I'm mad as hell, and I'm not gonna take it anymore ...

Chronicler · « **Reply #60 on:** August 10, 2003, 08:01:28 PM »

I'm also certain that it is much more profitable for these services to get kickbacks from corporations to posture themselves with policies that are hostile to 'small' merchants than to retain some integrity and allow people like Melonie to reap the benefits of her products. CC companies do not make money from processing fees, they make money from ridiculous interest rates and liscensing.

ggk · « **Reply #61 on:** August 10, 2003, 08:01:39 PM »

I don't see how you could do that. Record companies shell out millions to promote a record, and sometimes they don't make their money back. A music video can cost a million bucks. As an independent, how do you get the audience of an MTV without big money behind you? I know artists think they are being ripped off, but it is the record company that takes a chance of losing money.

Since you are an independent, and can make $9.00 profit, how many of your CDs have you sold? How much did it cost for you to get the word out about them?

Chronicler · « **Reply #62 on:** August 10, 2003, 08:07:11 PM »

They do shell out millions, but not for something that will not make them even more money in the long run. even then, it all stays within the industry, and half of the money they spend comes beck to them in the form of kickbacks just to justify over-inflating the price of the product, because anyone who touches it wants a piece of it, regardless of whether they deserve it or not. You have to be 'marketable'. They want people they can whore out to Pepsico and Car makers, and whoever else wants to use the tunes they record for whatever kind of marketing gimmic.

Especially now with the 'net, it is not needed to spend millions promoting an album, word can spread much quicker. The mp3 has made minced meat out of the RIAA's promotional machine, and they are scrambling trying to retain control of the industry.

ggk · « **Reply #63 on:** August 10, 2003, 08:09:38 PM »

The mp3 does allow music to be taken without paying for it. I bet you the popular mp3 files are those by bands that the record company has spent millions on, and that is why the are panicked. No matter what format your music is in, if you don't have marketing muscle behind it, nobody will know what it is.

If Sony wanted to sign your band, would you turn it down because of your beliefs?

Chronicler · « **Reply #64 on:** August 10, 2003, 08:22:21 PM »

True about the timing on the mp3. It's not my fault though that something that used to take lots of money and effort is now cheap as hell.

As for Sony, it would depend on the contract. I could spend the money recording the album myself, and they would still never give me a fair distribution contract because they want control so they can sell the product however they see fit. Crawling on my knees to a record company is going to result in some over-stuffed greaseball thinking he can [censored] me in the ass with a chainsaw because the company thinks I need them, when in fact, without a product (the artist), they have NOTHING to make money from. I do not care if I ever sell out Madison Square Garden, or play the Budokan. I'd be much happier playing small clubs at my own pace without some huge money machine pushing me until I blow my brains out like Kurt Cobain, or Savannah.

Zasha · « **Reply #65 on:** August 10, 2003, 08:27:17 PM »

OK, here's an idea that I haven't seen mentioned here, and if it was, I skipped over it:

Why can't sites like Melanie's, or even Chronicler's issue their respective products like shareware?

What I mean is, if I wanted to gain access to Melanie's member area, I could PayPal her email addy. She wouldn't have to register as a business, or have an automated shopping cart.

If I wanted a membership, I could simply READ what the membership amount is, and PayPal her that amount. She could then email me an unlock code or password that would gain me **103** to the site.

Similarly, if I wanted a video or whatever else, I could break out the calculator, add it all up, and email Mel what my claculation is for the price for her to confirm, and tell me what the approximate shipping will cost, then PayPal her that money as well.

Granted, it's not as easy and fast to do as just clicking on a bunch of buttons, and tends to rule out the impulse buyers, but I get the feeling that big bust fans tend to be fairly focussed, and will actively seek out a way to get what they want, even it it means that they can't instant gratification...I'll bet that if they really want it, they can wait a day...

For that matter, why can't you use Kagi? Or is it the same deal?

ggk · « **Reply #66 on:** August 10, 2003, 08:33:11 PM »

Let us know when you turn down the Sony contract. That would take balls.

