Oh Look, The Overall Music Industry In Canada Has Been Growing As Well...

from the and-so-it-goes... dept

We've discussed many, many times how the recording industry is merely a subset of the music industry, and it's quite unfortunate that many (including in the press and among politicians) seem to think that the recording industry is the music industry. However, if you actually take a look at the larger view, you quickly realize that almost every other part of the music industry has been doing quite well over the past decade. It's really just the recording industry part that's struggled. In fact, we've pointed to studies covering the UK, Sweden, Sweden and Norway which have all seen their overall music industry grow.

Even more importantly, in all of those, musicians themselves were making a lot more money than before. That's because the shift in the industry was towards markets and business models where the artists were able to collect the money, rather than a gatekeeper who kept most of it (i.e., the record labels). In an excellent article for the Toronto Globe and Mail, by professor Dwayne Winseck, which details all the problems with the copyright reform proposals in Canada, Winseck also does the same analysis for Canada, and once again finds that pretty much every other area of the music industry is growing:
When you look at it that way, you begin to realize that perhaps the only real issue is that one segment of the industry is becoming obsolete. But the other parts of the industry are more than making up for it -- indeed, the larger music industry has grown from $1.26 billion to over $1.4 billion. So why are we wasting so much time around the globe trying to pass laws to buck up that one obsolete segment? And why do politicians and the press buy this false story that the industry is in trouble?

As Winseck notes:
Ultimately, only once the myth that the music industry is in peril, and that it is the canary in the coalshaft for all media, is discarded will we get copyright laws fit for these digital times.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 May 2011 @ 8:23am

    How can you say that?

    These recording organisation work hard doing... hmm what do they do again?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Hephaestus (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 8:30am

      Re:

      Use legal contracts to remove all rights from the artists, coerce foreign nations to change their laws in a protectionist manner, violate constitutional amendments, use law suits to force any new startup to agree to financial terms created to make them fail. They do work hard ... to fuck people over.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 May 2011 @ 8:23am

    How can you say that?

    These recording organisation work hard doing... hmm what do they do again?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    HothMonster, 24 May 2011 @ 8:25am

    "So why are we wasting so much time around the globe trying to pass laws to buck up that one obsolete segment?"

    Because that segment gives the gatekeeper the greatest margins

    "And why do politicians and the press buy this false story that the industry is in trouble? "

    Because they are stupid

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Hephaestus (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 8:39am

      Re:

      "And why do politicians and the press buy this false story that the industry is in trouble? "

      The politicians - because they are bought and paid for.
      The press - because they are in the same business, content sales.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Greevar (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 8:41am

      Re:

      "Because they are stupid"

      No, because their income depends on buying into this false story. They're paid to be ignorant mouthpieces that parrot whatever they are told to say.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        HothMonster, 24 May 2011 @ 8:48am

        Re: Re:

        "No, because their income depends on buying into this false story. They're paid to be ignorant mouthpieces that parrot whatever they are told to say."

        if you are stupid cause someone pays you to be or because your brain doesnt work, you are still stupid.

        "We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." -Kurt Vonnegut

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Greevar (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:03am

          Re: Re: Re:

          I didn't say stupid, read my comment again. I said ignorant. You said stupid. Ignorant and stupid are not the same. Stupid means they can't learn. Ignorance means they won't/refuse to learn.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            HothMonster, 24 May 2011 @ 9:14am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            technically ignorance just means you havnt learned that you lack knowledge, information or education.

            So either they act stupid even though they know the truth, or they are willfully ignorant and refuse to learn because, well for whatever reason i am sure there are many. Ignorance is still stupidity its just stupidity caused by never being given knowledge as opposed to being so stupid you can't retain or comprehend the knowledge

            we are arguing semantics but i see your point. Its not that they are too stupid to understand, its that they refuse to learn or feign ignorance and act as if they don't know when they do.

            Ill will then again argue my point, pretending to be stupid = being stupid.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            A non-mouse, 24 May 2011 @ 9:19am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Ignorance means they won't/refuse to learn.

