With The Recording Industry In Free Fall, Why Are RIAA Bosses Getting Raises?
from the rewarding-failure dept
It’s difficult to think of a more disastrous strategy pioneered for the recording industry than the one cooked up by RIAA bosses Mitch Bainwol and Cary Sherman. The two were the “masterminds” behind the plan to sue fans directly, which has been an uncontested disaster that did absolutely nothing to help the bottom line of the record labels. If anything, the evidence suggests that the lawsuit strategy has only galvanized folks to look for alternatives beyond spending money on RIAA labels. The RIAA finally dropped the lawsuit strategy, which was deemed a money pit by a recording industry exec and almost resulted in EMI leaving the RIAA. After all of that, the RIAA itself had massive layoffs.
Given all of that, you might think that Bainwol and Sherman should be looking for new jobs. Instead, apparently, they’ve been given hefty raises. P2Pnet notes that Bainwol in 2008 made over $2 million dollars — an increase from the $1.485 million he made in 2007. Sherman made $1.332 million, noticeably more than the $985k he made a year earlier. While I don’t have any issue with the absolute amounts, I do question why these guys are getting raises while presiding over what will clearly be looked back on as one of the biggest blunders by an industry in decades. On top of that, I can see how some might question how the RIAA can claim to represent “starving artists” when its execs are doing so well. Apparently, the answer to not being a starving artist is to go become boss of the RIAA.
Filed Under: cary sherman, mitch bainwol, salaries
Companies: riaa
Comments on “With The Recording Industry In Free Fall, Why Are RIAA Bosses Getting Raises?”
Because America likes to reward failure. Ie: Bail outs. It’s in our culture.
perhaps the crew from p2pnet (and techdirt for that matter) would do better to stop playing gotchya politics and concentrate on their own matters?
Re: LOL
Yeah, cause obviously Techdirt and p2pnet are spending far too much money on their own executives…
(Obvious troll is obvious)
Re: Re: Troll wins!
If the obvious troll is obvious, why do you say anything? Are you the troll-troll?
No need to answer, I will just point out that the troll won. He has had more comments than the article.
Re: Re: Re: Troll wins!
That’s because everyone is shouting.
Re: Re: Re:2 Troll wins!
THEM STEALERS ARE DESTROYING OUR TROLLING INDUSTRY!!!
Re: Re:
I agree. Blogs should never report significant concerns about the business strategies of companies in industries that those blogs cover. Blogs should only post self-referential articles. That would draw in more readers! Oh yeah, and linking to other websites is illegal without express permission of the website’s owners.
/sarcasm (for those with malfunctioning sarcasm detectors)
Re: Re:
That’s the best trolling you can come up with? Work harder next time, please, TAM.
Re: Re:
“perhaps the crew from p2pnet (and techdirt for that matter) would do better to stop playing gotchya politics and concentrate on their own matters?”
TAMhole Rebuttal Rule #4 (aka the “See to your own house first” rule): When you can find no real complaint about the topic in question (because its indefensible to begin with), sidestep the entire argument and attack from a completely outside and irrelevant direction, thereby proving your superiority and winning the new, completely invented argument by default because it didnt address your made-up-on-the-spot point.
Re: Re:
That’s a pretty fine TAM-impersonation you’ve got there.
Re: Re:
Intro to TAM-Comments; version 1.0:
“TAM-comments”, invented by this Anonymous Coward, are the criterion of truth for a scientific theory. The TAM-Comment is the outcome of a pissing contest between anonymous cowards advocating competing theories.
The coward who pees highest is right, and gets his work republished. If he has truly impressive bladder power, he wins a Nobel Prize. The value of the TAM-comment is then recorded so that future generations of scientists can continue to test the theory.
The TAM-Comment value was a significance test used widely by statisticians. Statistical analysis of TAM-Comments involves a variety of tests to prove whether TAM-Comments are important or not. Most of these tests involve a test statistic that lets you calculate a X-value (2%). If your X, Y, and Z axis are low (2%, 7%, and 1%, respectively), then your data is worthless and you know you just wasted all your time (2 seconds) and money (55¢) in data collection.
But ultimately, the Statistical Board of Statisticians decided on October 27, 2008 to phase out the TAM-Comment valuations with immediate effect, because it was – according to Karl Frederich Gauss Jr and his specialists – “just too damn difficult to understand”.
Re: Re: Re:
“Intro to TAM-Comments; version 1.0:”
Where do I buy a TAM for dummies book?
Uhm… A dummy book on how to be a dummy?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
“Where do I buy a TAM for dummies book?”
It’s not possible. A draft of the manuscript was sent to Michio Kaku last month for peer review, and it’s reported that he shook his head in horror and utter disbelief.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I’ll wait for the dumbed-down version.
Re: Re:
Attack the person not the topic,
with Sarah Palin goodness.
Re: Re:
Am I shouting too?
Re: Re:
You first, TAM.
Re: Re:
>perhaps the crew from p2pnet (and techdirt for that matter) would do better to stop playing gotchya politics and concentrate on their own matters?
