Yeah, there was one graph I used in my thesis where they compared CD Buyers with Pirates, but obviously there is overlap.
As for buying digital music... I didn't find the same pattern there, perhaps because it doesn't make sense to replace music you already have with a different copy.
In any case, there is not all that much difference between pirates and non-pirates in that graph (definitions as mentioned in the article). Note that this survey was conducted about 1.5 year ago. I'm convinced things like this are changing rapidly, which is why I tried to focus more on the trends than on the small facts (but then I knew this graph would provoke a good discussion on techdirt ;-)).
I guess you're being sarcastic, but still want to set a couple of things straight.
First of all, I'm not an academic. I'm a marketing and business consultant.
Secondly, regarding this quote:
"Besides, the paper is clearly flawed, it implies that people who steal are more likely to buy."
That is really not what it implies or what I set out to look into. I just wanted to know what it is that motivates certain groups in terms of consuming music and how those dynamics can be used in order to make money. One of these groups is pirates, but I researched much, much more than just piracy.
Thanks for backing me up here, Karl. If people would actually read the study, they could see that their comments are really besides the point. I'm not so interested in the discussion about whether piracy is good, bad, evil, destroying music, a great development for creativity, etc.
The goal of my thesis is to create a model so that we can finally move beyond that discussion. :-)
Arguing on the internet is nice, but it's never going to solve business problems.
Thanks also for the links to the material. Interesting stuff.
This has always been the case. Not everyone can make a living off of music. At least now you don't have to pass by hordes of gatekeepers anymore.
Anyway, making enough of a living is not the primary motivation for creation either, because then only people who make a living off of music/art/any type of creation would do it.
No, they did NOT say that they buy more music. I wanted to be very careful with the phrasing. I only asked when the last time was that they purchased a physical CD.
The research is not about piracy (only the highlight in this post), it's about successfully marketing music in the digital age (in order to make money!) in the digital age.
And if the rest of what you're saying was true, Hadopi in France would work better than Spotify in Sweden in terms of reducing piracy, but that is obviously not the case.
"Bas, sadly, while the information wants to be free, it's freeness harms the ability for it to be made. It is a bit of a chicken and the egg thing, you cannot have free information without having information first."
I'm sorry, but more people can publish information than ever, so the information does not go away. This is, in part, due to a democratization of the means to produce and publish, which no longer inquires the type of investments we saw in the past.
"What will continue to be the long term problem is that the creation of high end content is done mostly through invested / seeded money."
I agree. Although this depends on your definition of high end. Personally, I don't see Justin Bieber or most pop stars as high end since they're usually replaceable.
"The labels have always been the investors, the ones who put the money up in form of up front money to make it possible to produce the content in a reasonable time frame, and to make it possible for that content to be delivered to the potential audience in an organized form."
Many of these things the internet can take care of now. Especially when new platforms are given the chance to develop (which they are not sufficiently, in my eyes).
"When you take the economics away, when you make it into a zero income game, you take away the ability for labels to invest."
I never suggested taking the economics away.
"If piracy reaches a point where they no longer make enough to justify their investments, they will just stop."
Good thing legal platforms are now taking over from piracy then, eh? As highlighted in the above article by the way.
"Then you are back to your free information problem, as the lack of information means there is nothing free.
I am sure we can all enjoy the wonderful amateur material that will come out to replace it."
And the music industry is still a multi-billion dollar business. Another trend I see is artists signing to brands instead of labels. People and companies are interested in investing in music. It's just that the game is changing.
And I resent how you're patronizing 'amateur material'. There is loads of great music coming from small, independent, "amateur" labels that I would pick over the mass-produced nonsense from the radio any day.
For your last line: I work in the music industry. I don't believe piracy to be as big as a problem as some say it is. Actually, I think piracy is a symptom, not the problem.
Everyone does agree to NOT pirate. It's just that the legal system is lagging behind, which turns them into pirates. ;-)
The reality is that the internet is not a marketplace that you can just move away from. It's a disruptive technology that will impact every part of society and business ultimately.
For this reason there can not be a 'mutual acceptable middle ground', since an increasing amount of 'things' can be turned into information. And information wants to be free.
That does not mean free as in monetary, but it's very hard to control information. Especially in the digital age of which we're just seeing the very beginnings.
On the post: Secret Service Descends on Artist For Mildly Creepy Public Photography
Hire him!
Even if he is punished for doing this without permission, his creativity should not go unrewarded.
On the post: Marketing Music Through Non-Linear Communication: Accepting The Full Reality Of The Digital Age
Re: Possible scenario?
On the post: Marketing Music Through Non-Linear Communication: Accepting The Full Reality Of The Digital Age
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Marketing Music Through Non-Linear Communication: Accepting The Full Reality Of The Digital Age
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
As for buying digital music... I didn't find the same pattern there, perhaps because it doesn't make sense to replace music you already have with a different copy.
http://basbasbas.com/thesis/problem#figure_10
In any case, there is not all that much difference between pirates and non-pirates in that graph (definitions as mentioned in the article). Note that this survey was conducted about 1.5 year ago. I'm convinced things like this are changing rapidly, which is why I tried to focus more on the trends than on the small facts (but then I knew this graph would provoke a good discussion on techdirt ;-)).
