Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

EMI music is sold to Universal. We're down to three major labels.

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 121 posts

Re: EMI music is sold to Universal. We're down to three major labels.

#31

Post by dpark »

billpatrianakos wrote: post #19
tptacek wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding of the Beatles situation is that it isn't label-driven. I'd love someone to clarify that.

I think the Beatles situation has to do with Michael Jackson having owned the Beatles catalogue for a time then Paul Mcartney bought it back (I think?). I'd start your search with that in mind. Also, the Beatles are on Apple Records which was/is their own label (but still under the umbrella of another label, possibly Columbia, I think). My broad strokes are correct but the details are questionable. I'm a big Beatles…

Pretty sure McCartney was never able to purchase the catalog from Jackson.

Re: EMI music is sold to Universal. We're down to three major labels.

#32

Post by ethank »

jwallaceparker wrote: post #21
ortatherox wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be more worried in the idea that there is no competition in label's market at the largest scale. Supposedly label contracts aren't exactly very artist friendly already, and I can't imagine as an upcoming artist it's going to get any better. On the otherhand, there are now a million indie labels, and lots of success stories from people using the internet.

>> On the otherhand, there are now a million indie labels, and lots of success stories from people using the internet. Exactly. As long as there is free competition among labels (i.e. music producers) there will be continually lower prices (i.e. better contracts) for musicians. And the "million indie labels" have brought much more competition. I would say overall it is a great time to be a recording artist.

I would like to see the quantified evidence of an Internet band making it through full ascension without ever touching one of the big 4/3. It is REALLY hard to find.

It's a great time to be a recording artist and be self sufficient. If you want to be the next U2 (or if you are U2) it's rather difficult and will remain so.

People speak about disruption. This industry is ripe for it, but it won't happen until a lot of the past is weeded out through attrition and better players take hold. It'll take an inversion in corporate structures.

Right now its too easy to never sign a band and just mine catalog for a long, long time. Hence the value in publishing assets, and the value in mechanical for catalog.

Re: EMI music is sold to Universal. We're down to three major labels.

#33

Post by ethank »

dylangs1030 wrote: post #28
mwsherman wrote: post #20

The traditional idea of a “label” is going away. The existence of that particular line of business is an accident of history. Not a bad thing, but dependent of a set of circumstances (including medium and distribution) that existed for, say, 50 years. There will still be a role for managing and promoting talent, but it will look more like marketing and less like distribution. It will have less dependence on intellect…

Right, this is the music industry adjusting to the freedom of information, one massive merger at a time. If they keep focusing on distribution, they'll keep losing money with piracy. I doubt music will ever be totally free, but they should at least focus more on shifting the market to branding and merchandise rather than fight an idealist war where no one commits piracy despite the ease.

Piracy is actually lower now on the list of how people get music for free. Number 1 is YouTube. Ad supported streaming and radio are also up there.

Piracy has been falling as a primary mover of free music for quite a while now.

The shifting of the market to branding and merch has been going on as long as I've been in the industry. I was a big part of it at Warner for a while, in our direct-to-fan initiatives.

The problem is where money in these companies is invested. They need to be technology oriented entities, but don't want to be. Apple cleaned the clock on that, and they let them.

Re: EMI music is sold to Universal. We're down to three major labels.

#34

Post by thwarted »

Achshar wrote: post #17

I like how title makes it look like it is a relief to have one less label to deal with.

Yeah, that stood out to me too. Consolidation like this is one less to deal with, and it gets rid collusion between parties that should be independent, but fewer parties means less competition and fewer choices of vendor.

Re: EMI music is sold to Universal. We're down to three major labels.

#35

Post by tptacek »

ethank wrote: post #29
tptacek wrote: post #18

Apologies in advance for glibness, but, who cares? Record labels are irrelevant. The capital costs of producing and (more importantly) distributing popular music have fallen through the floor. The heavily-promoted music products people think of when they think of EMI or Warner are in large part contrivances that exist primarily to perpetuate EMI and Warner. The future barely even belongs to independent labels like Ma…

This is a common argument among those that have never worked at or with a label. Matador for instance is distributed by ADA, who, guess what, is owned by Warner Music Group. The music business is much, much more complicated and convoluted than any glib comments like "who cares?" can summarize.

So what? Exactly what does ADA do that gives them a competitive advantage that will hold over the next 10 or even 5 years? Their expertise at merchandising? Because really, isn't ADA's core value proposition "getting CDs into the racks at Best Buy"? Who gives a shit what's in the racks at Best Buy? We really think people are going to be buying music at Best Buy 5 years from now? No they won't.

Re: EMI music is sold to Universal. We're down to three major labels.

#37

Post by ethank »

tptacek wrote: post #35
ethank wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a common argument among those that have never worked at or with a label. Matador for instance is distributed by ADA, who, guess what, is owned by Warner Music Group. The music business is much, much more complicated and convoluted than any glib comments like "who cares?" can summarize.

So what? Exactly what does ADA do that gives them a competitive advantage that will hold over the next 10 or even 5 years? Their expertise at merchandising? Because really, isn't ADA's core value proposition "getting CDs into the racks at Best Buy"? Who gives a shit what's in the racks at Best Buy? We really think people are going to be buying music at Best Buy 5 years from now? No they won't.

No, ADA also ships to indie retail world wide, manages relationships with about 70 DSP's, plus the rights of those relationships (i.e., some get the full record, some have to bundle, some only take AIFF files, etc).

TuneCore or The Orchard or CD Baby sort of do the same thing, but without international reach and without all the DSP relationships.

Stuff doesn't just magically show up on iTunes, Spotify, Rdio, MOG and god knows how many other places (including promos to radio, etc). It also doesn't automagically show up with cutouts and exclusive tracks depending on the retailer.

Also who do you think manages publishing catalogs for bands like Radiohead (Warner) or Arcade Fire (EMI)?

Best Buy will likely eliminate music from their planograms by next year. So will Target and Wallmart at some point. They mostly have. That doesn't mean that an upstart can disrupt the space. There are huge market barriers to entry.

Re: EMI music is sold to Universal. We're down to three major labels.

#38

Post by [deleted] »

ethank wrote: post #33
dylangs1030 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, this is the music industry adjusting to the freedom of information, one massive merger at a time. If they keep focusing on distribution, they'll keep losing money with piracy. I doubt music will ever be totally free, but they should at least focus more on shifting the market to branding and merchandise rather than fight an idealist war where no one commits piracy despite the ease.

Piracy is actually lower now on the list of how people get music for free. Number 1 is YouTube. Ad supported streaming and radio are also up there. Piracy has been falling as a primary mover of free music for quite a while now. The shifting of the market to branding and merch has been going on as long as I've been in the industry. I was a big part of it at Warner for a while, in our direct-to-fan initiatives. The pro…

[deleted]

Re: EMI music is sold to Universal. We're down to three major labels.

#39

Post by mmatants »

Achshar wrote: post #17

I like how title makes it look like it is a relief to have one less label to deal with.

I actually interpreted the title as having the exact opposite emotion - the frustration that there are only three oligarchs in this entire business now.
Post reply on HN