• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Bonneville CEO open to performance royalty

The real rub is this: with the proliferation of radio stations, there are small markets, mine is an example, that have more radio stations than would be justifiable if they were under separate ownership. Grays Harbor County is a great little two-station market, but there are 9 stations. So I have 5, my competitor has 4.

We run 5 stations with the staff of 1 station, since the revenues are finite. Our revenues are about the same as if we had one of two stations in the market, but our fixed costs are disproportionately higher than major market stations.

If we are assessed a special small market minimum fee per station, we're screwed, because you multiply that by 5.

Philosophically, I don't understand why the performing artists shouldn't be members of ASCAP, BMI, or SESAC.
 
Bill Wolfenbarger said:
Philosophically, I don't understand why the performing artists shouldn't be members of ASCAP, BMI, or SESAC.

Most are. Most write their own music, and get their royalty that way. This isn't about the artists. They're being used by labels that don't share in songwriter royalties.
 
JimmyJames said:
"But they are digital media, which allows users to make CD-quality copies"

XM and Sirius are far from CD quality. And most streams, even "high bitrate" streams aren't CD quality.

A serious music fan isn't going to avoid purchasing a CD because they can rip a song off a stream at even 128K.

That, right there, is the Big Lie. "Digital=Perfect". It's simply not true, and why hasn't anyone pressed them on that?
 
hubcity said:
JimmyJames said:
A serious music fan isn't going to avoid purchasing a CD because they can rip a song off a stream at even 128K.

That, right there, is the Big Lie. "Digital=Perfect". It's simply not true, and why hasn't anyone pressed them on that?

The fact is that 70% of music people obtain is being stolen from streams, clouds, or other PTP. The quality isn't the issue, because most of these people are listening on ear buds. So don't kid yourself: People ARE stealing music from digital sources, and the bit-rate doesn't matter.
 
But the point is the people who the music industry is courting in sales, those who would be avid listeners to specialty internet streams and likely to buy either through download, CD, or at least support concerts and merch - are the type of people who are not going to this sort of effort to steal music, yet the recording industry penalizes those forms of exposure to new music.
 
JimmyJames said:
But the point is the people who the music industry is courting in sales, those who would be avid listeners to specialty internet streams and likely to buy either through download, CD, or at least support concerts and merch - are the type of people who are not going to this sort of effort to steal music, yet the recording industry penalizes those forms of exposure to new music.

Because the music fans, those who support artists, are a small fraction of the public. The majority use music like deodorant, and they'd just as well steal low quality streams as opposed to paying $16 for a CD with one hit on it. The industry can't support its extravagant lifestyle appealing to the small number of dedicated fans. At the same time, it takes very little effort to steal music from the internet. It's really very easy. And everything the industry has tried to do to stop it hasn't worked. They penalize that exposure became they can. They'd penalize every other form if they could too. And they'd increase the price of CDs and concert tickets. Anything to motivate people to steal.

It's really a very bad situation, and before the Congress grants them any new royalties, they need to investigate the real problems within the music industry, starting with contracts that favor labels over artists, and why it still costs the same price for downloads as it does for CDs. The distribution system has become way cheaper. Where is all that money that used to go to middlemen going? I bet it isn't going to artists. If the music industry wants the American system to be more like other countries in terms of royalties, let's change the rest of the industry to be more like other countries. Don't just change ONE law, the one that favors the music industry.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom