If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy) Dumbass Wall Street says it's just come up with a revolutionary idea: Free music with profits coming from concerts. You know, the idea that's been pushed by music fans for well over a decade   (allthingsd.com) divider line 56
More: Dumbass, free music, Wall Street, profits  
•       •       •

1764 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 31 Oct 2011 at 10:46 AM   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»   |    Get this fabulous T-Shirt and impress the methane out of your friends! shirt it!



56 Comments   (+0 »)
   

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2011-10-31 09:15:49 AM
That might work, until fans figure out how to steal concerts.
 
SphericalTime [TotalFark]
2011-10-31 10:08:49 AM
ZAZ: That might work, until fans figure out how to steal concerts.

Totally a glass half full outlook you got there, ZAZ.
 
The Stealth Hippopotamus [TotalFark]
2011-10-31 10:32:48 AM
What about the old guys who cant tour 300 days a year? Cant we think about the old guys?!
 
king_nacho [TotalFark]
2011-10-31 10:49:04 AM
Many smaller artists are only able to keep going based on the album sales. Unless you are a big time headliner, this wouldn't be a good deal.
 
Fano
2011-10-31 10:49:43 AM
The Stealth Hippopotamus: What about the old guys who cant tour 300 days a year? Cant we think about the old guys?!

They belong in a museum.

Or, we can get a Chuck E. Cheese animatronic version to play.
 
PanicMan
2011-10-31 10:49:45 AM
The Stealth Hippopotamus: What about the old guys who cant tour 300 days a year? Cant we think about the old guys?!

Sell t-shirts. (new window)
 
tallguywithglasseson [TotalFark]
2011-10-31 10:54:14 AM
By which they mean, they have to figure out a way to take the money the bands are already making on concerts.

Oh and scalpers gauging customers is a problem. Let's just charge $100/ticket to begin with.
 
ddam
2011-10-31 10:58:55 AM
king_nacho: Many smaller artists are only able to keep going based on the album sales. Unless you are a big time headliner, this wouldn't be a good deal.

If those "smaller artists" can't pack a club of 100-300 people then they weren't making money off albums either.
 
LectertheChef
2011-10-31 11:02:43 AM
So basically, they think the major labels are going to start doing what successful independent acts have been doing for years. Hell, the old punk bands used to treat their albums as fliers, a way to get people to come to their shows. Nothing new under the sun I suppose. Personally, I'd like to see fewer artists taking major label deals, and taking the independent/small label route.
 
HotIgneous Intruder
2011-10-31 11:04:29 AM
Because music through tiny speakers or piezo speakers is just farking awesome.

/Misses the old Kenwood and Pioneer floor speakers.
//My lawn, off it, etc.
///Tired of the shrill caterwauling that emanates from tiny speakers.
 
theorellior [TotalFark]
2011-10-31 11:04:58 AM
Fano: Or, we can get a Chuck E. Cheese animatronic version to play.

It's my opinion that the Rolling Stones all died in a horrific bus crash in 1991 and the label successfully hushed it up and started using expert systems to produce generic Stones albums and animatronics to do concerts.
 
barneyfifesbullet
2011-10-31 11:08:46 AM
Some of GGV's investments include Alibaba Group, Pandora Media

So, an investor in Pandora thinks music should be free? Shocker.

So, what products are you guys offering for free?
 
Karma Curmudgeon
2011-10-31 11:09:35 AM
t3.gstatic.com

O hai!
 
qsblues
2011-10-31 11:13:14 AM
theorellior: Fano: Or, we can get a Chuck E. Cheese animatronic version to play.

It's my opinion that the Rolling Stones all died in a horrific bus crash in 1991 and the label successfully hushed it up and started using expert systems to produce generic Stones albums and animatronics to do concerts.

Hmmm. Kinda like KISS?
 
SixPaperJoint
2011-10-31 11:14:56 AM
king_nacho: Many smaller artists are only able to keep going based on the album sales. Unless you are a big time headliner, this wouldn't be a good deal.

You got any data to back this up? Cuz, this is not my experience with bands or being in them. Unless you are talking about the CDs we, my band, sells at our shows. You know, the CDs we made, mixed and produced by ourselves. That money generated puts some gas in our tank or some tasty breakfast sandwiches, maybe enough to buy a bag of local flora, but we don't rely on that money. The CDs are mostly promo material. We have noticed a cool trend though, for every CD we give away we see at least 3 more people at that venue when we come back. Thus, they now have mostly turned in to give-aways at our shows now.
 