Why not troll there instead? You can’t be that scared of Jon Newton deleting your posts; the way you work it’d strengthen whatever pitiful argument you have. Or is it Henry Emrich?
perhaps the likes of tam, darryl, and technopolitical would do better to stop playing gotchya politics on Mike for just about every single fucking article and concentrate on their own matters?
Because they work hard and achieve results, and capitalism rewards them for that.
That’s what all the apologists tell me, anyway.
It’s nothing to do with a culture of corporate fellatio and worship of big-business under the guise of free-market economics. No sir.
I am so glad that we can see the pottle calling the ket black. All they’re going to use that extra money for is to lobby even stronger for laws and rules against we, the ones that see P2P or newer technology as great tools to be used rather than support an archaic business model. So sad that the money could have been used to instead make them much richer if only they could stop to think about their own consequences for 5 seconds.
Re: Re:
I doubt their personal salaries contribute to their lobbying efforts.
Re: Re: Re:
Source
Out of $1.3 million, I’m sure that Mitch’s money goes mainly to those lobbying efforts since he’s the top lobbyist. ( I can’t find the info about how much he spends personally. I know that his check always say $5000 though…)
Let’s also remember that 2008 was an election year so all stops are pulled out for campaign funds. I find a huge discrepancy in spending before 2008. I forget when the Supreme Court said that it was unconstitutional to stop limits on funding. Perhaps that had a play in the field.
"Bribes Work Best" plan
If you could bribe those making the rules, you would grab as much as you could too. Welcome to the new Capitalism, bribe-for-bucks.
“Apparently, the answer to not being a starving artist is to go become boss of the RIAA.”
But of course. It’s the only industry where you can actually fail upward.
Re: Re:
Psh. I thought the whole point of capitalism was to rise to the level best suited to your level of incompetence.
When you are the boss you can give yourself a raise. Who else would give these people raises? Certainly not EMI.
Hmmm… Found something else. How they fund this:
Source
It’s funny that the labels still take so much but believe they are entitled to more.
You already know this
One word: greed
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/02/aig-execs-may-get-pay-rai_n_482970.html
Re: You already know this
err… you misspelled selfishness
RIAA
Because the RIAA is the Enron of music.
Re: RIAA
I thought they were the BP of music?
Re: Re: RIAA
Hillary Rosen does have that covered.
She can make a mess no matter where she goes.
Being a trade organization run by a board of directors, all but one of whom (Bainwol) are associated with the member record labels, why is the RIAA, which is merely a proxy, constantly bashed as if it is not the one determining policy and filing lawsuits?
Yesterdays news
While what these guys make is clearly ludicrous, it matters little. It would not surprise me to find them declaring bankruptcy by/before 2015, and crying about how little they’d made for their hard efforts to clean up the so called piracy in the system. Oh Yes, how we do love reward mediocrity.
And we wonder why this countries broke!!
Re: Yesterdays news
Declaring bankruptcy?
I have a music for that in their case.
Uma! Uma!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkXKurYN4f4
Bainwol’s “pay raise” was 15 times my annual salary.
His $2 million a year could keep 50 musicians gainfully employed.
I haven’t bought any RIAA member music since they started this mess, and I may never buy any again for the rest of my life, and I spend a lot on music.
There’s a lot of top end executives who have figured out ways to profit by setting up a company to fail.
Take Radio Shack. The CEO gets a big raise, but maybe just in stock options.
He fires all the experienced employees, and hires people who don’t care for minimum wage. While the market adjusts to squeezing out radio shack, the savings on employee salaries looks great on paper. Stock price goes up, CEO sells stock and takes a new job with success at Radio Shack on his resume. Radio Shack then falls apart into what it is today.
Similar thing happened with Motorola and lots of companies. Not everyone with stock wants long term success, some just want a quick buck and they can get it because they have enough capital in the game.
The question is, have some of the RIAA executives figured out how to personally profit from the failure of the RIAA. If so, the RIAA will be nothing in a few years no matter what.
Re: Re:
“The question is, have some of the RIAA executives figured out how to personally profit from the failure of the RIAA. If so, the RIAA will be nothing in a few years no matter what.”
That depends on how they setup the failure. I would not rule the possibility of them setting up the RIAA to fail but setup shop under another name so that when RIAA actually fails they can move over to the new entity and start the cycle all over again with the promise to fight “piracy” even harder.
Change
The RIAA knows their days are numbered. The public is demanding transparency and there is no system left for them to game.
Support an artist as the new Executive Director of SoundExchange. http://www.bit.ly/samanthamurphy
I promise to create a transparent, fair system that distributes what it collects in a timely fashion to its rightful owner, the artists and the copyright holders.
Re: Change
Even if we do how do I know your successor will do the same?
Re: Change
Great, another collection agency.
Tell me again why we need these organisations?
RIAA raises
Something stinks.
Trolling
The two were the “masterminds” behind the plan to sue fans directly, which has been an uncontested disaster that did absolutely nothing to help the bottom line of the record labels.
But maybe their revenues would have decreased even faster if they hadn’t done this! We don’t have enough information to say it didn’t help!
/troll
Actually I don’t think whoever said that the other day was trolling, I think he was being serious. Which perhaps is even worse.