microphone, save your OWN tracks as mp3s and distribute them yourself, without the need of some other company helping you to do so?

    Music Industry: That’s CRAZY talk! Who ever heard of such a thing?

    Everyone Else On The Internet: Let’s see….How about everyone else but you?

  • Agile Cyborg

    “Everyone Else On The Internet: You DO realize that nowadays all you have to do is record music through your computer using a microphone, save your OWN tracks as mp3s and distribute them yourself, without the need of some other company helping you to do so?”

    Please point me to examples of people doing this who live ABOVE meager subsistence level and who did not start off with an already established name.

    What you state here is meaningless in any other sense simply because people en masse distribute pure shit all day long on the internet with no clear ends to a mean.

    We are specifically addressing artistic profitability in an evolving environment that seeks to crush this- NOT how easy it is to distribute ‘stuff’. My grandmother can distribute stuff. Woohoo… where’s the brilliance in this, genius?

  • http://www.crunchnotes.com Michael Arrington

    The copyright is there below to stop people from taking the content and reselling it as if it were something they created. And copyright will continue to protect artists in that way, by stopping others from claiming the music is their creation, not the original artist’s.

  • Bob13

    I think the labels should persue a strategy related to adapting he radio/TV model to the net, i.e. Streaming royalties and licensing fees. I don’t get why they are not putting more resources into developing an infrastructure such as this. Its a model in which everyons could be happy: the Consumer still gets everything for free and the labels/artists get paid. The only losers would obviously be the websites and social networks, who would pay licensing fees. But i don’t see why they should be treated any differently from radio stations and TV channels. All three are businesses, which make money from advertising.

  • Bob13

    The answer is simple: as you say, recording requires only a computer. This means that ‘anyone’ can do it. Therefor, the problem of getting noticed and standing out from the crowd is still there. Therefor, nothing has actually changed. The labels are still very good at one thing: Marketing. And Marketing costs alot of money. And labels have money.

  • http://jcshepard.wordpress.com/2009/03/09/big-music-will-surrender-but-not-until-at-least-2011/ Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011 « JC Shepard.com

    [...] 9 March 2009 at 17:17 (Uncategorized) Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011 [...]

  • http://www.davidleeking.com/2009/03/09/the-beginning-of-the-new-normal/ The Beginning of the New Normal | David Lee King

    [...] the second article raising a ruckus in my head: Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011 from TechCrunch. This article mainly gives a music executive’s perspective of coming changes [...]

  • http://www.nerdcore.de/wp/2009/03/09/links-for-2009-03-09/ links for 2009-03-09 | Nerdcore

    [...] Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011 (tags: music musikindustrie) [...]

  • http://tomlovesyou.com/archives/459 tomlovesyou | Fabchannel Stops

    [...] with more than a few worldwide players. I recommend this very good read and post i found on TECHCrunch, written by Michael Arrington. It helped me to bring more light in this dark [...]

  • http://www.gerardbabitts.com Gerard

    360 deals? Any artist worth their salt would never agree to this in today’s wide-open world where DIY merch, touring, and distribution is easier now than at any other time. Cable/ISP/Phone fees? Good luck on that one too — why should I have to pay for something I might not want. Especially when you have a generation who have grown up expecting digital music to be more-or-less free.

    It. Is. Over. Short of them selling songs for a penny and making it easier to acquire or having one of the major players like Google, Apple, or MSN buy a major and give music away for free, I see the major label business model getting worse in the coming few years. They keep thinking they’re about to turn the corner but still don’t fully understand that their control of distribution and of exposure is gone. And without that they really don’t offer that much to artists beyond some quick upfront cash.

    Maybe it’s time for the major labels to cede new artists to independents and/or the artists and embrace being catalog houses who make the lion’s share of their profits off of licensing old songs and artists. Cut staff. Cut new artist development costs. Become a nickle and dime profitable business. Unfortunately that’s not sexy enough for the people who still run the industry, so we can rest assured that their pursuit of an old model will continue to destroy what’s left of it.

  • http://wherecanilegallypurchasemp3s.com/top-legal-web-site-to-download-music-pay-per-song-subscription-sites Top Legal Web site to Download Music – Pay Per Song & Subscription Sites

    [...] Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011 [...]

  • http://borangutan.com/?p=1296 Borangutan » The Big 4 Record Labels Aren’t in Trouble, “It’s All Part of a Master Plan”

    [...] incompetent to incompetently comedic, revealing snippets of a “Master Plan” in a new techcrunch article by Michel Arrington.  As it turns out, the American public is not only gullible on matters of government, we’re [...]

  • Nick Hardy

    Social media, playlist platforms and streaming makes the role of a label less important. Artists can even be discovered in new ways. I read that Ross Robinson discovered an upcoming act, Repeater, this way.

    I’ll be interested in seeing how this project sounds and plays out for him.

  • http://www.techcrunchit.com/2009/03/09/how-time-flys/ How Time Flys

    [...] continued struggle with Hulu suggests the content cartel has decided to double down on the hardball approach while they still can make it [...]

  • JJ

    There are many formats available. FLAC [Free Lossless Audio Codec] is the purist and an audiophiles dream.

  • http://newsfu.com/2009/03/09/music-business-on-vacation-until-2013-claims-record-exec/ Music Business on Vacation Until 2013, Claims Record Exec | News Fu

    [...] the weekend, Techcrunch’s Michael Arrington posted the details of a recent conversation he had with an anonymous [...]