Poorlytoldjoke
2011-10-31 11:18:23 AM
here's an idea. Buy the music you enjoy. Pretty simple. Don't buy what you don't enjoy. The internet has created this huge group of freeloaders who don't mind paying 5 bucks for a cup of coffee but don't respect music enough to pay 12 bucks for an album.

Oh, and if you want to complain about how the bands you like only have one or two good songs per album, you have shiat taste in music and you should just listen to the radio.
 
EatsCrayons
2011-10-31 11:19:38 AM
ddam: If those "smaller artists" can't pack a club of 100-300 people then they weren't making money off albums either.

Not true. I've worked with two indie artists who were making a living wage off CD sales, digital downloads, and film/TV licensing. But their fan bases were overseas. Both developed their followings as a result of their songs being featured in movies and foreign TV commercials.

No one gives a shiat about them domestically, but as self-publishing artists they can't afford to tour overseas. They've done radio interviews (not live) by phone though.
 
SixPaperJoint
2011-10-31 11:21:09 AM
theorellior: Fano: Or, we can get a Chuck E. Cheese animatronic version to play.

It's my opinion that the Rolling Stones all died in a horrific bus crash in 1991 and the label successfully hushed it up and started using expert systems to produce generic Stones albums and animatronics to do concerts.

Dude, that's what happened to Metallica in my world. Same year too, while promoting the black album. They died as rock legends: drunk, young and on top of their game.
 
Happy Hours [TotalFark]
2011-10-31 11:23:33 AM
Karma Curmudgeon: [t3.gstatic.com image 231x218]

O hai!

One big difference - instead of having a taper's section they will have snipers with recording device locators to take out anyone trying to record the shows.
 
moralpanic
2011-10-31 11:24:16 AM
king_nacho: Many smaller artists are only able to keep going based on the album sales. Unless you are a big time headliner, this wouldn't be a good deal.

BS. You have this entirely backwards. Smaller artists make almost nothing from album sales, how could they? It's the recording companies that write up the contracts and distribute the music.
 
there4igraham
2011-10-31 11:34:21 AM
king_nacho: Many smaller artists are only able to keep going based on the album sales. Unless you are a big time headliner, this wouldn't be a good deal.

Do you know how much it costs a smaller group or artist to record an album? In many cases bands gig and tour to raise money to make that album which in turn they'll sell at shows because they can't afford to distribute it.
 
Interrupted Infinitum
2011-10-31 11:34:29 AM
HotIgneous Intruder: /Misses the old Kenwood and Pioneer floor speakers.
//My lawn, off it, etc.
///Tired of the shrill caterwauling that emanates from tiny speakers.


Please. I am 20 and I have a pair of Wharfedale W4's in my room and use Sennheiser HD 518's for headphones.

/Spending a bit of cash on good audio stuff is one of the best things you can do for yourself IMO
 
0x1a4
2011-10-31 11:43:48 AM
now just get rid of ticketbastard...
 
Tom Paulin
2011-10-31 12:06:44 PM
I have one main problem with this:

There is the potential that the big studio's will screw over the consumers. How will we get this free music? Most likely digital downloads. But, what if they give it as really low bitrate, crappy stuff? So you complain about the quality and 'sorry, but it's free so you'll get what we give you'. I'd rather pay $20 for a decent album and know that it's at least decent quality than have no option but to take some crappy digital alternative.

Sure, arguably it doesn't matter too much with a lot of pop music, especially for the people listening too it on MP3 players with crappy earbuds. But what about music where the artists have put a lot of effort into it? And the fans who have decent stereo systems?

This could crush the ability to listen to music at a decent audio quality.
 
RealityChuck
2011-10-31 12:17:29 PM
Won't work, unless you like Lady Gaga. Most concert tours don't make money (a handful will make millions, of course, but there's never more than a dozen acts at a time that can do that). And this means that flamboyant showmanship will be far more important than musical talent.

There will be less music, and it will all sound the same. It's already happening and thinking this is going to be good for the audience -- let alone the artists -- is absurd on the face of it.

