Lunch with AJ & JC (by Skype) lottery?

[Deepwaters]

Originally Posted by aaroniu31

wow....so I see this thread as totally pointless and off track haha. but hey we all run into those. But it is interesting watching you two battle to the death about CD revenues.

Look, I don't mean to be rude, and I recognize that you're young and have a good excuse, but that is one of the most clueless things I've ever seen posted here.

This thread is not "off track" and it certainly isn't "pointless." Did you not understand why the OP presented the idea of the lottery? Does it completely escape your comprehension what that has to do with declining music sales and revenues? Can't you see that the entire idea was to create an alternative way for a musician we admire to make money? And so a general discussion of the realities of the music business is completely on target?

Nor is anyone "battling to the death." If you think that Lefty and I have ever behaved towards one another with the slightest degree of animosity, you're completely wrong. We don't even seriously disagree here, and although I remain convinced that the future of the music business just as in publishing is both digital and decentralized, I am inclined to bow to his superior knowledge of the realities of making music as it exists right at this moment.

You're the one who's off-track here, not the thread.

[User22]

Originally Posted by Deepwaters

Look, I don't mean to be rude, and I recognize that you're young and have a good excuse, but that is one of the most clueless things I've ever seen posted here.

This thread is not "off track" and it certainly isn't "pointless." Did you not understand why the OP presented the idea of the lottery? Does it completely escape your comprehension what that has to do with declining music sales and revenues? Can't you see that the entire idea was to create an alternative way for a musician we admire to make money? And so a general discussion of the realities of the music business is completely on target?

Nor is anyone "battling to the death." If you think that Lefty and I have ever behaved towards one another with the slightest degree of animosity, you're completely wrong. We don't even seriously disagree here, and although I remain convinced that the future of the music business just as in publishing is both digital and decentralized, I am inclined to bow to his superior knowledge of the realities of making music as it exists right at this moment.

You're the one who's off-track here, not the thread.

Sorry I like listing:
1)yes i'm young and this is probably why I look stupid to you.
2)I guess I'm translating this thread in the wrong way.
3)You can ask any of the regular guys like Plaz,Jung,Joey,Uni on chat that I have the weirdest/Totally exaggerated ways of saying what things are like. So yah sorry that "battling to the death." was the wrong choice of words.
4)Maybe I got lost in your guys earlier posts so thats why the whole Lottery all the way to the future of the music business just as in publishing is both digital and decentralized thing.
5)But yah your right, I'm not even contributing to this thread so I'll go, and I have no idea why or how I got in here haha.

Sorry If I messed things up, O and I'm really tired and thats the reason I usually write stupid pointless stuff

[lefty12357]

@aaroniu31, it's cool, don't worry about it. As Deep said, we are hardly arguing. As a matter of fact we are in pretty much total agreement on the main points of the discussion. I'm just adding a few details from my perspective for informational purposes only. But those details still support Deep's conclusions.

[User22]

yah I guess I just take fact-stating as arguing sometimes haha

[FanDeAliFee]

Originally Posted by Deepwaters

Edit: Doing the math...

Doesn't add up. If 95% of downloaded music was pirated, that should have resulted in a MUCH larger drop in revenue.

Ben pointed out the fallacy in that inference. As price falls (e.g. to "zero" with pirated wares), elasticity in demand is manifested.

Originally Posted by Deepwaters

the difference in price from CD to download would need to be... i.e. downloads cost only 12% of CDs

That's not so. Here is the correct calculation.