  • http://www.socialagerillan.se/?p=1104 Sociala Gerillan

    [...] Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011. TechCrunch, en av världens största bloggar, berättar om ett lunchmöte med en skivbolagsbigshot: “Det är för lönsamt för att inte stämma nu.” [...]

  • http://jumptheturnstyle.com/?p=2792 The Music Industry’s Big Plan To Do Nothing? | JumpTheTurnstyle

    [...] As Faraone would say, CLICK HERE TO READ THE WHOLE FUCKING ARTICLE. [...]

  • http://www.istockphoto.com/jeffreyw Jeffrey

    Some musicians can now become popular even without the help of Big Labels. A number of musicians with skills or the lack of it have become popular through Youtube.

    Even Madonna is no longer under a label and is “hiring” an Event Management company to spread her music.

  • http://aharden.wordpress.com/2009/03/09/links-for-2009-03-09/ links for 2009-03-09 « cygweb

    [...] Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011 (tags: music business riaa) [...]

  • http://hellomarko.com marko

    umm, so its all part of a master plan eh? they have so much foresight that this is just working out exactly like they planned…

    hmmm…

    NOT. i know many folks inside labels, and i don’t know anyone that shares this view. in fact, they believe that the folks at the top have NO CLUE, and that it will be a miracle if anyone survives it. bottom line, someone will figure it out, but likely the innovation will not come from the inside.

    and therein lies the opportunity kids!!

  • http://www.dakxturcotte.com Dakx Turcotte

    It is not a new thing that consumers get to listen to free music. I have been listening to free music for as long as I can remember on radio, TV and most recently on the Internet.

    Even if the formats in which I consume music did change over time (from vinyl, tape, CDs to digitally compressed most recently), my consumption of music really hasn’t changed much.

    Once I hear something I like on my medium of choice, I get it in the format I prefer.

    If the music labels were able to increase their revenues when came the radio and TV mediums, they should be able to monetize it with newer mediums.

    But they should focus on providing consumers and device manufacturers with the right technologies to consume correctly. Numerous start-ups and technology companies have developed great technologies to help consume music at much faster rates: Fraunhofer with the MP3, Apple with the iPod/iTunes integration, companies like Gracenote, MusicIP or Shazam with their music intelligence, fingerprinting and discovery technologies and more.

    With such innovations at their doorstep, there are no limitations to what music labels could and can do to increase their short, mid and long term revenues by providing a way and a mean to enhance the consumption speed and experience.

    I say to music labels: Listen to Reid Hoffman when he says that start-ups can get you out of the hole in which you are stuck into, start-ups can help you sell more.

    Dakx

  • http://financegeek.com/big-labels-believe-their-lock-on-talent-will-survive-the-transition-to-free/ Finance Geek » Big labels believe their lock on talent will survive the transition to free

    [...] Arrington has a great write up on a lunch he had with un -named executive from a major record label which throws some light on why [...]

  • http://anti-aol.livejournal.com Marah Marie

    @tomg: *Comment of the Year*

  • curmudgeon

    Let me sum up the above comment.

    1. “when music becomes about music again, instead of about money. we will see the change. ”

    The music industry should be about music, not money.

    2. “you should still have to buy a full album online even if you only like 2 of the songs.”

    Unless you have picky tastes and only like 2 out of 10 songs on an album. In that situation, it’s not about the music but about the money, and you (picky listener) should be forced to buy the whole album.

    3. “if you only want 2 songs off of an album, then you don’t deserve to listen to it in the first place.”

    And if you don’t want to buy my whole album, dear picky listener, then you don’t deserve to listen to ANY music. Only us “true fans of music” deserve to listen to any music.

    Bottom line:

    Music should not be about money… nor the listener. It should be about the musician and “true fans” who like all music. Nothing is going to change unless we shut out those who only like 2 songs!!

    …..

    Idiot.

  • Simon A

    So, it’s part of the plan?

    Getting artists and fans pissed off at you is part of your plan?

    Wow. It’s like storming Normandy with a spork.

    People will forgive (read: forget) them for the last few years, but the people who actually buy CD’s and engage in music more than a Pussycat Dolls ringtone will not return.

  • musicextreme

    Kinda late comment, however, Music “labels” like “Angels” “VC”s put money up front to the many so the few can make out in this commercial endeavor. Not a bad thing i would suppose…

  • http://azeemazhar.com/?p=175 Great reads for the week » azeem.azhar

    [...] How big music will surrender (Techcrunch) [...]

  • http://www.anonboard.com F2 E-Business Forum

    This doesn’t make any sense. What’s stopping artists from just going solo and building their careers on internet radio play and music sharing, while retaining their own copyrights? Am I the only one that thinks the labels pimping the artists is bad for everyone? It just results in lots of crappy unfocused music and no-talent ‘artists’ being trotted out by corporations solely as marketing tools.

  • Patrick

    Unfortunately, your economic analysis is very one sided. Sure, it costs nothing for you to copy a CD, and I’m sure you are more than pleased to get something for free. But musicians have to spend huge amounts of time to write the songs, buy equipment, recording time, etc. This isn’t even including the decades that a musician will spend to become proficient in the instrument. Some people will play music whether they get paid or not, but “on the margin” you are telling a generation of children that learning music is, literally, worthless.