You get what you pay for. If you want only free music, then you'll get worthless music.
 
Broktun
2011-10-31 12:21:23 PM
So, I took my 14 year old daughter to see a show at the 9:30 club last weekend.

The Maine and Taking Back Sunday were the two bands playing, and the show was sold out. I'm not a fan of either band but The Maine has better songs, and Taking Back Sunday had a better sound and stage presence.

Capacity of the club is 1200, I figure 200 tix were given away as promotions or whatever.

So 1,000 tix at $25 (not including taxes and "fees") would be $25,000. I assume the house gets a cut (plus beer/liquor sales). The bands get to keep their tee shirt sales.

Does anyone with knowledge of club touring know what type of money each band would have made for the evening?
 
Kanemano
2011-10-31 12:38:53 PM
Broktun: So, I took my 14 year old daughter to see a show at the 9:30 club last weekend.

The Maine and Taking Back Sunday were the two bands playing, and the show was sold out. I'm not a fan of either band but The Maine has better songs, and Taking Back Sunday had a better sound and stage presence.

Capacity of the club is 1200, I figure 200 tix were given away as promotions or whatever.

So 1,000 tix at $25 (not including taxes and "fees") would be $25,000. I assume the house gets a cut (plus beer/liquor sales). The bands get to keep their tee shirt sales.

Does anyone with knowledge of club touring know what type of money each band would have made for the evening?

Depending on the promoter, the band could have had a portion of the gate, venue usually only takes 25%,
liquor sales is usually all venue,
T-shirts and CD sales are sometimes all with the band or split with the venue,
promo tickets are usually traded for advertisement on the radio or giveaways
 
barneyfifesbullet
2011-10-31 12:46:37 PM
Kanemano: T-shirts and CD sales are sometimes all with the band or split with the venue

Merch often split with venue and promoter. Band just adds their cuts onto price of shirt. It's why t shirts cost $40 at concerts.
 
Eternal Virgin
2011-10-31 12:46:55 PM
I'm too shy to go to concerts. :(
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2011-10-31 12:47:59 PM
SphericalTime

I own a despair.com mug with a line marked "this glass is now half empty."
 
Kanemano
2011-10-31 12:53:24 PM
barneyfifesbullet: Kanemano: T-shirts and CD sales are sometimes all with the band or split with the venue

Merch often split with venue and promoter. Band just adds their cuts onto price of shirt. It's why t shirts cost $40 at concerts.

Thanks for that I used to work in advertisement not in promotions, but the promoter still walks away with $20,000 if successful,(big if) say $10,000 going to the bands (Usually guaranteed, paid in advanced) and they get to do it again the day after tomorrow some other place 200 miles down the road.
 
Daraymann
2011-10-31 12:54:13 PM
That might work until you realize a lot of artists make all their money from concerts. As soon as "Wall Street" starts pulling more money off of that, you get little more then slave labor.
 
Kirk's_Toupee
2011-10-31 12:57:21 PM
no free music will not make us less angry.
 
struct [TotalFark]
2011-10-31 01:08:04 PM
Wall Street is in the music business now?
 
Fano
2011-10-31 01:23:47 PM
RealityChuck: Won't work, unless you like Lady Gaga. Most concert tours don't make money (a handful will make millions, of course, but there's never more than a dozen acts at a time that can do that). And this means that flamboyant showmanship will be far more important than musical talent.

There will be less music, and it will all sound the same. It's already happening and thinking this is going to be good for the audience -- let alone the artists -- is absurd on the face of it.

You get what you pay for. If you want only free music, then you'll get worthless music.

Eh, the hobos at the park play pretty good covers
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2011-10-31 02:01:52 PM
As soon as "Wall Street" starts pulling more money off of that, you get little more then slave labor.

I thought Ticketmaster already sliced a huge wad off the top of the pile of cash.
 
sonofASDF
2011-10-31 02:28:51 PM
Poorlytoldjoke: here's an idea. Buy the music you enjoy. Pretty simple. Don't buy what you don't enjoy. The internet has created this huge group of freeloaders who don't mind paying 5 bucks for a cup of coffee but don't respect music enough to pay 12 bucks for an album.

Oh, and if you want to complain about how the bands you like only have one or two good songs per album, you have shiat taste in music and you should just listen to the radio.