            That's actually not true. Ignorant basically means "uneducated" or "uninformed", in regards to a particular topic. Here's the definition from dictionary.com:

            ig·no·rant
            –adjective
            1. lacking in knowledge or training; unlearned: an ignorant man.
            2. lacking knowledge or information as to a particular subject or fact: ignorant of quantum physics.
            3. uninformed; unaware.

            It is often thought to be an insult, but it really isn't. There are numerous things I am ignorant of, such as the "quantum physics" example given in the definition above. No insult there, I just don't know jack about that topic and I'm ok with that.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Richard (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:05am

          Re: Re: Re:

          Actually I don't think they are stupid - they think the public is stupid - and they can get away with it.

          I used to think that they were wrong in that belief - but then along came the UK AV referendum where the "no" campaign won a spectacular victory based on the premise "you're too stupid to vote with a numbered preference".

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 8:34am

    I had an argument like this

    While I was driving in today I had an argument with my manager that could be applied to this (it's the same thing just over games). He says that we should prop up the old models not for the sake of that industry but for the sake of the shipping industry. If everyone started going digital all those jobs would be lost.

    I tried to explain how he was wrong, but he didn't listen. He only cared about the loss of a job. I have since given up on humanity.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Greevar (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 8:45am

      Re: I had an argument like this

      Shipping and the internet are just two different distribution systems. One is analog (feet, trucks, boats, and planes) and the other is digital (ones and zeros). What is happening isn't a "lost" job, but a shift from one system being dominant, to another for a particular segment of the market. As the former gives way to the latter, more jobs will open in areas that support the new dominant distribution system.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 8:49am

        Re: Re: I had an argument like this

        His argument on that was that it takes a handful of people to maintain a server where as it takes hundreds or so to ship things (that's hundreds of jobs lost to the ether apparently). He even refused to listen to my example of USPS adapting to E-Mail.

        He's one of the smartest guys I know, if he can't figure this out, what hope is left for the majority?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Greevar (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 8:57am

          Re: Re: Re: I had an argument like this

          True, but who's going to be putting new infrastructure in the ground to carry all that new digital media? Increased reliance on the internet for distribution will put increased demand on existing infrastructure, forcing the creation of more network capacity. That's where the jobs will go.

          There's a lot of upgrading needed here in the US and it won't just be as simple as putting cable in the ground and lay off your work force. As network capacity increases, so will usage as new services learn to use it, resulting in more demand for bigger networks. It will increase exponentially, if we can get the incumbent service providers to stop clinging on to the past.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:01am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: I had an argument like this

            (Playing devil's advocate)
            But truck drivers don't know tier 3 networking.

            (Not playing devil's advocate)
            It's so hard to argue like this since I know how easily my arguments are debunked.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              Greevar (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:05am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I had an argument like this

              It doesn't take a degree in networking to dig a ditch and fill it with cable.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              Richard (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:11am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I had an argument like this

              In simple terms the loss of jobs in one area frees up labour for new activities. You could try reminding him that if we'd taken his advice 300 years ago 90% of the population would still be engaged in full time agriculture.
              Having said that, I DO think we have a duty to look after those whose current jobs are lost, during the transitional period. The mistake we make is to allow the free market to create victims - tarnishing its image.

              The motto should be "competition between ideas, co-operation between people."

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                Greevar (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:14am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I had an argument like this

                Ha! Interesting! If you follow that line of thinking, with the loss of jobs comes the freedom to take lower-paying part time jobs and using the remainder of that time for personal agriculture. Fuck jobs! I'm starting a vegetable garden!

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              A non-mouse, 24 May 2011 @ 9:30am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I had an argument like this

              But truck drivers don't know tier 3 networking.

              They don't need to know tier 3 networking, they need to know how to drive the truck & deliver packages. Somebody still has to deliver all those new routers, cables, servers, etc.

              Whoa! Look how we went full circle there! It's almost like we're now creating new jobs.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          The Infamous Joe (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:25am

          Re: Re: Re: I had an argument like this

          His argument on that was that it takes a handful of people to maintain a server where as it takes hundreds or so to ship things

          Serious answer:

          ..and if my company no longer has to pay hundreds of people to ship things (indirectly or directly) then I now have much more money to create new jobs.