  • starscream

    i thought they were the beatles

  • http://www.criti-size.com/?p=1157 Una cuestión de tiempo |

    [...] de Michael Arrington en TechCrunch tras una comida con un ejecutivo de la industria musical, “Big music will surrender, but not until at least 2011“, deja las cosas más que claras: no estamos hablando de lo que es bueno o lo que es malo, de [...]

  • http://indexmb.com/a-business-model-may-emerge-but-will-the-product-be-the-same/ A Business Model May Emerge, But Will The Product Be The Same? | INDEX // mb

    [...] music exec fessed up to Michael Arrington recently that the music business was near bottom. I smirked when I read that because the book business [...]

  • http://www.speaksoftlycarryacandle.com/2009/03/10/the-death-of-the-record/ The Death of the Record | Speak Softly, Carry a Candle

    [...] this very interesting article the other day, took way to long to write about it.  The gist is simple–the record industry [...]

  • http://www.norestingplace.com/?p=166 Earth Is No Resting Place » Blog Archive » Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011

    [...] I had a surprisingly candid lunch conversation last week with a big music label executive, and a goo… [...]

  • http://www.bestnotizie.com/7698/le-label-si-arrenderanno-nel-2011/ » Le label si arrenderanno nel 2011?

    [...] Michael Arrington di TechCrunch.com ha riportato sul suo blog di una conversazione avuta con un non meglio precisato dirigente di una big dell’industria musi-discografica da cui è scaturito un’inaspettato scenario nella guerra tra la RIAA e lo scambio in rete di files protetti da diritto d’autore. [...]

  • http://pateandopiedras.com/buzzeando/?p=1843 Una cuestión de tiempo | Buzzeando

    [...] de Michael Arrington en TechCrunch tras una comida con un ejecutivo de la industria musical, “Big music will surrender, but not until at least 2011“, deja las cosas más que claras: no estamos hablando de lo que es bueno o lo que es malo, de [...]

  • http://www.digforfire.co.uk mark

    like the horse and cart makers were just waiting for the right time to start to muck around with the internal combustion engine and just got the timing wrong!

    please

    and how exactly, in this great masterplan do the labels figure on fighting their patch against any number of infinitely better run, smarter and more agile businesses who are already filling the vaccum?

    the music industry is dead – its been dead for 10 years. The reason? A load of 40+ old skool money men are still running them, and they have no clue about how to turn a computer on.

  • http://www.musicaduepuntozero.com/major-musicali-contro-internet-rivoluzione/ Le Major Musicali Contro Internet ma la Rivoluzione Sta Per Arrivare | Musica 2.0

    [...] questa domanda ha dato una risposta Michael Arrington di TechCrunch il quale racconta che durante un’intervista un alto [...]

  • goddamelektric

    We’ll survive the way we always did, by playing music, and not necessarily as our sole source of income. I think it likely that most musicians now don’t even see the majors as being part of the real picture anymore. Back to being minstrels I say.

  • logicbox

    A Luddite in a suit remains a Luddite…. Michael, I had conversations with label execs as far back as ’03 noting that multi-rights deals would mitigate their investment risk profile; not interested…. That P2P simply redefined the relationship between consumer and retailer and that monetising P2P was a fairly simple proposition; not interested…. That Apple had already taken control of the digital distribution of music and something needed to be done; not concerned…. And a little more recently that at least 50% of recorded music revenues would be digital by 2010; yeah, right….

    For the said exec to suggest their corporate behaviour reflects some grand strategy is laughable. They could have re-organised half a decade ago!

    Guys like your lunch buddy would sit on panels at conferences and literally admit that they didn’t know how the future was going to play out but that once they were there they’d know what to do. Pardon?

    Seems like the suit is trying to re-write a little history, and make himself look a whole lot smarter than he really is.

    Funniest article I’ve read all year.

    Shame really, some of the new guys in the biz are genuinely smart cookies. Perhaps you had lunch too far up the greasy pole?

  • http://www.thillgroup.com Tracy Hill

    Although I do agree with much of this, I don’t agree with the part about traditional record companies having a lock on talent. Myspace Music is one click away from millions of artists worldwide, so once they figure out an A&R system, they will be discovering the next generation of Beyonces, Foo Fighters, U2s, etc., not traditional record companies. And, from a promotional standpoint, no traditional record company can break a band worldwide with a single banner ad or music video, unlike Myspace Music/Records.

  • http://www.thillgroup.com Tracy Hill

    If you mean Live Nation when you say “labels,” then I agree.

  • http://www.firstonmars.com Tuhin Roy

    I don’t buy it.

    The fact that labels know that music is going to “feel” free doesn’t mean they are giving up on making money from the use of the sound recording. They are just going to move towards a “tax” (either literally or as a build-in to ISP fees).

    They will also make money on the other pieces of the 360.

  • http://eleetmusic.com/?p=383 eleetmusic – Marketing Digital Music » Blog Archive » Blogger’s Poncho Gobblin

    [...] The double standards occuring in the halls of major record labels will lead to their extinction even faster than earlier reported. Record compaines have recognized the immense marketing power of [...]

  • http://heffalumpsandwoozles.co.uk/2009/03/furture-of-music/ Heffalumps & Woozles » Furture of Music

    [...] then if you with to geek it up, have a read on this interesting article on the “Furture of Music” via [...]