THIS!
 
Mr.Poops
2011-10-31 02:31:03 PM
Broktun: So, I took my 14 year old daughter to see a show at the 9:30 club last weekend.

The Maine and Taking Back Sunday were the two bands playing, and the show was sold out. I'm not a fan of either band but The Maine has better songs, and Taking Back Sunday had a better sound and stage presence.

Capacity of the club is 1200, I figure 200 tix were given away as promotions or whatever.

So 1,000 tix at $25 (not including taxes and "fees") would be $25,000. I assume the house gets a cut (plus beer/liquor sales). The bands get to keep their tee shirt sales.

Does anyone with knowledge of club touring know what type of money each band would have made for the evening?

Venues take a cut to cover personnel and advertising. They also take a cut off merch sales.

Now let's say the venue takes 7,000 off the top of that 25,000 bringing it down to 18,000 per band. Each band member probably gets a decent cut -- it differs from band to band and who has songwriting rights but say they each take home 1,500 and the rest of the money goes towards self-promotion, gas, bills, roadies and all that other stuff people don't think about. 1,500 isn't bad for a night of playing music.

But in a ruthless business, most bands fade into obscurity after 5 years.
 
Dee Snarl
2011-10-31 03:02:06 PM
Poorlytoldjoke:
Oh, and if you want to complain about how the bands you like only have one or two good songs per album, you have shiat taste in music and you should just listen to the radio.

Ha. So much this.
 
MrEricSir
2011-10-31 03:05:42 PM
Daraymann: That might work until you realize a lot of artists make all their money from concerts. As soon as "Wall Street" starts pulling more money off of that, you get little more then slave labor.

THIS.

Slavery is profitable for the slave owners, so people who want to make the big bucks will always choose slavery (or something damn close to it) over any form of profit sharing.
 
Rent Party
2011-10-31 03:09:02 PM
there4igraham: king_nacho: Many smaller artists are only able to keep going based on the album sales. Unless you are a big time headliner, this wouldn't be a good deal.

Do you know how much it costs a smaller group or artist to record an album? In many cases bands gig and tour to raise money to make that album which in turn they'll sell at shows because they can't afford to distribute it.

It's actually quite cheap these days thanks to digital technology. Where you spend the money is on the engineer and producer (the people that know how to use that gear), and those guys are starving, too.

If you can't get a decent 10 track album done for less than $5K these days, you're doing it wrong.
 
Reverend Monkeypants
2011-10-31 03:16:12 PM
Poorlytoldjoke: here's an idea. Buy the music you enjoy. Pretty simple. Don't buy what you don't enjoy. The internet has created this huge group of freeloaders who don't mind paying 5 bucks for a cup of coffee but don't respect music enough to pay 12 bucks for an album.

So true.

/musician, and crying into his fair trade coffee
 
foo monkey
2011-10-31 04:01:37 PM
Total revenues for CDs, vinyl, cassettes, and digital downloads worldwide dropped 25 percent from $38.6 billion in 1999 to $27.5 billion in 2008...

Um, Take digital downloads out of there and tell me what the numbers say. I'm pretty sure everyone was pirating music off Napster in 1999. That's grown into a legit multi-billion dollar business. Meanwhile physical media's gone in the shiatter.

Gross? Net? Does it take into account production and distribution costs? I hate these farkers.
 
missiv
2011-10-31 04:33:41 PM
myoo.com
John Parry Barlow is amused and happy about this "new" musical theory brought forth by Wall Street.
 
dontbreakthebend [TotalFark]
2011-10-31 04:36:05 PM
I've been saying this for years, but mostly for my own selfish reasons. At the beginning of the Napster phenomenon, I thought that file sharing would actually save music. The way I saw it, two things would happen if artists no longer made money off of their records:

1) The recording industry would change the way they produce records. They would no longer drop six to seven figures to enlist the help of guys like Tom Lord Alge and Andy Wallace for mixing and mastering. Ultimately, I figured that would mean that albums (mainly rock) would go back to a more organic sound, not the super-compressed radio ready fare that we are used to.