          Non-serious Answer:

          ..and if my company no longer has to pay hundreds of people to ship things (indirectly or directly) then I can pass that savings on to the customer, who will then have more money to buy beer. More people buying beer means more people moving beer around, which stabilizes the shipping industry.

          Shoot, my non-serious answer proves my point, too. Ah well.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            Greevar (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:31am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: I had an argument like this

            Damn you! You're making sense! Keep this up and you'll implode the universe!

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              Hephaestus (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:49am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I had an argument like this

              I was wondering why a rift had opened up on my computer screen ... quick, everyone, next article before we end the universe !!!

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                The Infamous Joe (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 10:01am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I had an argument like this

                shit! uh... err.. ah ha! But that would never work, because all the tubes would get clogged and we'd have 1's and 0's coming back up through our monitors, spilling on the floor.

                Whew. That was a close one.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Angry Puppy (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 1:50pm

          Re: Re: Re: I had an argument like this

          Try this on him:

          Since the increase in digital communications my usage of overland and international shipping has increased several hundred percent. I buy laptop batteries from China, truck parts from Texas, and computer parts from Ontario just in the past few weeks. Prior to ubiquitous Internet shopping I used couriers once every couple of years.

          Sure, game sales are increasingly distributed by being downloaded on-line, but I am sure if a real study was made (like the example in the article) it would be shown that the Internet has increased the use of shipping services.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 24 May 2011 @ 8:49am

        Re: Re: I had an argument like this

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Jay (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 8:52am

      Re: I had an argument like this

      So basically, he wants Madden 2012 over Half Life 3...

      Reasoning: Steam has gotten a helluva lot better with digital distribution. Now, you can get games over Steam far quicker than you can get them at Wal-Mart.

      EA used to dominate the retail market. Somewhere a game such as Half-Life had to fight for shelf space along with the newest Madden.

      Finally, your manager is basically saying he wants Steam or Kongregate to go out of business because they are finding a niche and seeking to fill it with quality games.

      Valve took our jobs!

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:02am

        Re: Re: I had an argument like this

        Bingo. All technological advancement must stop to save current jobs. *face palm*

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:06am

          Re: Re: Re: I had an argument like this

          Holy crap, I just realized that I didn't mention Madden in my post but that's exactly where it started. I asked why Madden had to come out with a new game every single year and charge $60 for it when they could just let people download the relatively minor changes (Say $10) and only release physical media every few years. That instantly went into "Digital distribution is killing the shipping industry".

          Why hasn't the RIAA used that argument yet? "Piracy is killing the shipping industry."

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            Jay (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:13am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: I had an argument like this

            "Holy crap, I just realized that I didn't mention Madden in my post but that's exactly where it started."

            Us gamers can spot each other a mile away. :p

            "Piracy is killing the shipping industry."

            Dude, they already have the corn farmers on their side. The shipping industry they just have everyone's laptop be confiscated at the border. I don't think they need anymore help. >_>

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            Richard (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:16am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: I had an argument like this

            Why hasn't the RIAA used that argument yet? "Piracy is killing the shipping industry."

            Don't give them ideas!

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              Hephaestus (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:53am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I had an argument like this

              Oh please! ... we can debunk the whole piracy is killing the shipping industry just like ... VCR-Boston strangler, corn farmers going out of business because of movie piracy (I bet that one sounded much better in his head), etc etc

              So let them, we can enjoy making fun of them.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 24 May 2011 @ 9:06am

        Re: Re: I had an argument like this

        EA publishes valves retail versions, valve still sells games in stores.

        no matter how big digital purchases get there will always be box copies, people like their manuals and maps and boxes and collectors edition special items.

        seems to be pulling threads with your argument.

        on the overall idea of the thread. I would say the digital market has increased the revenue of the shipping business. I am just thinking of all the shit sold over Amazon or Ebay. Even if the market for digital versions of goods continues to grow (books, music, movies, games) there is still plenty of physical shit that needs shipping, and I doubt games and movies and books sold will ever be 100% digital.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:14am

          Re: Re: Re: I had an argument like this

          Pulling threads in my argument, but my argument was thread bare to begin with.

