Posted by Bill Martinelli [ 72.226.193.116 ] on November 02, 2005 at 21:27:47:
In Reply to: Re: Napster posted by manualblock on November 02, 2005 at 20:16:50:
Do you think Napster isn’t mad with the RIAA anymore, or vice versa? Seems like an awfully big cheek, to turn. Stranger things have happened. Most generally revolve around money!
There’s no such thing as free radio. The radio stations all pay huge licensing fees to play the music we listen to. Even NPR and college stations pay at lesser rates than some of the commercial stations. It could be free if you never buy anything. Since the stations are paid by advertisers the cost is simply pushed into the products and the consumers pay for it. Advertising budgets are huge. What would you think a bottle of Bud would cost if they never advertised? A pair of Nike sneakers or even grape juice with no Larry King endorsement.
I’m with Akhilesh, I like the used music stores. We do have a say in how much things cost and how much people are paid. If you don't buy new music there are no profits for recording industry and those artist. Go to local concerts instead. I’m not too crazed with the some of the pro sports salaries so I boycott the events for the most part. Everyone has there threshold of ‘what its worth’ to them.
There is a point about the whole Napster situation in that. Do you think all the younger people that downloaded millions in RIAA revenue would have gone out and paid for the music? Have sales now seen huge profit gains.
[ General Forum ] [ Help ]