3 ms·

It's the same reason why journalists and whole host of other content creators are no longer making a living: There is so much out there for free, most people do

It's the same reason why journalists and whole host of other content creators are no longer making a living: There is so much out there for free, most people don't perceive it as having value anymore. This is why music piracy of the early 2000s hurt the industry: the individual artist wasn't necessarily losing money directly at the time, but it definitely made it difficult for all artists to make money 2 decades later. The same thing also happened to software, which is why so many companies moved to SaaS.

colechristensen 8y ago
>The same thing also happened to software, which is why so many companies moved to SaaS. This isn't true. If you make updates paid enterprise customers are going to drag their feet and you'll be stuck supporting a large number of versions for a long time. It is much easier to lock corporations into continuous subscriptions. Did anyone ever make much of a living on selling recordings? I think a big problem is the lack of market for the less intense public performance (live music at restaurants and cafes and the like) which makes such things rare and usually very poorly paid. I would love to frequent places with good food and good live music with the atmosphere of being able to carry a conversation while the band was on. What I've experienced is bands in big rooms with terrible acoustics and bad mixing so loud I can't hear myself think or anything really but the drummer. Combine this with the social and economic situation of everyone staying home and watching TV most nights makes the demand for live music weak. There is an opportunity for targeting that kind of market but difficult to capture requiring a good booker and a sound person that doesn't want everything to sound like a rock show.
- jimrhods23 8y ago
  "Did anyone ever make much of a living on selling recordings?" Yes. I know plenty of independent artists before and after the Napster days and they could no longer make a living. People just expected it for free, because Napster changed the culture of music..which is the long-term danger of piracy. It also made it so the only artists that could make a real living are forced to sign with a big label, because you now need an entire marketing department behind your music to compete with free. Music is now used as free marketing to get people to go to a show...and you need to be signed with a giant label to play at any decent venue. Small artists don't have access to any of this. "I think a big problem is the lack of market for the less intense public performance" These were always poorly paid gigs..and for good reason. There is no ROI for the restaurant/cafe, who are barely eking out a profit. "This isn't true. If you make updates paid enterprise customers are going to drag their feet and you'll be stuck supporting a large number of versions for a long time. It is much easier to lock corporations into continuous subscriptions." This IS true. Many software companies went to SaaS because it can't be shared for free and the cost of server space/hosting is now very cheap. I should know, I was involved in many meetings with business owners that did just this. So the unintended consequences of over a decade of software/music piracy is pushing all of the independent artists out of a living and we now need to pay a monthly fee for software instead of being able to purchase it outright.

colechristensen 8y ago

>The same thing also happened to software, which is why so many companies moved to SaaS. This isn't true. If you make updates paid enterprise customers are going to drag their feet and you'll be stuck supporting a large number of versions for a long time. It is much easier to lock corporations into continuous subscriptions. Did anyone ever make much of a living on selling recordings? I think a big problem is the lack of market for the less intense public performance (live music at restaurants and cafes and the like) which makes such things rare and usually very poorly paid. I would love to frequent places with good food and good live music with the atmosphere of being able to carry a conversation while the band was on. What I've experienced is bands in big rooms with terrible acoustics and bad mixing so loud I can't hear myself think or anything really but the drummer. Combine this with the social and economic situation of everyone staying home and watching TV most nights makes the demand for live music weak. There is an opportunity for targeting that kind of market but difficult to capture requiring a good booker and a sound person that doesn't want everything to sound like a rock show.

jimrhods23 8y ago
"Did anyone ever make much of a living on selling recordings?" Yes. I know plenty of independent artists before and after the Napster days and they could no longer make a living. People just expected it for free, because Napster changed the culture of music..which is the long-term danger of piracy. It also made it so the only artists that could make a real living are forced to sign with a big label, because you now need an entire marketing department behind your music to compete with free. Music is now used as free marketing to get people to go to a show...and you need to be signed with a giant label to play at any decent venue. Small artists don't have access to any of this. "I think a big problem is the lack of market for the less intense public performance" These were always poorly paid gigs..and for good reason. There is no ROI for the restaurant/cafe, who are barely eking out a profit. "This isn't true. If you make updates paid enterprise customers are going to drag their feet and you'll be stuck supporting a large number of versions for a long time. It is much easier to lock corporations into continuous subscriptions." This IS true. Many software companies went to SaaS because it can't be shared for free and the cost of server space/hosting is now very cheap. I should know, I was involved in many meetings with business owners that did just this. So the unintended consequences of over a decade of software/music piracy is pushing all of the independent artists out of a living and we now need to pay a monthly fee for software instead of being able to purchase it outright.