          That Amazon and Ebay argument was a damn good one. I'll have to remember it. Finite goods, that's where the money is.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Greevar (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:37am

          Re: Re: Re: I had an argument like this

          "no matter how big digital purchases get there will always be box copies, people like their manuals and maps and boxes and collectors edition special items."

          Unless you realize that internet access is becoming more ubiquitous every day. So today box copies may be necessary, but that will not hold true for long.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 24 May 2011 @ 9:48am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: I had an argument like this

            im not saying its necessary, im just saying people like physical goods. people like collectors editions and boxes and maps and manuals. Sure some games let you print all that shit out depending on where you bought your digital copy but for instance: http://windows7themes.net/pics/the-witcher-2-collectors-edition.JPG

            you can buy a digital version and can print most of that out, but whats better a piece of paper with a map printed on it or a cloth map? also the figurines and night vision goggles and all that stuff isnt going away, people like it and they make good money on selling it.

            Although I know alot of people, myself included, dont really care about the physical goods. So like I said someday I think the digital versions of this type of good will out sell the physical version but I don't see the physical version completely disappearing.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            HothMonster, 24 May 2011 @ 9:59am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: I had an argument like this

            Thats funny, Lesath says a little farther down in this article's comments that he is buying the box copy of a game because its a the collectors edition, otherwise he would buy digital

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Huph, 24 May 2011 @ 8:36am

    That's because the shift in the industry was towards markets and business models where the artists were able to collect the money, rather than a gatekeeper who kept most of it (i.e., the record labels).


    Ehhh... not quite. The gatekeepers are still alive and strong in the areas where the "growth" is happening. Publishing has increased because more music is licensed to film, TV, and ads, but that money isn't necessarily making it to artists. Besides the usual publishing firms that have always taken cuts, you now have the placement companies taking enormous cuts. Film and TV music coordinators aren't out there exploring the internet and indie charts for music; a band pays *a lot* of money to have their music pitched for placement.

    Concerts are another case where gatekeepers like the ticketing companies, promotion firms, and the firms that place acts together for tours are taken larger and larger percentages. Tours are often pay-to-play for small bands; a lot of headliners increased revenue comes from the money the opening act pays for the "privilege" of opening for a big name.

    So maybe the industry is growing, but it's not at all a paradise for the artists. In this instance, I'd almost prefer labels, since they do at least give money to bands to make new music. Ticketmaster, et al does no such thing.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 8:42am

      Re:

      I wouldn't qualify it as giving money to bands to make new music. It's more like giving a loan to bands to make new music and in return they have to give up their copyright, most of the money, and their royalties until the loan (that can increase at any time) is payed off (from the royalties alone).

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Jay (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:10am

      Re:

      Yes, but there are a lot of innovations coming out. Over the weekend I heard about a few alternatives in ticketing that work for smaller avenues.

      More companies are becoming adept at finding niches.

      I'm sure that you'll see even Ticketmaster going down and becoming competitive. It just takes time.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Hephaestus (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 8:37am

    Just a little trend based on this chart.

    Cool!!! If you continue the line out for recorded music it goes to zero in 2 years ... Big Ole GRIN

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Greevar (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 8:37am

    Not just Sweden, but Sweden and Sweden?! Shocking!

    It's interesting that I find this here on TD when I just finished reading this:

    http://www.cringely.com/2011/05/netflix-too-big-to-fail/

    It seems that all traditional media is becoming obsolete. Broadcast TV, analog phone, cable TV, Sat TV, and even traditional cellular phones will eventually be surpassed by services that ride on the back of the internet. There will eventually be no "data" package to add to your mobile service, data will be your mobile service. Pay per view will be gone and replaced with Net Flix style streaming video.

    Oh, let's not forget music! It's already changing and the old way is already obsolete! Why listen to the radio, when you can just plug your mobile media player/phone into your aux jack in your car and listen to ad-free entertainment all the way to work? Even streaming could work here, retaining access to NPR for those that can't let go of their live media.

