Here's the funny part: Did you go to a live nation show? Then indirectly you supported a label. They are doing more and more "360" deals which means they are getting a part of the ticket price as well.
The name changes, but the function remains the same.
I am not dense. Most of his "actual" scarcity is artificial in nature, limits set by someone selecting to stop producing something, rather than any true scarcity.
There is no shortage of cotton, no shortage of t-shirt plants, and no shortage of printers to make them (cheap too!). The only scarcity is when a human decides to order 50 of something instead of 1000.
Hardcover books are the same sort of thing, the choice is made not to offer a paperback or digital version right away, and the hardcover books are often in limited supply (first printing, second printing, etc... more artificial scarcity). It isn't any different, there is no shortage of paper or printing presses, just a human choice to limit production (artificially creating scarcity).
There are few true actual scarcities, time being one of the very few.
Becoming a fan is like signing your name in agreement.
50 years ago, someone might have put something rude on the blackboard or put up a paper on the wall. Becoming a fan at that point would have been signing "I agree - bob" or something like that on the paper.
There is a huge difference between students making fun of a teacher over lunch "Mr Jones is a weenie!", and actually taking it public. They crossed the line along the way, and they pay the price. To be honest, they should be lucky the teacher isn't one of those Americans with a lawyer on speed dial, as the content might have been actionable.
The one small flaw in it all is that you are deliberately and explicitly choosing not to give customers what they want in an attempt to extract more money.
Actually, the one small flaw is assuming the customer is always right, because they are not.
What makes me laugh out of all of this is that what the book sellers are doing is exactly the "artificial scarcity" system that Mike pushes so much. Hardcover books are the equal of the "pre-release box set" or the "autographed hoodie" or what have you, something that is rare by it's nature. If you want to be first to read a new book, you buy the hardcover. If you are just like the masses, you wait and buy the paperback or the digital version.
It really is the same thing, just framed slightly differently. The artificial scarcity is what justifies the price, no different from paying $50 for a hoodie.
I had been under the impression that when manufacturers tell retailers what the end user price is, it's a form of price fixing,
No, price fixing is when manufactures or retailers get together and agree to a price for all similar goods, and agree not to compete on them.
Book publishers each produce unique products, so there is no real price fixing possible, only a contractual agreement for what is an acceptable retail price for the product between the distributor and the retailer.
If Amazon and Walmart got together to set a retail price for a specific book, that would be price fixing.
Yup, I read. That story pretty much just pees on the situation and doesn't try to look at it in depth. Mike is trying so hard to dismiss it that he doesn't consider the actual data. That isn't a story on it, it is a one sided dismissal of it.
No, the question is why not ask ALL music buyers, rather than then smallest possible subset?
Econ 101: If you have multiple markets for the same thing, you don't lower the price in the smallest market so as to hurt your larger market.
60 cents per song would mean 60x12 = $7.20 for an album. When albums retail between 11 and 20 dollars, why would you want to depress the overall market? You might encourage more people to buy online, but your net profits overall would drop. That wouldn't be good business.
Proof that none of you have run a business before.
Moron. I understand the idea of sampling, but if you are only sampling a single small part of the overall buying public (just digital music consumers, instead of all music consumers) you won't get the full answer.
So you can anonymously continue to fair reading101.
If I want to buy a Porsche, I am not interested about hearing about a kit car that I can assemble myself that looks sort of like a Porsche.
I sort of wish the linux flunkies wouldn't try to push me onto their stuff every time something comes up in discussion. You guys are possibly the only more annoying group than the Jobs Yobs that insist that everything apple is perfect and the rest of us are idiots.
More importantly, you comments about Gimp have little or another to do with piracy. Move along please.
Commercial or non-commercial (ie, you want to get paid or you don't) pretty much has the same result. Jammie Thomas wasn't doing commercial file sharing (she wasn't charging for the content) but the end results are the same, people who have the product who did not pay for it. The effects of file sharing, example, are commercial even if no money trades hands.
