Big Music Will Surrender, But Not Until At Least 2011

The article claims that in a few years, recorded music will be free. Unless you plan on paying for free music (which seems difficult,) you will support artists by going to their shows, buying their merch, etc.

If I understand correctly the businessplan goes like this:

1) Keep alienating consumers and digital music outlets with courtcases and other mafia-like behaviour until CD-sales approach zero. Make a bit of money, and since music is going to be free anyway, who cares if consumers and the future marketing channel hates us.

2) When CD-sales are low enough give the music away. The sites we are now suing will play along once they get our stuff for free. And those guys over at Apple don't know what they're talking about when they tell us that consumers will gladly pay for music if it just works. We don't really believe that they have digital music sales in excess of $1 billion.

3) When we can't make any more money from CD's well change to 360 music deals, and we'll get a cut of merchandise, live events, etc. Of course well have to find out how to do world tours and other stuff we haven't got a clue about, but we'll worry about that later.

4) During the roll-out of the above we will ignore the fact that artists hate us and are fleeing our labels. They'll surely come back once we get our new business model going.

I mean seriously - is this the best they can do?

I just went to see a band - I then checked their website, I can buy CDs/download tracks/T-Shirts. There are links to the tickets for their upcoming gigs. there are even press packs to download ready for the lazy journalist to put in their newspapers.

I don't know who their recording company is - and why exactly would they need one?

Concerts: so if I understand correctly, paying for concerts is morally justified as opposed to paying for recorded music -- which apparently is wrong -- because... you're confronted with a threatening-looking bouncer if you attempt to jump a fence? Honestly, I admire the chutzpah in the finger-wagging at record labels when the proffered philosophical justification essentially runs: "I can get away with it. Ergo it's ok." That's deep, man!

Merchandise: SRV dolls, anyone? There's no question that money can be made through merchandising. But anyone who thinks this is going to work to the advantage of real acts consisting of real musicians who aren't photogenic and doll-able etc., as opposed to say your next class of X Factor, is living in la-la land. Or, for that matter, that merchandising can act as a substitute for the revenue streams that recorded music sales once provided.

Tipjoy: seriously though; you're kidding, right? Tipjoy is your answer to a 50% fall in revenue for recorded music in less than a decade?

Can I just suggest that all you armchair record execs put your money where your mouth is and create this awesome benevolent no-label label which only pushes, y'know, cool music, and makes lots of money doing it but doesn't do anything nasty like asking you to pay for it?

Is everyone here so arrogant as to think the entire music industry consists solely of fat buffoons who are simply lacking in vision or technical know-how to find these el dorado musicbiz 2.0 revenues?

Recorded music takes huge time and effort on the part of a wide range of individuals, all specialized on different aspects of the production. From songwriting through arranging, recording and mic placement and the myriad expertises that this requires, through mixing, mastering, etc.. You're telling me that all of this has no value? As a singer-songwriter in a band who loves music as much as programming let me just say: you, sir, are cheap.

> I will not shed a tear when the last major record label shuts down.

I'll be positively ecstatic!