    Now, if science could just figure out quantum entanglement, we could see infinitely faster service from anywhere in the universe!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 May 2011 @ 8:58am

    It's stupid politicians that want to be around famous people. The recording industry parades around their "artists" (yes I put that in quotes) and the politicians get stars in their eyes and can't say no.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    DannyB (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:06am

    Overall Music industry grows DESPITE recording industry

    If you removed that big red line, I wonder how the orange line would change?

    I notice Internet and Mobile is climbing the fastest and is now equal to dinosaurs-R-us.

    At some point when the red line for buggy whips goes to zero and can drop no further, I wonder what the overall growth will finally look like?

    That will be a nice day!

    Either no more trolls, or trolls just lamenting over something that no longer matters.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 May 2011 @ 9:08am

    So why are we wasting so much time around the globe trying to pass laws to buck up that one obsolete segment?

    I don't know, so why bother making albums, eh? Sales are going down according to that chart, so I guess people don't care and just want to consume music via live shows.

    You guys go ahead and get the word out about this, and we'll ask bands to skip recording and just play shows instead.

    Sound good?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 24 May 2011 @ 9:15am

      Re:

      You seem to have a problem comprehending how it works. Bands recording/releasing their works drives up demand for the live music.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      HothMonster, 24 May 2011 @ 9:24am

      Re:

      with your attitude I would prefer you did neither.

      The point is if people spend less on cds they are still funneling an equal amount of money into the music industry, whether thats live shows or digital sales the same amount of money is being spent on music.

      of course you could stop recording albums in studio and do something like this / http://www.owlandbear.com/wilco-archive/ / allow fans to hook to your soundboard and record and release your shows for free, and then still release albums because you are in it for the fans and the music not because you are a money grubbing dbag who doesnt want to work for a living

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Greevar (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:28am

      Re:

      Way to get it completely wrong. No one ever said that it's the end of recording, only the end of recording as a business. Artists should still be mindful of the need to promote themselves through recorded music. How else will you know that a band is worth the $50 ticket to see their show?

      Your attempt to invalidate the argument by making it look stupid fails because you misconstrued the opposing argument, making you look stupid instead.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Howard the Duck, 24 May 2011 @ 9:29am

      Re:

      And ignore digital sales?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      The Infamous Joe (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:33am

      Re:

      You should definitely go into marketing. You can be the very first to come up with the idea of no longer making commercials, because you spend all that time and effort and then just give them away. It's gonna revolutionize the marketing sector, trust me.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Roger, 24 May 2011 @ 9:34am

    Inaccurate

    Mike, I think your opinions are not factual and ill-researched, unfortunately. Publishing is not growing - in fact, it is flat or declining in most cases with projections pointing to declines over the next few years due to royalty reporting lags. The concert industry struggled last year, and its trajectory is highly uncertain at this stage - especially ahead of the summer concert season. In fact, most bands are struggling on the road, not the opposite. And, the decline of CDs means that less money is being made on the road at merch tables.

    I'd urge you to research the music industry more.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 24 May 2011 @ 9:41am

      Re: Inaccurate

      Oh. I was confused why everything on that graph was climbing except recorded sales. I am glad you have clarified what that means. Thanks.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      The Infamous Joe (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:42am

      Re: Inaccurate

      I think your beef is with one Professor Dwayne Winseck.

      I'd urge you to RTFA.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 24 May 2011 @ 9:42am

      Re: Inaccurate

      i see the research he is basing his opinion on, where is yours?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Greevar (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:45am

      Re: Inaccurate

      You act like CD's are the pivotal item here, they're not. That also disproves any notion that bands are making less at the merchandise table, especially since it ignores the fact that there's more to a merch table than CD's. Otherwise they'd call it a CD table and not a merch table.

      Struggling concert industry? Source?

      Bands are struggling on the road? Citation needed.