Mp3 does make distribution cheaper, but I don't think it makes the marketing cheaper. Can you name a wealthy musician that has never had a record deal but was able to make wealth without one? We are talking about making money here, not just getting by.

Zasha · « **Reply #67 on:** August 10, 2003, 08:40:20 PM »

Quote:

Can you name a wealthy musician that has never had a record deal but was able to make wealth without one? We are talking about making money here, not just getting by.

Ooh! Ooh! Not that I'm jumping in this argument, but I can!

TOM PETTY! (OK, he doesn't fit the NEVER part, but for a long time, no record company would sign him because of his succesfull suit of whatever company it was that he sued, but he still sold records and got himself and the Heartbeakers on the map).

ggk · « **Reply #68 on:** August 10, 2003, 08:42:51 PM »

Yeah, the never part makes all the difference. If it was going so well, why did he end up signing?

Chronicler · « **Reply #69 on:** August 10, 2003, 09:00:27 PM »

Money is a hard thing to turn down. Good point. But if I am legitmately looking at getting signed, then who's to say I could not slowly but surely do my own thing? I would want to know every last specific detail of the contract, and then go into negotiations with a counter proposal so they know I am not F&^%ing around. Bottom line is, I'll probably have to go a European label or Sony Japan to get a good deal for the kind of music I make.

Chronicler · « **Reply #70 on:** August 10, 2003, 09:01:35 PM »

-----------------------------------------
Zasha, this is an interesting topic about PayPal. The thing that companies hate to deal with is intellectual property rights because individual rights are much more difficult to violate than a company policy. When the rights point back to an individual, especially when the product is their own image, it is a difficult thing to commericalize because there are so many players and each one has a different Terms of Service agreement.

Chronicler · « **Reply #72 on:** August 10, 2003, 09:17:46 PM »

Yes, absolutely. I think that big boob entertainers have MUCH more of an upperhand than does a lowly musician. But she has a point, whether explicitly stated or not, in that not all of the entertainers are as aware as she might be as to how valuable they actually are.

I know my cartoons are silly, but the story is really about how the female is the one with the power, and not some producer, because of the fact that there is an entire industry based around a handful of individuals. I was thinking that the idea of the models putting together their OWN conglomerate would be unstoppable, if enough of them could be convinced that a little patience might pay off huge down the road.

ggk · « **Reply #73 on:** August 10, 2003, 09:39:04 PM »

That's a good idea. Why don't musicians do the same thing?

melonie_charm · « **Reply #74 on:** August 10, 2003, 09:46:35 PM »

Conglomerates sound good in theory, but in the real world there is big money to be invested up front setting up the infrastructure for such an enterprise, and work to be done every day maintaining that enterprise. Since the vast majority of models already know that the money to still be made in this business does NOT come from the internet, very few would be willing to make an additional investment of capital plus ongoing time and effort to participate. As a result, 'somebody' ultimately gets stuck keeping the whole enterprise rolling. If the girls expect to model once or twice a year, and will not volunteer additional time to interact with potential customers, but do expect a higher payout than they could get at PhotoClubs or another existing multi-girl big boob site, then that 'somebody' winds up making a large investment themselves and taking on a whole lot of work in return for very little renumeration. There would also be arguments in regard to 'relative contributions' and a myriad of other points.

An analogous situation to your suggestion would be a strip club which was owned and operated by its dancers. In theory it could work out great. But in practice, there would be girls not contributing with equal effort, girls not showing up on nights when business is traditionally slow, some girls claiming that their knockout bods were the reason that customers came to the club thus they should be entitled to a higher percentage than other girls ... and when it's time to pay for new equipment or annual fees, there would be arguments about what should be done and who should pay for it. The conglomerate simply does not compute, because in the real world it is a ship without a captain.

Re: I'm mad as hell, and I'm not gonna take it anymore ...