  • http://www.8legs.net/2009/03/le-label-si-arrenderanno-nel-2011/ Le label si arrenderanno nel 2011? | 8legs

    [...] Michael Arrington di TechCrunch.com ha riportato sul suo blog di una conversazione avuta con un non meglio precisato dirigente di una big dell’industria musi-discografica da cui è scaturito un’inaspettato scenario nella guerra tra la RIAA e lo scambio in rete di files protetti da diritto d’autore. [...]

  • http://www.SmogVeil.com Frank Mauceri

    Not sure why it is that musicians must surrender their art to bootleggers and illegal downloaders. Drummers gotta eat too! No one is actively stealing books, paintings, ballets…so why is it that musicians have to essentially give their stuff away for free?

  • http://blog.artistforce.com/2009/03/10/a-method-to-the-madness-big-labels%e2%80%99-vision-for-now-and-the-future/ A Method to the Madness: Big Labels’ Vision for Now and the Future at The ArtistForce Blog

    [...] Read the full TechCrunch article here. [...]

  • http://www.greenstreetproduce.com Paul A.

    Well done
    /golf clap

  • Chocolate milk

    Well, the major problem right now is that not many people wants a cd today. It just wont play in the computer, telephone, ipod etc etc etc. Right there, the industry is killing itself, by hanging on to an old media.

    Then: The first error they did was sueing the ass off Napster. That was 28 million users when they dug in.

    Spotify cellebrates one million users today.

    Just imagine what those 28 million was worth. And that was 10 years ago.

  • http://www.thinksketchdesign.com/2009/01/16/web/media/music/reverbnation-why-facebook-will-eat-itunes Reverbnation – Why facebook will eat iTunes | ThinkSketchDesign

    [...] as always, techcrunch: Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011 | | | | | | No comments yet Click here to cancel [...]

  • http://philmichaelson.com Phil Michaelson

    Jason — i heard the same thing from a music executive. something about devices like my ipod/tv/computer coming with music that a user pays for via a subscription . it didn’t make sense to me.

    labels should focus on innovatively marketing and distributing. find a way to muscle indies off itunes homepage while selling me ringtones for my oven.

  • http://www.markcarras.com/?p=183 So what is so wrong with the 360 deal? » MarkCarras.com

    [...] company saying that they have to make their money somewhere, but I ask why punish the artists? TechCrunch has some ideas on why the labels have no problem with [...]

  • http://clondans.wordpress.com/2009/03/11/una-cuestion-de-tiempo/ Una cuestión de tiempo « Clondans’s Blog

    [...] de Michael Arrington en TechCrunch tras una comida con un ejecutivo de la industria musical, “Big music will surrender, but not until at least 2011“, deja las cosas más que claras: no estamos hablando de lo que es bueno o lo que es malo, de lo [...]

  • http://jimda5is.com/2009/03/11/its-all-part-of-the-game/ Totally Me» » It’s all part of the game

    [...] to this article over on TechCrunch, the current stupidity amongst the leadership of the RIAA and the record labels [...]

  • scodav

    Mmmm, I don’t know. Hard to believe, that after all this time, record labels have a “master plan”. More a series of desperate moves leading to a dream where they are still needed and quality is irrelevant. Oh, and where they have a “lock” on talent. Artists felt bound to labels because of two things – promotion and distribution. Distribution is no longer a problem and the labels have no more clue than anyone else as to successful new means of promotion. Did you happen to ask him when artists might be cut in on these new revenue streams? Many artists’ contracts preclude any profit from internet sales.

    Of course, your last line makes a lot of sense, but mainly if you replace “forgiven” with “forgotten”.

  • Anonymous

    “And who knows, a decade after that we may have all forgiven the music labels.”

    Anonymous does not forgive and does not forget.

    There will be a day set aside to commemorate all the victims of the so called “intellectual property industries”.

  • http://interimmarketing.info Charles Sipe

    Music is far too expensive, especially since the break even point for a digital song is like 5 cents. If record companies sold songs for 10 cents, I think most people would buy a lot more music.

  • http://audiowire.wordpress.com/2009/03/12/itunes-10-years-too-late/ iTunes 10 Years Too Late? « Audiowire

    [...] Read the rest of the article here… [...]

  • Febrele

    We can’t make money selling songs for 10c, don’t you get it!?

  • http://www.nerdcore.de/wp/2009/03/12/musiker-downloading-is-not-a-crime/ Musiker: Downloading is not a crime! | Nerdcore

    [...] Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011 Tags: Copyright, Music, Music-Industry, p2p [...]

  • http://www.dgans.com David Gans

    Exactly. I don’t even think about getting a “record deal” any more. I hired two promotion companies to get my CD out to radio, and although the airplay Im getting hasn’t translated to a lot of CD sales (no surprise there) I am working to turn that airplay into more and better gigs. That’s the model these days; the artist IS the label.

  • http://www.kikabink.com/news/1031/recording-industry-will-sue-until-it-doesnt-make-sense/ Recording Industry Will Sue Until It Doesn’t Make Sense

    [...] Michael Arrington, “Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011,” TechCrunch, … Share and [...]

  • http://www.helge.at/2009/03/helge-at-tv-blick-in-die-zukunft/ Helge.at-TV: Blick in die Zukunft · Helge’s Blog

    [...] von Kutiman. Würde mir sofort eine CD von ihm kaufen – wenn ich mir nicht vorgenommen hätte, bis 2011 keine Tonträger mehr zu [...]