      You're the only one submitting opinions without factual support and lacking of research. I'd urge you to back up your opinions with data more.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Any Mouse (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 10:31am

      Re: Inaccurate

      I was starting to wonder where the 'debunkers' and 'FUDbusters' of TD had gotten to. Thanks for proving they aren't all asleep.

      Now, you might want to go back and reread the article that points to someone else's research. This isn't Mike's research, just his commentary on it.

      Better yet!

      [citation needed]

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Jeremy (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 12:10pm

      Re: Inaccurate

      according to who is this dying? You have evidence of the contrary in front of you

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Angry Puppy (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 2:49pm

      Re: Inaccurate

      Congratulations! This is the best straw-man argument I've heard recently. You set up a false argument you present as representing, but actually having nothing to do, with the facts presented and then (try to) destroy it so as to appear to win the debate.

      First, you pick publishing and then present projections without sources or data. Then you argue about concerts and bands on the road struggling.

      Bands have always struggled on the road. The life is brutal. My girlfriend's brother literally starved to the point of illness in the late 1970's as a lead guitarist of a club band even though they were relatively successful and worked steadily for over a year.

      You also skip over the tiny fact of the world just barely recovering (and maybe not) from the biggest depression since 1930. How wouldn't the concert industry not suffer?

      You should realize this is not a chat site for a group of politicians or media hacks that head bob to anything recording industry shills say.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Lesath (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:47am

    Back to video games, I have 12 games on reserve for this year/early next year. If I could download them though XBox Live and from Blizzard I would. The only reason I go to the Gamestop now is to see the people I use to work with.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 24 May 2011 @ 9:51am

      Re:

      since you say blizzard I bet you mean Diablo 3, i wouldn't be surprised if they release that digital on day one as they have for the last few WOW releases.

      If you stop gaming on xbox and switch to PC you can probably get most of the rest of your preorders from Steam, digital w a preload

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 May 2011 @ 9:53am

    Maybe the totality of revenue associated with the "music industry" is increasing at a very modest rate, but clearly the historical source of revenue for that portion of the industry most closely associated with the creation and distribution of music is rapidly traveling downhill.

    Labels are not dumb. At this point in time they underwrite the lion's share of music being provided to the consuming public. If they lose revenue in one area you can be sure they will look elsewhere to cover the decline in revenue.

    If nothing else, this graph suggests to me the labels will surely turn their attention to 360 contracts and take a much more active role that covers the entire and useful life cycle of the performers they have signed.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Lesath (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:54am

    Oh yes, I mean Diablo 3. That was the first game from the list I had on reserve. I'll get D3 in the box cause it's gonna be the Collector's Edition. I play on the 360 because most of my friends don't have/can't afford/don't like the PC as a gaming platform.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 May 2011 @ 11:31am

    The chart is too short. Extend it back to 1988 and you will see the real losses. A short upturn in an overall losing trend doesn't make everything right.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      HothMonster, 24 May 2011 @ 11:42am

      Re:

      1988? so you are saying all the pirating from 1989 already crippled the industry? lets see your numbers from 1988 that are over 1.4 billion.

      1988?? So if they big decline is between 1988 and 1998 then it certainly wouldnt be the fault of piracy. Piracy didnt gain legs till the late 90s. Dial up piracy, really? Napster came out in 1999 so I think that is why they start where they do, that is considered by most to be the dawn of mass piracy.

      But if you have some figure from 1988 of them makeing 1.6 billion or something I would love to see your source.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased) (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 2:04pm

      Re:

      Oh yeah...after everybody upgraded (ie. repurchased) their music catalog to CDs I am certain they didn't buy the same 40 albums every year after. Pick an arbitrary year and use that as a benchmark. How about 1835-2010? I think you will see quite an increase in revenue.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Suzanne Lainson (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 1:46pm

    I'd like to see actual 2010 concert revenue

    I'm curious what the actual revenue numbers of live music in Canada turned out to be. The above graph only shows estimated 2010 figures. Also live and publishing aren't growing as fast as recorded music is declining.