2) If artists could only make money off of licensing, touring, and merchandise, then the studio creations would cease to exist. Most hip hop (not all) would suffer after fans realized that 50 dollars to watch a rapper's posse wave towels in the air and shout out rhymes is not worth it. The real artists--those who can write, produce, and PERFORM their work--would be the ones that would prosper. The 13 year old in his basement would again wish to become a real musician instead of learning to master sequencing programs on his computer.

Well, I was wrong. Dead wrong. File sharing has allowed artists to operate free from labels and still become successful, but nothing has stifled the hacks. I suppose that the hacks have always been around and will continue to exist, but it seems that these days, we have a lot more shiat to choose from.

I guess the thing to remember is that artists never really made that much from record sales in the first place. I may be mistaken, but I always remember hearing that bands on major labels used to take home about 8% of a record sale. And a lot of the initial sales went to paying back the label for the advance they received upon signing. So maybe things aren't that different.

If there is anything that has ruined music today, it is the mp3 player. I know that for me, it changed the way I listened to music. instead of absorbing an album, I would make quick judgements because I had such easy access to so many other songs. Certainly, other people have noticed this. Could you even imagine a band like Led Zepplin or Yes being successful today? I can't. Nobody would spend enough time with the music to really appreciate it.

I'm only 28, so I do not know what it was like when those records came out, but it seemed like a record release was an event. People would spend hours with headphones on while they studied the artwork. Perhaps I'm idealizing the past. Am I? We will never return to that, no matter what the industry does. Popular music has become an imitation of itself, relegated to hooks and catch phrases, and free music will not change that.
 
BigMevy
2011-10-31 06:10:09 PM
king_nacho: Many smaller artists are only able to keep going based on the album sales. Unless you are a big time headliner, this wouldn't be a good deal.

I'm not in the music biz, and don't claim to be an expert, (though I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night) so I could be wrong. But back in the day, most artists "made" money on album sales. Generally speaking, most tours didn't really make money, what they did was drum up a fanbase and got the music out there so people would buy the albums. I'm sure your major headliners will make music off tours, but I would doubt that a lot of your mid-range and small venue artists make much.

It seems to me in this day and age, where music can easily be uploaded to the internet and even live performances, the reverse of this proposition would become true. It almost makes touring unnecessary to get the music out there, or at least less necessary. A successful internet marketing strategy can turn virtual unknowns to overnight sensations. Not to mention it cuts down the expenses of album production, distribution, manufacturing, etc.

Of course if folks go out and download said music via pirated means without paying for it, not only will artists not be touring but they won't be uploading music either.

We're going to be stuck listening to the likes of that Rebecca Black chick in another decade or so.
 
Knara
2011-10-31 06:33:29 PM
king_nacho: Many smaller artists are only able to keep going based on the album sales. Unless you are a big time headliner, this wouldn't be a good deal.

Those "smaller artists" are using the wrong business model entirely by going through a major label.

It's more possible than ever to be an actual DIY indie band and keep most of your revenue.
 
marksman
2011-10-31 06:55:33 PM
Broktun: So, I took my 14 year old daughter to see a show at the 9:30 club last weekend.

The Maine and Taking Back Sunday were the two bands playing, and the show was sold out. I'm not a fan of either band but The Maine has better songs, and Taking Back Sunday had a better sound and stage presence.

Capacity of the club is 1200, I figure 200 tix were given away as promotions or whatever.

So 1,000 tix at $25 (not including taxes and "fees") would be $25,000. I assume the house gets a cut (plus beer/liquor sales). The bands get to keep their tee shirt sales.

Does anyone with knowledge of club touring know what type of money each band would have made for the evening?

Bands usually get a set fee per show. The rest goes to the club. My buddies band toured. They got about a grand per show, but they were playing 300-500 seat clubs. They made another couple hundred per show from merchandise. It's not the easiest life on the road....
 
kab
2011-10-31 07:16:50 PM
Here's an even better one. Stop signing record contracts which only allow you a fraction of the money that should be going to you.

You'll have artistic freedom, and wind up avoiding fair weather fans who demand to be told what to listen to by the corporate side of the industry.
 
narkor
2011-10-31 07:54:41 PM
Pink Floyd lost a ton of money off its tours and Wierd Al Yankovic (who you'd think would have the sort of audience that would support this model) barely breaks even on his.
 
Displayed 50 of 56 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

Redisplay/refresh comments

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
From the Fark Shop:
More from the Fark Shop »