"Legitimate digital sources accounted for [only]
27 percent of recording industry REVENUE." (NOT UNITS)

Assumptions:
CD-equivalent units purchased per year (N) constant
CD prices (P) constant

Define:
D as the number of non-CD units now sold per year
d as the fraction of non-CD units sold now = D/N
r is the ratio of the non-CD to CD price for a unit

Original revenue R(0) = NP
Current revenue R(t) = (N-D)P+D(rP)

Stipulating R(t) = (1-0.55=0.45)R(0) meaning
[1] (N-D)P+DrP = 0.45NP
and stipulating
[2] DrP = 0.27((N-D)P+DrP)

Divide [1] & [2] by P

[3] (N-D)+Dr = 0.45N
[4] Dr = 0.27((N-D)+Dr)

Divide [3] & [4] by N

[5] (1-d)+dr = 0.45
[6] dr = 0.27((1-d)+dr)

Solving [5] for d in terms of r

[7] 0.55 + d(r-1) = 0
[8] d = 0.55/(1-r)

Note d<=1 so therefore r<=0.45
Note r>=0 so therefore d>=0.55

Simplifying [6]

[9] 0.73dr = 0.27(1-d)

Substitute d from [8] into [9]

[10] (0.73x0.55)r/(1-r) = 0.27(1-0.55/(1-r))

Multiply [10] by (1-r)

[11] (0.73x0.55)r = 0.27(1-r) - (0.27x0.55)

And solve for r

[12] (0.73x0.55+0.27)r = 0.27(1-0.55)
[13] r = (0.27x0.45)/(0.73x0.55+0.27)
= 0.18[0938198064035740878629932985853]

Use [8] to obtain d

[14] d = 0.6715

To account for the stipulations and assumptions, in round numbers,
About 2 of 3 sales have to be non-CD
And a non-CD price must be 1/5 of the CD equivalent

But aren't ACTUAL non-CD prices always MUCH closer to CD prices?
(See below for some documentation of this.)

(One interesting possibility is this: Did buyers who liked only one song
on a CD always buy the whole CD anyway? If so, then by selling pro
rata by the song via non-CD means, sales can fall a lot even in the
absence of any displacement by piracy.)

=======

For fun I dug out and looked at numbers directly from the RIAA here:
http://76.74.24.142/1D212C0E-408B-F7...F5871C369D.pdf
as cited at http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/conte...75f2b49bfe450c

See the file for subtleties. Note also some slight
differences from some previously reported numbers.

(in millions) year 2008

Digital
Download Album
(Units Shipped) 56.9
(Dollar Value) 568.9
=> Average price $10.00
(sales of singles are about double in size)

Physical
Compact Disk
(Units Shipped) 384.7
(Dollar Value) 5,471.3
=> Average price $14.22

Non-CD album prices are 70% of CD prices
(NOT 18% as in the simple model calculation above)

Physical (CD-like) units (in millions) by year

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
847.0 938.9 942.5 881.9 803.3 746.0 767.0 705.4 619.7 511.1 384.7

CD units in 2008, relative to 1999, are down to 41%
(NOT 33% as in the simple model calculation above)

% of Shipments (value, not units - RF)

2005 2006 2007 2008
Physical 91% 84% 77% 68%
Digital 9% 16% 23% 32%

=======

Deep, in fact I do very much appreciate your point
about the potential input savings in non-CD distribution.
But consumer prices are not very different, as noted above.

That was NOT the case for encyclopedias, as I discussed
several years ago here:
Libraries in transition from paper to electronics

And since you are an e-book guy, Deep, you might enjoy
the new page I just assembled here:
A very incomplete history (500-2010) of intellectual property law, the codex and the e-book

=======

Aside: Note when I asked...
Would you pay to watch an Alizée video on YouTube?

I got some answers like these:

"kinda pointless... these days movies, music, etc leak
even before they are finished..."

"They say that time is money. Considering the time I've
spent watching Alizée videos, I would say I've already
paid quite a bit."

Do you think these answers would make the RIAA feel better? <G>

=======

Of course, now there is another challenge facing people who want
to earn income creating new art which is entertaining, but not
especially of our times.

With digital storage and communication now so dirt cheap, ALL of culture
from all eras is coming online for instant gratification - some of it free,
some ad-supported and some fee-based. The Wall Street Journal
has an interesting perspective piece here:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126136236068199631.html

It notes that now that anyone with a laptop has near-instant access
to a near-infinite array of art objects, it's becoming harder for anyone to
sculpt the tastes of millions of people into anything remotely resembling a
lemming-like consensus.

