An interesting blog about the potential pitfall of licencing fees going through the roof
http://adage.com/smallagency/article?article_id=117114
http://adage.com/smallagency/article?article_id=117114
-
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
The end of internet radio in July?
- Thread starter Walter Graff
- Start date
F
fang39
Guest
Interesting indeed. It's all about choice. Internet radio provides a medium for listeners to hear artists and songs that terrsetrial radio has either never heard of or long forgotten about. Traditional broadcasters, who are proponents of the CRB, are trying to limit our entertainment choices. They're trying to dictate what we can and cannot listen to. We've seen this argument all over this site as beloved formats dissappear from the radio dial because they attract an undesireable demo. While I can understand that from a dollars and cents standpoint, to not even allow an alternate point of view to be heard IS dictatorship in it's truest form. If internet broadcasters are paying their FAIR share of royalties, why shouldn't they be allowed to compete in the market?
I can personally relate to the arguement. I host and produce a weekly 70's retrospective program called "Saturday Morning 70's--2 Hours of Music and Memories from the decade that gave us Archie Bunker, Watergate and The Pet Rock." I was advised by several industry syndication pros to market the show on my own, and if I gain a siginificant number of affiliates, it may become attractive to a national syndicator. Though it's been a tough sell, the show is currently broadcast on two dozen stations across the country and around the world, some on terrestrial but mostly via internet. At this point in time, I don't make a dime from the show as I'm clueless on how to sell ad time, so it's been a labor of love for me and the feedback I've received from listeners and most of the artists whom I've interviewed has been tremendous!
Even so, there was one artist who was very upset that the program was being broadcast on Internet radio, or as he referred to it "pirate radio." He lectured me on how artists are being scewed out of their royalties and how he hope the CRB would "crush" Internet radio "like a bug." The funny thing is, his music falls into the category of 70's music that current listener research has deemed "unlistenable" and has all but dissappearred from the airwaves. While I can understand his reasoning, my question to him was "what other radio station/show is willing to dedicate the better part of two hours to your music?" As mentioned in the article, when listeners are exposed to music they don't hear every day, they are far more likely to seek out those songs/artists than songs that are played ad nauseum, like on terrestrial radio.
If internet radio folds, I'll probably have to stop doing the show because of the dwindling number of Oldies/Classic Hits or even AC stations that would be interested in airing an all 70's program. I prefer to take the "Field of Dreams" approach to this arguement...."Build it (internet radio) and they (listeners) will come." That's what it's all about. The fear of competition. 'Nuff said!
I can personally relate to the arguement. I host and produce a weekly 70's retrospective program called "Saturday Morning 70's--2 Hours of Music and Memories from the decade that gave us Archie Bunker, Watergate and The Pet Rock." I was advised by several industry syndication pros to market the show on my own, and if I gain a siginificant number of affiliates, it may become attractive to a national syndicator. Though it's been a tough sell, the show is currently broadcast on two dozen stations across the country and around the world, some on terrestrial but mostly via internet. At this point in time, I don't make a dime from the show as I'm clueless on how to sell ad time, so it's been a labor of love for me and the feedback I've received from listeners and most of the artists whom I've interviewed has been tremendous!
Even so, there was one artist who was very upset that the program was being broadcast on Internet radio, or as he referred to it "pirate radio." He lectured me on how artists are being scewed out of their royalties and how he hope the CRB would "crush" Internet radio "like a bug." The funny thing is, his music falls into the category of 70's music that current listener research has deemed "unlistenable" and has all but dissappearred from the airwaves. While I can understand his reasoning, my question to him was "what other radio station/show is willing to dedicate the better part of two hours to your music?" As mentioned in the article, when listeners are exposed to music they don't hear every day, they are far more likely to seek out those songs/artists than songs that are played ad nauseum, like on terrestrial radio.
If internet radio folds, I'll probably have to stop doing the show because of the dwindling number of Oldies/Classic Hits or even AC stations that would be interested in airing an all 70's program. I prefer to take the "Field of Dreams" approach to this arguement...."Build it (internet radio) and they (listeners) will come." That's what it's all about. The fear of competition. 'Nuff said!
There are actually quite a few terrestrial radio broadcasters who are in total support of internet radio here.
Guess what? We've got to pay the fees to stream, too. If you assume 19 cents per listener per song, and assume 1,000 listeners tuned in, we'll have to pay a bit over $24 million a year. And few stations can or will afford that.
Some proponents of internet radio want to make this an "us vs. them" argument, but that's politics, period. We're gonna get hit hard by those fees, too. It could also kill our streaming as well.
Guess what? We've got to pay the fees to stream, too. If you assume 19 cents per listener per song, and assume 1,000 listeners tuned in, we'll have to pay a bit over $24 million a year. And few stations can or will afford that.
Some proponents of internet radio want to make this an "us vs. them" argument, but that's politics, period. We're gonna get hit hard by those fees, too. It could also kill our streaming as well.
Guess what? We've got to pay the fees to stream, too. If you assume 19 cents per listener per song, and assume 1,000 listeners tuned in, we'll have to pay a bit over $24 million a year. And few stations can or will afford that.
Where did you get 19 cents per song per listener??? Today's Newsday says it nineteen hundrenths of a cent per listener.
Where did you get 19 cents per song per listener??? Today's Newsday says it nineteen hundrenths of a cent per listener.
julesism said:
Well it would be policed in A) an internet radio station that promotes itself would be found. B) those who do what you are suggesting are not true webcasters but are the punks that give internet radio a bad name in the industry. C) going back to A, if you are doing everything to be annonymous then why even bother broadcasting, it defeats the purpose. Royalties need to be paid, though they need to be fair. The bills before Congress will set them fairly.
titoisradio said:
so what about the stations that do not promote themselves? i.e. hobbyists and "bedroom" DJ's/stations? When I started tinkering with RealAudio 2.0 back in the day, I don't think webcasting was anywhere near industry status. I do agree 100% with your last two sentences, I'm just asking curious questions...
