179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes

← back to listing · view thread

From:
Jeff Waye/Ninja Tune
To:
Konstantin Minko ,
Date:
Tue, 23 May 00 13:36:45 -0500
Subject:
RE: [idm] mp3s and change in the music industry
Msg-Id:
<200005231720.NAA09289@sparkle.Generation.NET>
Mbox:
idm.0005.gz
the $11.99 figure comes from my thinking that... -in the end I think all online distribution will cut out is the packaging cost, so that's the figure I derive minus the packaging. -you say the it takes less people to employ to run a digital side. I currently run our entire U.S/Canada operation with 5 people. Most web sites I know have a lot more working for them. Neither of those 5 people have anymore time on their hands. To ad digital distribution I would need to hire more people and essentially become self-distributed (there's a reason I don't distribute our records directly and it's purely financial). If I don't do that, I license the right to a company....a company that needs to also make money to survive (ie. get their cut in the markup) -I think generally the digital world is skewed in perception right now. Most companies seem to have a good deal of private investment, or are public companies and can afford to operate at a loss for awhile. Once that dries up and all the web companies need to maintain a revenue stream then the cost will level back up to the current 'real world' costs (but yet then I employee twice as many people). -okay what I didn't factor in is the convenience of 'stock on demand', but I'm pretty tight with the pressings so I'll give another dollar off....so $10.99. Look I could be totally full of shit on this, I don't have any experience in the web world expect based on what I see now. I can appreciate it from a marketing standpoint and that it does give us higher visability, and if 100% of my sales become digital than it's all good and easy but until then it's a lot of financial juggling between the two. Okay, I'm done now. Jeff
quoted 54 lines With all due respect, I do not think this is correct. In the macro scope>With all due respect, I do not think this is correct. In the macro scope >getting your business online nowadays gives benefits from thousands of >directions and lowers business expenses to impossible minimums. It is a >general trend and publicly available facts. > >Let's look in the music industry using your scale of price content. > >Eliminated components: Production costs. Physical distribution. Paying for >overstock. etc... > >Components that remain on the same level are: recording fees, studio costs, >mastering, print >ads, tour support, co-ops, promo copies, print media publicity, radio >publicity, postage. > >Componets that are lowered in cost: number of employees (online business >needs 10 or 20 times less employees to run), office overhead costs, >management costs, etc. > >New components: online ads (can easily be avoided at all or put inside the >same physical ad budget), web co-ops (can be avoided at all or minimized on >less costly basis with physcal co-ops, online promos (can be avoided or put >inside the same physical promos budget). > >PLUS: A huge rise in sales due to increased avalability of your products >which is the most important benefit of online business. > >And that's a look from the person who's not involved in music industry (I am >a financier and involved in online business). If to take into account that >only 1/3 of CD price is generated by record company... This means that >digital music can be available less than for 5 bucks minimum. Where is >figure of $11.99 is generated? Please explain. > >Let's just guess how much a record company would benefit if not only a part >of its business moves online but all physical sales are suspended and >switched to online... You just have to keep your recording, mixing, >mastering, etc. phase and then have a couple or more employees responsible >for sales!!! Other parts of infrastructure like advertising or promoting >will remain and/or be adapted to online which provides additional >cost-effective schemes. > >this message is pure MHO not intended to hurt anyone but please do not hide >the truth from us. > >take care > >Alien > >np. MP3's of U-ziq's "In Pine Effect" which is pretty shitty for me in >comparison to his later works and which I could have bought if not for mp3s! >God bless MP3. > >btw: Ninja is a great label and is not particularly a subject of our >discussion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org