Thus one will compete for the attention of people with damn near
everything that has EVER been created - including almost limitless
amounts of virtually free stuff out of copyright!

[User22]

Originally Posted by docdtv

Ben pointed out the fallacy in that inference. As price falls (e.g. to "zero" with pirated wares), elasticity in demand is manifested.



That's not so. Here is the correct calculation.

"Legitimate digital sources accounted for [only]
27 percent of recording industry REVENUE." (NOT UNITS)

Assumptions:
CD-equivalent units purchased per year (N) constant
CD prices (P) constant

Define:
D as the number of non-CD units now sold per year
d as the fraction of non-CD units sold now = D/N
r is the ratio of the non-CD to CD price for a unit

Original revenue R(0) = NP
Current revenue R(t) = (N-D)P+D(rP)

Stipulating R(t) = (1-0.55=0.45)R(0) meaning
[1] (N-D)P+DrP = 0.45NP
and stipulating
[2] DrP = 0.27((N-D)P+DrP)

Divide [1] & [2] by P

[3] (N-D)+Dr = 0.45N
[4] Dr = 0.27((N-D)+Dr)

Divide [3] & [4] by N

[5] (1-d)+dr = 0.45
[6] dr = 0.27((1-d)+dr)

Solving [5] for d in terms of r

[7] 0.55 + d(r-1) = 0
[8] d = 0.55/(1-r)

Note d<=1 so therefore r<=0.45
Note r>=0 so therefore d>=0.55

Simplifying [6]

[9] 0.73dr = 0.27(1-d)

Substitute d from [8] into [9]

[10] (0.73x0.55)r/(1-r) = 0.27(1-0.55/(1-r))

Multiply [10] by (1-r)

[11] (0.73x0.55)r = 0.27(1-r) - (0.27x0.55)

And solve for r

[12] (0.73x0.55+0.27)r = 0.27(1-0.55)
[13] r = (0.27x0.45)/(0.73x0.55+0.27)
= 0.18[0938198064035740878629932985853]

Use [8] to obtain d

[14] d = 0.6715

To account for the stipulations and assumptions, in round numbers,
About 2 of 3 sales have to be non-CD
And a non-CD price must be 1/5 of the CD equivalent

But aren't ACTUAL non-CD prices always MUCH closer to CD prices?
(See below for some documentation of this.)

(One interesting possibility is this: Did buyers who liked only one song
on a CD always buy the whole CD anyway? If so, then by selling pro
rata by the song via non-CD means, sales can fall a lot even in the
absence of any displacement by piracy.)

=======

For fun I dug out and looked at numbers directly from the RIAA here:
http://76.74.24.142/1D212C0E-408B-F7...F5871C369D.pdf
as cited at http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/conte...75f2b49bfe450c

See the file for subtleties. Note also some slight
differences from some previously reported numbers.

(in millions) year 2008

Digital
Download Album
(Units Shipped) 56.9
(Dollar Value) 568.9
=> Average price $10.00
(sales of singles are about double in size)

Physical
Compact Disk
(Units Shipped) 384.7
(Dollar Value) 5,471.3
=> Average price $14.22

Non-CD album prices are 70% of CD prices
(NOT 18% as in the simple model calculation above)

Physical (CD-like) units (in millions) by year

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
847.0 938.9 942.5 881.9 803.3 746.0 767.0 705.4 619.7 511.1 384.7

CD units in 2008, relative to 1999, are down to 41%
(NOT 33% as in the simple model calculation above)

% of Shipments (value, not units - RF)

2005 2006 2007 2008
Physical 91% 84% 77% 68%
Digital 9% 16% 23% 32%

=======

Deep, in fact I do very much appreciate your point
about the potential input savings in non-CD distribution.
But consumer prices are not very different, as noted above.