I can stream two ways for free:
http://www.listen2myradio.com
and
http://www.streamwebtown.com
I still prefer to pay and have the rights holders be paid.
Vern
http://www.rockhitsradio.com
http://www.listen2myradio.com
and
http://www.streamwebtown.com
I still prefer to pay and have the rights holders be paid.
Vern
http://www.rockhitsradio.com
julesism said:
In the days of RealAudio 2.0 it was more of a tinkering for hobbyists. Today with the success of Live365 and Loud City, I'd say the hobbyists and bedroom DJs are all about becoming the next big net radio station, even if their finances would never allow them to.
titoisradio said:
In my case, I'm just trying to have fun - the fun that, in this day and age of broadcast radio, is largely absent. I am grateful for each listener I get and hope that, with each liner or sweeper that they hear, a new smile is to be had for that moment, and possibly a new set of ears coming back.
i've been listening to internet radio for about 4 years, they do play alot of music that i remember back in the 60's, 70's , 80's and other good hits from 90's and some of today that radio doesn't play, and there is also good songs that are being played that i never heard of. i listen to live 365. so i hoping the internet radio sites will continue on ( live 365, pandora, real networks, yahoo, aol and others ) without other companies buying them out and ruining them. thanks
Hmm, I haven't had time to update my live365 station in a year and a half (maybe someday soon?). But, I've kept it open anyway, however, if the costs get too crazy, I'll pull the plug. Maybe there's some of those encrypted hostlink type programs like peercast as an option, but then again, I really don't have time anymore.
captex said:
If I could be of service:
Don't just hope. Do. Contact your Congresspeople.
http://www.savenetradio.org
Web radio host faces rate hike and demise
This one breaks down Live365's delima:
By Corazon Riley of the San Mateo Daily Journal
A massive rate hike for online radio stations could prove to be the demise of one Foster City-based company that hosts thousands of stations representing more than 150 countries and numerous musical genres.
Through online radio networks, music aficionados around the world can share their love for music with the click of a button. Live365, a Foster City-based company, allows four million people a month explore the radio stations and almost 10,000 people and organizations play DJ to their own station.
Representatives from Live 365, launched in July 1999, claim it is a victim of a royalty increase that would cause the company to go out of business. A recent ruling by the Copyright Royalty Board (CBR), in effect July 15 and retroactive to January 2006, would at least triple the sound recording royalty imposed upon Internet radio, excluding satellite and AM/FM radio.
According to Wire.com, the rate hike would require Live365 to pay $4.2 million for 2006. This is in addition to the $500 per station Live365 would owe. The average cost for a person or group to have their own radio station is $60. Paying $500 per channel would greatly exceed revenue.
The new royalty increase would put Live365 out of business as well as countless other small radio Webcasters. Live365, together with the Save Net Radio Coalition, is bringing its case to Congress. The company has encouraged their thousands of Webcasters to send letters to Congress in protest. Internet radio listeners, artists, and DJs have launched a campaign to overturn the increased rates and have constructed legislation called The Internet Radio Equality Act.
http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=76455
This one breaks down Live365's delima:
By Corazon Riley of the San Mateo Daily Journal
A massive rate hike for online radio stations could prove to be the demise of one Foster City-based company that hosts thousands of stations representing more than 150 countries and numerous musical genres.
Through online radio networks, music aficionados around the world can share their love for music with the click of a button. Live365, a Foster City-based company, allows four million people a month explore the radio stations and almost 10,000 people and organizations play DJ to their own station.
Representatives from Live 365, launched in July 1999, claim it is a victim of a royalty increase that would cause the company to go out of business. A recent ruling by the Copyright Royalty Board (CBR), in effect July 15 and retroactive to January 2006, would at least triple the sound recording royalty imposed upon Internet radio, excluding satellite and AM/FM radio.
According to Wire.com, the rate hike would require Live365 to pay $4.2 million for 2006. This is in addition to the $500 per station Live365 would owe. The average cost for a person or group to have their own radio station is $60. Paying $500 per channel would greatly exceed revenue.
The new royalty increase would put Live365 out of business as well as countless other small radio Webcasters. Live365, together with the Save Net Radio Coalition, is bringing its case to Congress. The company has encouraged their thousands of Webcasters to send letters to Congress in protest. Internet radio listeners, artists, and DJs have launched a campaign to overturn the increased rates and have constructed legislation called The Internet Radio Equality Act.
http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=76455
The Live 365 article kind of sums it all up for a good number of us.
I've been broadcasting through Live365 since 2001. Matter of fact, July 9 will be exactly six years.
If Live is forced to close, it doesn't appear that we have any other place to go. That will take down
many of us.
I'm not really ready to pack it in, but it looks like the door could be slammed shut next month.
I've been broadcasting through Live365 since 2001. Matter of fact, July 9 will be exactly six years.
If Live is forced to close, it doesn't appear that we have any other place to go. That will take down
many of us.
I'm not really ready to pack it in, but it looks like the door could be slammed shut next month.
I wrote my congresspeople, all should follow.
D
dbdigital
Guest
Apparently the internet radio Day of Silence is still on for June 26 and that all the webcasters, big and small, are committed to doing this.
But I don't think anyone has heard from the terrestrial broadcasters who stream their content (and that, of course, includes Clear Channel) as to whether or not they are on board to go silent.
db
But I don't think anyone has heard from the terrestrial broadcasters who stream their content (and that, of course, includes Clear Channel) as to whether or not they are on board to go silent.
db
- Status