The Truth About The Riaa, What They Arent Telling

[Schmiggy_JK23]

Anti RIAA article

great article over at one of the premier tech news sites online... some interesting facts...

The drop in music units is interesting but is caused in part by a drop in the number of CD singles and cassettes being shipped. That the total dollar value of music sales was down by 4.1% in 2001 and 8.2% in 2002 should come as no surprise to anyone, not even the RIAA. The economy is down and people are more reluctant to part with their money, especially on items that are not essentials.

The increase in CD price has been significantly higher than inflation in the last two years. The reduction in shipments of CD singles and cassettes has taken away the low-cost options and we have seen an average price for a music unit rise from $12.57 in 1999 to $14.67 in 2002. Given these factors it is not surprising that CD sales to those on a low income (eg. age group 10 to 19) have fallen away.

Another major factor in the drop in music sales has probably been the actions of Clear Channel -- as it has built up a dominant, almost monopolistic, radio network across the USA. Clear Channel really took advantage of a 1996 decision to remove the 40-station cap on radio station ownership and by February 2002 it owned more than 1200 radio stations, with its nearest rival owning only about 205.

a great read for all who feel "piracy, and downloads" are screwing the RIAA over... lots of hard figures, numbers, and charts,

[ripley02]

that makes a lot of sense. I wonder if the riaa will have any good response to that once they review that report.

[Jibbler]

It would be disturbing enough if the RIAA had credibility in its statements and actions, but it doesn't. It chooses to ignore many plausible reasons for a drop on music sales in 2001 and 2002, preferring to blame downloading from the web as the entire cause of the ills of the music industry.

I couldn't have said it better myself. It appears the music industry won't even consider any other reason but filesharing for their loss of business.

[Leech_Killer]

we have seen an average price for a music unit rise from $12.57 in 1999 to $14.67 in 2002.

I wish. I've just been to the HMV website and the new Blur album is £14.99 sterling or $21.29 dollars. The double album "Now 54" is £16.99 sterling or $24.13 dollars. If originals were only $14.67 (£10.33) more poeple would buy them, instead the UK public feels like it's been ripped off.

[Schmiggy_JK23]

exactly... those asshats are so pissed at the fact that their distribution method is totally out of synce with the times, along with prices, they are blind to truth, that being... piracy and p2p isnt killing their business... they are...

it would be like IBM still depending on processors to make their business run... they couldnt do it anymore... they had to change their business model... and are still, one of the top computing companies in the world... you modify, adapt, to changing times, and business practices, and the RIAA refuses too, cuz they have it so well, for so long... so fuck them.

and clear channel, in my opinion, they can fuck off too... they are responsible for most of the shit that now graces our airwaves as so called music... they attempt to control what "popular" music is... sick of it... long live the indie radio stations, and those that arent afraid to play something other then the "status quo"

[Jibbler]

Originally posted by Schmiggy_JK23@8 May 2003 - 20:23
it would be like IBM still depending on processors to make their business run... they couldnt do it anymore... they had to change their business model... and are still, one of the top computing companies in the world... you modify, adapt, to changing times, and business practices, and the RIAA refuses too, cuz they have it so well, for so long... so fuck them.

Schmiggy, you are right on. This is the very same problem facing Chrysler in the 80s. It took almost 15 years, but now they are back on top of the industry. Sometimes you need to reinvent your product and take the market back. B)