On the post: Marketing Music Through Non-Linear Communication: Accepting The Full Reality Of The Digital Age
Re: Re: Re:
I make a living by applying these ideas. That's enough for me.
On the post: Marketing Music Through Non-Linear Communication: Accepting The Full Reality Of The Digital Age
Re:
It's quite easy.
On the post: Marketing Music Through Non-Linear Communication: Accepting The Full Reality Of The Digital Age
Re: Re: herp derp hderp dreph erph ep herp herp erh derpd duuurrrrrrrr
First of all, I'm not an academic. I'm a marketing and business consultant.
Secondly, regarding this quote:
That is really not what it implies or what I set out to look into. I just wanted to know what it is that motivates certain groups in terms of consuming music and how those dynamics can be used in order to make money. One of these groups is pirates, but I researched much, much more than just piracy.
On the post: Marketing Music Through Non-Linear Communication: Accepting The Full Reality Of The Digital Age
Re:
On the post: Marketing Music Through Non-Linear Communication: Accepting The Full Reality Of The Digital Age
Re: Re: Re: Re:
The goal of my thesis is to create a model so that we can finally move beyond that discussion. :-)
Arguing on the internet is nice, but it's never going to solve business problems.
Thanks also for the links to the material. Interesting stuff.
On the post: Marketing Music Through Non-Linear Communication: Accepting The Full Reality Of The Digital Age
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Anyway, making enough of a living is not the primary motivation for creation either, because then only people who make a living off of music/art/any type of creation would do it.
On the post: Marketing Music Through Non-Linear Communication: Accepting The Full Reality Of The Digital Age
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The research is not about piracy (only the highlight in this post), it's about successfully marketing music in the digital age (in order to make money!) in the digital age.
And if the rest of what you're saying was true, Hadopi in France would work better than Spotify in Sweden in terms of reducing piracy, but that is obviously not the case.
On the post: Marketing Music Through Non-Linear Communication: Accepting The Full Reality Of The Digital Age
Re:
On the post: Marketing Music Through Non-Linear Communication: Accepting The Full Reality Of The Digital Age
Re:
On the post: Music Exec Says Too Many Silly Things To Put In This Headline
Re: Re: Re:
I'm sorry, but more people can publish information than ever, so the information does not go away. This is, in part, due to a democratization of the means to produce and publish, which no longer inquires the type of investments we saw in the past.
"What will continue to be the long term problem is that the creation of high end content is done mostly through invested / seeded money."
I agree. Although this depends on your definition of high end. Personally, I don't see Justin Bieber or most pop stars as high end since they're usually replaceable.
"The labels have always been the investors, the ones who put the money up in form of up front money to make it possible to produce the content in a reasonable time frame, and to make it possible for that content to be delivered to the potential audience in an organized form."
Many of these things the internet can take care of now. Especially when new platforms are given the chance to develop (which they are not sufficiently, in my eyes).
"When you take the economics away, when you make it into a zero income game, you take away the ability for labels to invest."
I never suggested taking the economics away.
"If piracy reaches a point where they no longer make enough to justify their investments, they will just stop."
Good thing legal platforms are now taking over from piracy then, eh? As highlighted in the above article by the way.
"Then you are back to your free information problem, as the lack of information means there is nothing free.
I am sure we can all enjoy the wonderful amateur material that will come out to replace it."
And the music industry is still a multi-billion dollar business. Another trend I see is artists signing to brands instead of labels. People and companies are interested in investing in music. It's just that the game is changing.
And I resent how you're patronizing 'amateur material'. There is loads of great music coming from small, independent, "amateur" labels that I would pick over the mass-produced nonsense from the radio any day.
Shpongle is one of them.
Also, please specify how any of what you said is relevant to locker services and the conversion of pirates into paying consumers.
On the post: Music Exec Says Too Many Silly Things To Put In This Headline
Re: Not exaggerating here, are you, Mike?
But if you click and hear that, you're a pirate, so you probably shouldn't...
On the post: Music Exec Says Too Many Silly Things To Put In This Headline
Re: Not exaggerating here, are you, Mike?
Everyone does agree to NOT pirate. It's just that the legal system is lagging behind, which turns them into pirates. ;-)
On the post: Music Exec Says Too Many Silly Things To Put In This Headline
Re: Re: Re: Best headline ever
On the post: Music Exec Says Too Many Silly Things To Put In This Headline
Re:
The reality is that the internet is not a marketplace that you can just move away from. It's a disruptive technology that will impact every part of society and business ultimately.
For this reason there can not be a 'mutual acceptable middle ground', since an increasing amount of 'things' can be turned into information. And information wants to be free.
That does not mean free as in monetary, but it's very hard to control information. Especially in the digital age of which we're just seeing the very beginnings.
On the post: Music Exec Says Too Many Silly Things To Put In This Headline
Re: Best headline ever
Thanks Dark Helmet!
On the post: Can Google+ Succeed Merely By Being Not Facebook?
Re: Re:
But yeah, that's why.
Next >>