    Another question I have about the graph (maybe it was already answered somewhere). It shows mobile devices. Does this mean the sale of hardware?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Angry Puppy (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 3:26pm

      Re: I'd like to see actual 2010 concert revenue

      It's the overall figure that is significant. My interpretation of the chart is that digital distribution is proportionally increasing as recorded media declines.

      I believe mobile devices meaning downloads via services like iTunes into protable MP3 players.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Suzanne Lainson (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 3:38pm

        Re: Re: I'd like to see actual 2010 concert revenue

        It's the overall figure that is significant

        And what the overall figure shows is that music industry income is the same as it was in 2004.

        I think music spending has been and will continue to be hit by the overall economy. More money going to necessities and less going to discretionary spending. That's why I am particularly interested in concert income. I don't think it will be a growth industry.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Angry Puppy (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 3:59pm

          Re: Re: Re: I'd like to see actual 2010 concert revenue

          I agree.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          darryl, 25 May 2011 @ 3:13am

          Re: Re: Re: I'd like to see actual 2010 concert revenue

          The overall, is the same OR LESS than it was in 2004, so for the 6 years between 2004 and 2010 the OVERALL market went down.

          Want did not go down was the population, disposable income, employment, or many, or GDP or inflation.

          Again, there is just no way you can claim 'growth' of a market based on that graph of statistics.


          Do you also not the massive decline in recorded music with the incline in 'internet/mobile'. ?

          The direct correlation.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            HothMonster, 25 May 2011 @ 7:50am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: I'd like to see actual 2010 concert revenue

            "Do you also not the massive decline in recorded music with the incline in 'internet/mobile'. ?

            The direct correlation."

            Now that is some english sir. Its like poetry so beautiful. Too bad it doesnt make a lick of sense.

            "Want did not go down was the population, disposable income, employment, or many, or GDP or inflation."

            Your right want did not go down, but job rates and disposable income plummeted. At least I think you are right but again I cant really understand you.

            "so for the 6 years between 2004 and 2010 the OVERALL market went down."

            yeah most other industries are still struggling to get back to prerecession numbers but the music industry seems to be back at its highwater mark and growing. But points for having one sentence that actually makes sense, thats an improvement Darryl.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              Suzanne Lainson (profile), 25 May 2011 @ 1:51pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I'd like to see actual 2010 concert revenue

              most other industries are still struggling to get back to prerecession numbers but the music industry seems to be back at its highwater mark and growing.

              That's what I am curious about. I don't think the live music portion is continuing to grow. I haven't seen the actual 2010 figures for Canada or the est. figures for 2011, but I think there have been cutbacks and will continue to be cutbacks. It makes sense to me as fuel and food costs increase, something has to give, and going to concerts is a relatively easy spending item to drop from one's budget.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Angry Puppy (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 3:16pm

    Ironic

    The recording industry often cites Canada (specifically Quebec) as the worst (next to China) source of piracy and piracy as the main reason for music industry declines thus requiring more further greater copyright laws. It's nice to see facts being reported as proving otherwise.

    The other fact often ignored by recording types is that even though it is true China and Quebec have a larger amount of illegal downloading than over political regions it is not due to the lack of copyright laws or enforcement measures. It is due to cultural content laws. The Quebec and Chinese people download content because it is the only available delivery channel. The usual retail channels for any foreign content are highly restricted.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    darryl, 24 May 2011 @ 7:37pm

    WTF - You get that from THAT ????

    how on earth can anyone with a brain look at that graph and determine the conclusion that Mike has made about it ???

    and how can so many people here be blind enough to agree with him.

    Did ANY of you ever go to school ???

    and once again, Mike provides zero references to show that overall the industry is NOT doing what Mike claims it is.

    Why not include a plot of GDP or inflation on the graph, or a comparison with some other markets, or the market in general ?


    I know why, because it would show what Mike does to get his mantra across, truth and honesty go out the window..

    which is a shame, as Mikes integrity goes with it.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Brendan (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 8:23pm

      Re: WTF - You get that from THAT ????

      You type a lot of words. Why do you do this? They are not coherent or logical.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Jay (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 9:54pm

      Re: WTF - You get that from THAT ????