  • Sean Roberts

    have to respectfully disagree with you and this notion of free ad supported music rebuilding the music industry. I strongly believe that music will always retain a monetary value and that despite moves from the major music labels to profit from digital ventures through advertising, they are still missing overall conclusion of the digital revolution: LISTEN TO YOUR CONSUMER BASE. Today the labels are releasing one hit wonders and trying to profit from mega-stars through 360 deals. Even if the music is free, they are not reinvesting the money correctly and cutting costs where they should. They need to invest in A&R. They need to stop manipulating the consumer and simply listen. Even if music were given away for free and money is thus generated through 360 deals, it does not excuse the lack of investment in their overall product and consumer base. Free or not, they are focused on short term gains. They WILL continue to fail. I propose a grassroots and independent restructuring of the music industry.

  • http://heffalumpsandwoozles.co.uk/2009/03/future-of-music/ Heffalumps & Woozles » Future of Music

    [...] then if you with to geek it up, have a read on this interesting article on the “Furture of Music” via [...]

  • Adam Keck

    I guess I don’t understand why an artist/group still needs a label… As far as I can tell, artists/groups need only a promoter and manager to coordinate performances and recording, since they can sell music directly to their fans online. Is there some greater utility provided to artists by labels? I don’t see this industry structure in the visual arts, so it seems strange.

  • http://greginthedesert.net/2009/03/10-interesting-links-from-march-8th/ 10 Interesting Links From March 8th – Greg In The Desert

    [...] Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011 – His response: It’s all part of a master plan. The labels fully understand that recorded music, streamed or downloaded, is going to be free in the future (we’ve argued this relentlessly). CD sales continue to decline by 20% per year, and the only thing that’ll stop that trend is when those sales reach zero. Nothing will replace those revenues.They also understand that recorded music will largely be little more than marketing collateral, meaning that the Internet services being sued today for copyright infringement will be embraced in the future as ways to get the word out on hot new music. These services pay for the privilege today (either through high streaming rates or in court), but in the future they’ll be the ones getting paid by labels. Think radio payola at a whole new level, and there won’t be any more talk about social networks giving stock to labels and artists. Money will flow the other way, as it should. [...]

  • Nigel Dorser

    What about passing the hat around in advance, and releasing the content for free? http://www.takoha.net.

  • http://emergentfuture.com/2009/03/08/will-the-music-industry-adapt-to-technology-in-the-future-finally/ Will the Music Industry Adapt to Technology in the Future, Finally? | Emergent Future

    [...] browsing over at TechCrunch, I noticed this little article revolving around the music industry. As many of you are likely [...]

  • http://craighobern.com/blog/?p=4 DYNAMIC MEDIA & COLLABORATIVE REMIXABILITY « craighobern.com

    [...] scheme would fail in this new environment and while this has already been admitted by some there are others who are going in the entirely wrong direction. personally i embrace it, sure it [...]

  • http://beatcrave.com/2009-03-17/live-performance-sales-overtake-recorded-music-in-uk/ Live Performance Sales Overtake Recorded Music in UK

    [...] consumers and music services for compensation. Though it might not make much sense, Techcrunch reports that for the industry, “the spreadsheets and financial models dictate that suing customers and [...]

  • http://www.affarssmart.se/archives/30 Affärssmart.se » Skivbolagen har spelat ut sin roll – och de vet det

    [...] får de betala för nu. Eller? Vissa menar snarare på att allt är en medveten taktik från skivbolagen. Att de är fullt medvetna om att [...]

  • http://musicindustryreport.org/?p=6449 Counting Crows Go Label-Free

    [...] The band joins Radiohead, Nine Inch Nails and others who’s explored releasing music outside of the normal label/distributor world, and more are sure to follow. Labels are pushing all of their artists to sign 360 music deals that give them a cut of every revenue source, as CD sales become increasingly shaky. Without those deals, the labels are unlikely to be able to make much money from even their top artists after 2011 or so. [...]

  • http://stopbragging.com/?p=1500 StopBragging.com » Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011

    [...] This was taken from TechCrunch: [...]

  • Yuhong Bao

    Why do you think the music industry is waiting until 2011 to surrender instead of surrendering now in the first place?

  • Grave Logic

    I checked them out from one of these forums, and I wish there were more press on Repeater.. it’s better than a lot of stuff coming out right now, and I want their new business model to succeed so more people can hear them…!

  • http://simonearle.tumblr.com Simon

    Die you big old dinosaurs. I really hope that alternative business models continue to rise to the surface and that consumers can support music without getting ripped off like the past.

  • dan

    artists from obscurity to popularity…Lily Allen and Katie Thom…both through Myspace

  • Rob

    Who both had, as I believe Major backing…

  • http://www.weeklysongcast.com Rob

    I totally agree. More like a lock on creative freedom in my opinion and therefore a masking of some of an artists talent as a result.

  • http://www.weeklysongcast.com Rob

    Actually the Digi001 came out last century! I got one in 1999.

  • http://societrends.com/2009/03/19/one-way-ticket-to-obscurity/ From Rosanne to record companies | Societrends

    [...] company who violates music copyright law. (Although they apparently are giving up on the latter.) Look for record companies to be the 2011-2012 version of 2009’s newspaper publishers. In other words, the record companies failure to scrap [...]