That was NOT the case for encyclopedias, as I discussed
several years ago here:
Libraries in transition from paper to electronics

And since you are an e-book guy, Deep, you might enjoy
the new page I just assembled here:
A very incomplete history (500-2010) of intellectual property law, the codex and the e-book

=======

Aside: Note when I asked...
Would you pay to watch an Alizée video on YouTube?

I got some answers like these:

"kinda pointless... these days movies, music, etc leak
even before they are finished..."

"They say that time is money. Considering the time I've
spent watching Alizée videos, I would say I've already
paid quite a bit."

Do you think these answers would make the RIAA feel better? <G>

=======

Of course, now there is another challenge facing people who want
to earn income creating new art which is entertaining, but not
especially of our times.

With digital storage and communication now so dirt cheap, ALL of culture
from all eras is coming online for instant gratification - some of it free,
some ad-supported and some fee-based. The Wall Street Journal
has an interesting perspective piece here:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126136236068199631.html

It notes that now that anyone with a laptop has near-instant access
to a near-infinite array of art objects, it's becoming harder for anyone to
sculpt the tastes of millions of people into anything remotely resembling a
lemming-like consensus.

Thus one will compete for the attention of people with damn near
everything that has EVER been created - including almost limitless
amounts of virtually free stuff out of copyright!

My brain just crashed from all those Physics problems and that National Spelling Bee-grade vocabulary haha....but interesting stuff there, thx Doc!

[FanDeAliFee]

Originally Posted by docdtv

Supposedly, Alizée "Toc de Macintosh" Jacotey herself said

Mp3 players are not at the source of piracy, it's the price of progress and the Internet... we can't do anything about it, we made a lot of laws, it was a battle lost before it begun, unless we go back to vinyl records. I think we should prepare for the death of the CD...

We hear you, princess, and are struggling to brainstorm plan B!

It seems that the <a href="http://alizeeamerica.com/forums/showthread.php?p=150660"><i>Opendisc</i></a> initiative is an attempt to address the "file-sharing" crisis killing CD sales which uses a methodology in the spirit of the very suggestion made at the start of this thread. (I will abstain from offering a technical analysis, in the hopes of helping this method succeed as long as possible.)

But another revenue stream exists for <i>celebrated</i> artists as well. Long before <i>YouTube</i> and other free video hosting sites threatened the legitimate marketing of movies, a wiseman named <i>Yogurt</i> explained the way forward:
<center><object width="660" height="525"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/xvmZ9SPcTzU&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&border=1&showinfo= 0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/xvmZ9SPcTzU&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&border=1&showinfo= 0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="660" height="525"></embed></object></center>

[Ruroshen]

Heh. I would totally buy Alizée, The Breakfast Cereal.

[FanDeAliFee]

Originally Posted by Ruroshen

Heh. I would totally buy Alizée, The Breakfast Cereal.

Evil people trying to wreck Alizée's business prospects have suggested that consuming same would give you WIND. I don't buy it, do you?

By the way, some woman named Ensler or something like that encouraged me to ask you: What would <i>Alizée, The Breakfast Cereal</i> taste like? A brief answer will suffice; there's no need for a whole soliloquy!

And you do know that John Harvey Kellogg, MD, invented Corn Flakes™ (the breakfast cereal) to <a href="http://sexuality.about.com/b/2006/02/20/100-years-of-fighting-masturbation-one-spoonful-at-a-time.htm">help curb</a> the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Harvey_Kellogg#.22Warfare_with_passion.22">"d readed affliction of onanism,"</a> right? (Gosh - and here I had thought that supposedly <i>idle hands were the Devil's instruments</i> - go figure!) Do you think the proposed product would prove at all useful in this regard?

P.S. See also <a href="http://alizeeamerica.com/forums/showthread.php?p=149857"><i> Alizée, good enough to eat!</i></a>

[FanDeAliFee]

Originally Posted by lefty12357

Check this article out. http://emusician.com/interviews/indu...r_panos_panay/ It covers some of what is going on in the music industry, but the last section is really pertinent to the discussion about artists communicating with fans, and how important it's becoming for success.

(I have nothing to add; this is a cross-posting.)