CloudatCost Mobile App Released
-
They've made out well from me, I have rebought so many CDs that I own just because I am lazy and don't want to deal with digging them out and ripping them and moving the music around. Amazon makes a lot of money purely on convenience from me.
-
I buy Amazon when I can but iTunes has a lot Amazon doesn't, and a lot of artists put everything on iTunes but not everything on Amazon. Sadly...
-
@thanksajdotcom said:
I buy Amazon when I can but iTunes has a lot Amazon doesn't, and a lot of artists put everything on iTunes but not everything on Amazon. Sadly...
I consider those to be artists that I don't care about. If they are going to be tech snobs, I'll be a financial one.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@thanksajdotcom said:
I buy Amazon when I can but iTunes has a lot Amazon doesn't, and a lot of artists put everything on iTunes but not everything on Amazon. Sadly...
I consider those to be artists that I don't care about. If they are going to be tech snobs, I'll be a financial one.
I don't understand it personally. However, I can't entirely blame them. The iTunes market has much higher exposure than Amazon does.
-
@thanksajdotcom said:
I don't understand it personally. However, I can't entirely blame them. The iTunes market has much higher exposure than Amazon does.
Can't blame them for releasing on iTunes. That's fine. But releasing ONLY on iTunes means they are either snubbing others or out to make a point to support Apple. It's crazy. Why would a musician make their career about supporting a specific technology to the detriment of their own careers?
-
Seriously, @scottalanmiller
Do you guys really think the artists have much say in this? That is not how the industry works.The digital distribution model is changing it and enabling more musicians to break way from the labels, but most are owned by the labels and that is where all the decisions come from.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@thanksajdotcom said:
I don't understand it personally. However, I can't entirely blame them. The iTunes market has much higher exposure than Amazon does.
Can't blame them for releasing on iTunes. That's fine. But releasing ONLY on iTunes means they are either snubbing others or out to make a point to support Apple. It's crazy. Why would a musician make their career about supporting a specific technology to the detriment of their own careers?
Because they think they will make more money... Apple sells what used to be the most expensive phone on the market, and while they sell a ton fewer than Android based ones do, they are the richest company in the world from it.
-
@JaredBusch said:
Seriously, @scottalanmiller
Do you guys really think the artists have much say in this? That is not how the industry works.The digital distribution model is changing it and enabling more musicians to break way from the labels, but most are owned by the labels and that is where all the decisions come from.
Agreed. I think we will start seeing this change in the next 2-5 years... labels will probably start drying up, at least a little while artists start to find other avenues to get capital and self publish.
-
At lot of times it the Label then a Distributor. Artists make almost no money these days from downloads/CDs due to so many hands being in it and Piracy. Most of their money comes from touring and merch sells at the tours (make a $2 t-shirt sell it for $30 and people will buy it as it's only sold at the concert)
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
At lot of times it the Label then a Distributor. Artists make almost no money these days from downloads/CDs due to so many hands being in it and Piracy. Most of their money comes from touring and merch sells at the tours (make a $2 t-shirt sell it for $30 and people will buy it as it's only sold at the concert)
Considering the new models of distribution.... and moving away from CD sales... Hopefully artist's will start getting more of what they deserve.
-
@Dashrender said:
Considering the new models of distribution.... and moving away from CD sales... Hopefully artist's will start getting more of what they deserve.
One has to wonder how much many of them deserve, though. The bulk of the money is earned by the studios, not the artists. The good artists rarely get attention or sales. The bulk of music sales go to "studio made" artists and all of the success is driven by things that the studio has done, not things that the artist have done. Not true in all cases, but mostly. Look at a big money band like "One Direction".... studio assembled, studio made, studio promoted. The "artists" are good performers with talent and they work hard (and earn a lot of money) but they didn't do anything to justify being millionaires. They are getting a nearly free ride to richess and fame while the studio is doing all the heavy lifting. They are interchangeable "artist cogs" in a studio promotion machine.
Studios mostly choose which songs will be singles, which will be hits, which will be famous. If studios make those decisions, studios are doing the work and the investment that needs to be paid back.
-
I suppose there is a bunch of that... but then there are things like the child singer from canada.. can't think of and don't want to his name... became a Youtube sensation and is now a millionaire.
You don't think this would become more the norm considering modern distribution methods.. and the studio made sorta-bes would mostly fade away?