  • http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/03/27/the-sorry-state-of-music-startups/ The Sorry State Of Music Startups

    [...] make money, lose money or go out of business. All they want is to make enough money to extend the ultimate surrender date as long as possible. That’s when we’ll finally see the economic reality dictated by the [...]

  • http://www.rajajasti.com/2009/03/27/web-music-startups/ Web music startups « Raja Jasti’s Blog – Renaissance Thinking

    [...] make money, lose money or go out of business. All they want is to make enough money to extend the ultimate surrender date as long as possible. That’s when we’ll finally see the economic reality dictated by the [...]

  • http://reviewsmanual.com/the-sorry-state-of-music-startups.html The Sorry State Of Music Startups | Reviews Manual

    [...] money or go discover of business. All they poverty is to attain sufficiency money to modify the ultimate deliver date as daylong as possible. That’s when we’ll eventually wager the scheme actuality settled [...]

  • Attallah

    As you pointed out, Radiohead made much more money when they were less experimental.

    The argument so far has been that the labels can’t expect consumers to pay anything for listening to music. And I know that the labels are depicted as evils. But will the consumers ever pay for music once the labels are gone? Will they pay the artists when they self-promote their music?

    I think that it’s a bit pretentious to claim the moral high ground when you’re taking someone else’s work for free, and wrap it with some ideology about the evil of labels.

  • Attallah

    LOL!

  • http://geek.topnewsdigest.com/uncategorized/the-sorry-state-of-music-startups/ The Sorry State Of Music Startups | Geek News and Musings

    [...] make money, lose money or go out of business. All they want is to make enough money to extend the ultimate surrender date as long as possible. That’s when we’ll finally see the economic reality dictated by the [...]

  • http://www.thefaredge.com/?p=1568 The Far Edge » Blog Archive » The Sorry State Of Music Startups

    [...] make money, lose money or go out of business. All they want is to make enough money to extend the ultimate surrender date as long as possible. That’s when we’ll finally see the economic reality dictated by the [...]

  • http://www.markkachigian.com/2009/03/links-for-2009-03-27/ links for 2009-03-27 | Mark Kachigian | Internet Marketing Professional

    [...] Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011 (tags: music business marketing) [...]

  • http://www.netdesk.co.uk/site/2009/social-marketing/the-sorry-state-of-music-startups-9/ The Sorry State Of Music Startups | netdesk

    [...] make money, lose money or go out of business. All they want is to make enough money to extend the ultimate surrender date as long as possible. That’s when we’ll finally see the economic reality dictated by the [...]

  • http://fr.techcrunch.com/2009/03/28/le-sort-peu-envieux-des-startups-de-musique-en-streaming/ Le sort peu envieux des startups de musique en streaming

    [...] feront rien; même si certains paieront des amendes exorbitantes ou passeront du temps en prison, ce  jour arrivera et les labels le savent [...]

  • http://www.web20consultants.com/the-sorry-state-of-music-startups The Sorry State Of Music Startups | Web 2.0 Internet Marketing

    [...] make money, lose money or go out of business. All they want is to make enough money to extend the ultimate surrender date as long as possible. That’s when we’ll finally see the economic reality dictated by the [...]

  • http://recycledbeats.blogspot.com/ J

    The Majors suck, we know. The bigger issue is Radio and TV. Record labels are like banks and a record deal is basically a loan for marketing. Radio and TV is where people actually hear and see the artist but all they do is rotate the same 10 bands/artists. An indie artist would have a better chance against selling his or her soul to a record label if Radio was bold enough to actually play something worth listening to. Something fresh and new. MTV is another example. They have the power to bring us great music, instead, they give us 20 bands and reality TV. If an amazing indie artist had the opportunity to be seen and heard based on talent and talent alone, things would be different.

  • http://h-manga.info SadistiX

    so they’re gonna exploit their customers as much as possible while they still can? good game plan, executives!

  • JB

    Big Music and its commodities, Rock Stars and Pop Stars, are bygones of the Age of Control.

    A Rock Star is actually a very fascist concept. These people are the Mussolinis of music.

    This era couldn’t end any faster.

  • http://shirleytempo.wordpress.com/2009/03/29/18/ Shirley Tempo

    [...] Change the game: Music industry to wave the white flag… someday [...]

  • http://shirleytempo.wordpress.com/2009/03/29/get-that-white-flag-ready/ Get that white flag ready « Shirley Tempo

    [...] Change the game: Music industry to wave the white flag… someday [...]

  • Roberto

    Isn’t the problem with the artists? If they stopped signing over the rights to their music, wouldn’t this solve nearly everything? Maybe they could give the labels a percentage of all revenue for a certain amount of time or something.

  • http://www.thefaredge.com/?p=1736 The Far Edge » Blog Archive » Stealing Music: Is It Wrong Or Isn’t It?

    [...] the reality of the Internet will force the laws to change, too. One way or another the music labels will eventually surrender, and recorded music will be [...]

  • http://savevinyl.co.uk/music-startups/ Save Vinyl » Music Startups

    [...] read more [...]

  • http://blindmen.se/blog/2009/04/the-masterplan/ The Masterplan | Blindmen

    [...] Michael Arrington på Techcrunch hade lunch förra månaden med “a big music label executive”. Han ställde direkt frågan som många av oss nog ställer oss ibland: Why are you guys so damned clueless? Your business is disintegrating before your eyes, and all you do is go for short term cash gains (lawsuits, mafia-style collection rackets from venture backed music startups, etc.). [...]