      Darryl, when you get a point, people will take you seriously. You have nothing to back up your claims.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 24 May 2011 @ 10:13pm

      Re: “Mike provides zero references”

      This whole posting is a reference, to the study by professor Winseck, which you might like to examine before professing an opinion, perhaps?

      Also, notice those words in blue? Those are links. In other words, references, to “the UK, Sweden, Sweden and Norway”. That’s vahn, two, three, four, FOUR references! Ha-a-a-a-a! (In a strong Hungarian accent.)

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      techflaws.org (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 11:07pm

      Re: WTF - You get that from THAT ????

      What are you talking about brains when you clearly don't qualify?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 25 May 2011 @ 7:52am

      Re: WTF - You get that from THAT ????

      "Did ANY of you ever go to school ??? "

      Now that is funny.

      "Why not include a plot of GDP or inflation on the graph, or a comparison with some other markets, or the market in general ?"

      Mike didnt make the graph or do the research, he is just sharing the work of someone else. Since you are so smart and well educated why don't you make the graph you are talking about and show how wrong he is.

      I would LOVE to read an entire post from you.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Julian, 25 May 2011 @ 11:43am

    When the law stops representing the wishes of society

    At what point did we stop caring that the people those few of us who care enough to vote for stopped carrying forward the will of society? Why do we stand idly by while laws are enacted to curb filesharing sites and threaten their webhosts? This is the future... Giant record labels and film studios are the past. So are university textbook publishers. Next--video game developer firms like EA, Nintendo, you name it. Why pay when people are willing to band together to create and proliferate for FREE

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Suzanne Lainson (profile), 25 May 2011 @ 1:56pm

      Re: When the law stops representing the wishes of society

      Why do we stand idly by while laws are enacted to curb filesharing sites and threaten their webhosts?

      Copyright isn't a cause that is going to determine I vote for. I'm much more interested in health care and clean tech issues. However, I, too, wonder when people are going to get out and vote for what they believe in. Politics depends heavily on political funding and in the US right now the laws favor big organizations that have the money to pour into campaigns. Let's see what we can do to change that.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Duss Rodgers, 25 May 2011 @ 9:16pm

    All the more reason to stay independent...

    This is great news and confirms what I've been saying for years. It's better to not only be an indie nowadays, but to focus more on the touring aspect of your music business.

    I mean look at the stats for touring... far surpasses the distribution of music in any category. On or offline. The musician who tours in today's new music industry is going to find themselves in a much better position financially than those focusing on distribution and their online presence. Let's face it... fans want to see you play and for that privilege - they will pay.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Suzanne Lainson (profile), 25 May 2011 @ 9:39pm

      Re: All the more reason to stay independent...

      The musician who tours in today's new music industry is going to find themselves in a much better position financially than those focusing on distribution and their online presence.

      The economics of touring can be brutal, though. When fuel prices go up, not only do the bands have to spend more money to get from gig to gig, their fans have less money to spend on ticket prices. That's why I expect touring to take a hit.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 26 May 2011 @ 11:52pm

        Re: Re: All the more reason to stay independent...

        The people that read this site don't have a clue about how harsh touring is.

        People that live in their parent's basement wouldn't know what it's like to miss your family. They think life on the road is all luxury and parties. They don't understand that there is little difference between being a touring musician and being a carny or circus worker.

        Even if you tour in the plushest bus, you sleep in a space that is smaller than a coffin. You are only allowed to pee, when it comes to using the bus bathroom.

        ...unless you go rogue like Dave Matthews, and that will bring you big trouble.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          The Infamous Joe (profile), 27 May 2011 @ 4:35am

          Re: Re: Re: All the more reason to stay independent...

          I frequent this site and I feel like I have a pretty good grasp about what it's like to miss my family. I spent 4 years on a submarine, and my longest stretch of being underwater in a row is 58 days. We reset the counter when we surfaced in the middle of the ocean so someone could bring us food before we ran out, at 60 days. There are men who do it for 20 plus years. Next time you pull out a cell phone or turn on the radio try and remember that you get to make money doing what you love, and you have it better than you think.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.