  • http://www.mikemccready.com/2009/04/05/the-future-of-the-music-industry-part-ii/ Mike McCready » Blog Archive » The Future of the Music Industry – Part II

    [...] Over the past few years a lot of venture capital firms and angel investors have poured money into music start-up companies that either stream major label music over the Web or offer it for download. Just to get started, Warner Music Group, SonyBMG, EMI and Universal demand millions of dollars from these start-ups upfront. So, the money has been flowing from the venture capital firms to the start-ups right into the pockets of the major labels. In many cases, it then turns out that these start-up firms pay more money than their business models can support and they’re going belly up long before ever turning a profit. A high profile start-up in this space called Spiral Frog was the most recent victim of this type of death. An interesting article about that can be read here. [...]

  • http://www.onyourcloud.com/non-classe/la-loi-creation-et-internet-ou-hadopi-rejetee/ La loi “Création et Internet” ou HADOPI rejetée ! – On Your Cloud !

    [...] Les majors sont bien capables de survivre une année de plus non? De toute façon elles n’ont pas le choix, le changement de business model est annoncé d’ici 2013 ! [...]

  • http://nbcmi2009.wordpress.com/2009/04/17/big-music-will-surrender-but-not-until-at-least-2011/ Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011 « New Business Concepts Music Industry 2009
  • http://www.technewsgeek.com/as-court-prepares-shackles-for-the-pirate-bay-other-torrent-sites-are-ready-to-replace-it/ Tech News Geek » As Court Prepares Shackles For The Pirate Bay, Other Torrent Sites Are Ready To Replace It

    [...] congregate. That is the stick part of its carrot-and-stick business model. They are still trying to figure out what the carrot will be, but increasingly it looks like licensing ad-supported streams on the [...]

  • http://www.webolia.com/2009/04/as-court-prepares-shackles-for-the-pirate-bay-other-torrent-sites-are-ready-to-replace-it/ As Court Prepares Shackles For The Pirate Bay, Other Torrent Sites Are Ready To Replace It

    [...] congregate. That is the stick part of its carrot-and-stick business model. They are still trying to figure out what the carrot will be, but increasingly it looks like licensing ad-supported streams on the [...]

  • http://www.thefaredge.com/?p=2248 The Far Edge » Blog Archive » As Court Prepares Shackles For The Pirate Bay, Other Torrent Sites Are Ready To Replace It

    [...] congregate. That is the stick part of its carrot-and-stick business model. They are still trying to figure out what the carrot will be, but increasingly it looks like licensing ad-supported streams on the [...]

  • http://mondaymorningblogger.wordpress.com/2009/04/21/todays-ignorance-courtesy-of-bj%c3%b8rn-rogstad/ Today’s Ignorance Courtesy of Bjørn Rogstad « Monday Morning Blogger

    [...] The music industry is losing money because its distribution platform has fundamentally changed over the past 15 years.  This is not an opinion but a fact.  A fact that is even understood by the record labels. [...]

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/invisyblninja Russell Berridge

    Does this exec’s admission that Big Labels KNOW what to do, but won’t until their hand is forced…does it not reek of “Conspiracy”…? Can’t they be tried if this ever came to court?

  • mykel

    Hey, Could you please elaborate about paying the RIAA/MPAA to download and share please. Thanks.

  • http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/06/against-all-odds-imeem-raises-more-cash-and-has-a-bold-new-music-plan/ Against All Odds: Imeem Raises More Cash And Has A Bold New Music Plan

    [...] a chance this company may still be around for the foreseeable future. And they may have redefined how streaming deals are done across the industry. CrunchBase Information Imeem Information provided by CrunchBase Tweet [...]

  • http://blog.viningmedia.nl/2009/05/against-all-odds-imeem-raises-more-cash-and-has-a-bold-new-music-plan/ Against All Odds: Imeem Raises More Cash And Has A Bold New Music Plan | Viningmedia Nieuws

    [...] a chance this company may still be around for the foreseeable future. And they may have redefined how streaming deals are done across the [...]

  • http://audocs.com/blog William Robinson

    True – True – True, Everything is a GO until the complete phase out after 2020.

  • http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/02/the-infamous-2009-limewire-pizza-fiasco/ The Infamous 2009 LimeWire Pizza Fiasco

    [...] happens in the future with the battle between users and labels, we know one thing. July 1, 2009, the date of the Infamous 2009 LimeWire Pizza Fiasco, was when it [...]

  • http://www.stoth.com/2009/07/02/the-infamous-2009-limewire-pizza-fiasco/ The Infamous 2009 LimeWire Pizza Fiasco | Stoth

    [...] happens in the future with the battle between users and labels, we know one thing. July 1, 2009, the date of the Infamous 2009 LimeWire Pizza Fiasco, was when it [...]

  • http://spinvalleypost.com/2009/07/02/the-infamous-2009-limewire-pizza-fiasco/ The Infamous 2009 LimeWire Pizza Fiasco | Spin Valley Post

    [...] happens in the future with the battle between users and labels, we know one thing. July 1, 2009, the date of the Infamous 2009 LimeWire Pizza Fiasco, was when it [...]

  • http://newsfed.net/2009/07/03/the-infamous-2009-limewire-pizza-fiasco/ The Infamous 2009 LimeWire Pizza Fiasco | Newsfed – Aggregate local and tech stories with related videos and tweets!

    [...] happens in the future with the battle between users and labels, we know one thing. July 1, 2009, the date of the Infamous 2009 LimeWire Pizza Fiasco, was when it [...]

  • http://www.techdare.com/2009/07/02/the-infamous-2009-limewire-pizza-fiasco/ The Infamous 2009 LimeWire Pizza Fiasco | Techdare

    [...] happens in the future with the battle between users and labels, we know one thing. July 1, 2009, the date of the Infamous 2009 LimeWire Pizza Fiasco, was when it [...]

  • http://www.joeryder.com/2009/07/we-are-now-content-producers/ We are now content producers – Joe Ryder, (a)g

    [...] TechCrunch discussed the music industry a few months ago. I watch musicians and the music industry intently simply because I know the industry so well – I have an uncle who has a band and a recording studio, as well as several high school chums in the biz. The music industry’s management of talent may not be very pretty now, but they will be the first ones to really lock onto the next trend. Trust me. [...]

  • http://tysonator.mixtrac.com/index.php/2009/07/12/free-music-is-coming/ Free Music is Coming || mixtrac

    [...] not until 2011, according to Michael Arrington from Techcrunch. This was one of the most interesting articles published on TechCrunch this year.  It [...]

  • http://www.tv-gossip.com/lost/ Lost Guy

    what lol how is a rock star a fascist concept? what are you talking about

  • http://www.shuttlebum.com/?p=23 My Ideal Music Distribution Model Part I: Background Info « Shuttlebum

    [...] speculate on where things are headed. Some think iTunes is the future, others think that music will soon be free and become simply a marketing tool for merch/performances. I honestly don’t have a clue how [...]

  • http://songcat.wordpress.com/2009/08/14/the-future-of-the-music-industry-part-ii/ The Future of the Music Industry – Part II « The DotCat Song Blog

    [...] Over the past few years a lot of venture capital firms and angel investors have poured money into music start-up companies that either stream major label music over the Web or offer it for download. Just to get started, Warner Music Group, SonyBMG, EMI and Universal demand millions of dollars from these start-ups upfront. So, the money has been flowing from the venture capital firms to the start-ups right into the pockets of the major labels. In many cases, it then turns out that these start-up firms pay more money than their business models can support and they’re going belly up long before ever turning a profit. A high profile start-up in this space called Spiral Frog was the most recent victim of this type of death. An interesting article about that can be read here. [...]

  • http://kulturekonomi.se/2009/03/13/bra-saker-funkar-inte-alltid/ Bra saker funkar inte alltid | Kulturekonomi

    [...] jag läser också ett fascinerande inlägg på TechCrunch där skribenten Michael Arrington återger en lunchdiskussion med en chef på ett stort musikbolag [...]

  • http://kulturekonomi.se/2009/09/22/stamningar-som-affarside/ Stämningar som affärsidé | Kulturekonomi

    [...] är alltså inte min teori, utan från ett lunchsamtal i New [...]

  • http://blogg.tkj.se/hot-och-stamningar-skivbolagens-nya-affarside/ Tommy k Johanssons blogg om datorer & Internet

    ”Hot och stämningar skivbolagens nya affärsidé?”…

    Är stämningar skivbolagens nya affärsidé? Den frågan ställer sig Madeleine Sjöstedt (FP) på dagens Brännpunkt hos Svenska Dagbladet. Ja, ibland undrar man verkligen om det inte är så…
    Madeleine Sjöstedt är kultur- och idrottsborgarråd i Stockholm…

  • http://radioactivegavin.wordpress.com/2009/03/17/digital-crossroads-back-in-action/ Digital Crossroads back in action « Out of Print

    [...] Arrington’s lunch conversation with anonymous record [...]

  • http://rebootnews.wordpress.com/2009/03/08/interview-with-jay-rosen/ Interview with Jay Rosen « Rebooting The News

    [...] for Jay to offer one or two paragraph critiques of various bits of journalism. For example this story on TechCrunch is interesting, but it might be more believable if we knew who the author was talking [...]

  • http://julliengordon.mvmt.com/2008/06/27/7-signs-that-the-music-industry-is-changing/ 7 Signs that the Music Industry is Changing | Jullien Gordon // Purpose Finder

    [...] Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011 http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/03/08/big-music-will-surrender-but-not-until-at-least-2011/ The Record Industry’s Digital Distribution Plan (TotalMusic) Comes Back From the Dead http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/08/07/the-record-industrys-digital-distribution-plan-totalmusic-comes-back-from-the-dead/ [...]

  • http://hitmusicacademy.wordpress.com/2009/12/09/the-future-of-the-music-industry-part-ii-guest-blog/ The Future of the Music Industry: Part II – Guest Blog « The Hit Music Academy

    [...] Over the past few years a lot of venture capital firms and angel investors have poured money into music start-up companies that either stream major label music over the Web or offer it for download. Just to get started, Warner Music Group, SonyBMG, EMI and Universal demand millions of dollars from these start-ups upfront. So, the money has been flowing from the venture capital firms to the start-ups right into the pockets of the major labels. In many cases, it then turns out that these start-up firms pay more money than their business models can support and they’re going belly up long before ever turning a profit. A high profile start-up in this space called Spiral Frog was the most recent victim of this type of death. An interesting article about that can be read here. [...]

blog comments powered by Disqus
Advertisement
Got a tip? Building a startup? Tell us