As for Youtube, when you choose to upload something, you are putting it on a commercial service. There is no way for your video to be seen without advertising. Thus, it's commercial even if it is not your specific intention.
Again, sorry, but last week Mike has a survey up that showed that most of the activity in the music business was still in shiny plastic discs. So if you are going to survey music buyers, you should survey all of the, not a small sub-set.
It would be incredibly relevant to see what price point ALL music consumers would consider good for digital media. and perhaps also to see what part of the plastic disc market would be shifted online if the price was right.
Keep an eye on all of the information out there, not narrowly on a single study.
I am just thinking how little I like no-name brand products from a supermarket, as they are usually the cheapest and lowest possible quality. I just can't wait to see the quality / cost trade offs they end up making on the movie product.
1. by definition, terrorism is a crime
2. and it seems to be organized
3. organized crime pirates music
4. therefore, music piracy is terrorism
You failed basic logic 101, didn't you?
Music piracy isn't terrorism. You so fail that it is beyond words.
However, those who monetize piracy for organized crime may be contributing directly or indirectly to terrorism or related activities.
Illegal activities are what fuel many terrorist organizations. Afghanistan is pretty much the world production leader of the raw plant product required to make heroin. The trail of illicit sales of this drug on the streets of America traces all the way back to those people who fight against the American military in that country. Are they terrorists? Not specifically, but you would have to be pretty stupid to ignore the connections.
On the post: Lady Gaga's Use Of Free Music
On the post: Amazon, Macmillan Fight Over Ebook Prices; After Amazon Removes Macmillan Titles, It Caves To Higher Prices
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Just like hardbacks / Paperbacks ?
On the post: Econ 101: Study Shows That If Record Labels Lowered Prices On Music, They Would Sell A Lot More
Re: Re: Re:
The name changes, but the function remains the same.
On the post: Amazon, Macmillan Fight Over Ebook Prices; After Amazon Removes Macmillan Titles, It Caves To Higher Prices
Re: Re: Re: Just like hardbacks / Paperbacks ?
There is no shortage of cotton, no shortage of t-shirt plants, and no shortage of printers to make them (cheap too!). The only scarcity is when a human decides to order 50 of something instead of 1000.
Hardcover books are the same sort of thing, the choice is made not to offer a paperback or digital version right away, and the hardcover books are often in limited supply (first printing, second printing, etc... more artificial scarcity). It isn't any different, there is no shortage of paper or printing presses, just a human choice to limit production (artificially creating scarcity).
There are few true actual scarcities, time being one of the very few.
On the post: Students Given Detention Just For Becoming 'Fans' Of A Page Making Fun Of A Teacher
50 years ago, someone might have put something rude on the blackboard or put up a paper on the wall. Becoming a fan at that point would have been signing "I agree - bob" or something like that on the paper.
There is a huge difference between students making fun of a teacher over lunch "Mr Jones is a weenie!", and actually taking it public. They crossed the line along the way, and they pay the price. To be honest, they should be lucky the teacher isn't one of those Americans with a lawyer on speed dial, as the content might have been actionable.
On the post: Amazon, Macmillan Fight Over Ebook Prices; After Amazon Removes Macmillan Titles, It Caves To Higher Prices
Re: Just like hardbacks / Paperbacks ?
Actually, the one small flaw is assuming the customer is always right, because they are not.
What makes me laugh out of all of this is that what the book sellers are doing is exactly the "artificial scarcity" system that Mike pushes so much. Hardcover books are the equal of the "pre-release box set" or the "autographed hoodie" or what have you, something that is rare by it's nature. If you want to be first to read a new book, you buy the hardcover. If you are just like the masses, you wait and buy the paperback or the digital version.
It really is the same thing, just framed slightly differently. The artificial scarcity is what justifies the price, no different from paying $50 for a hoodie.
On the post: Econ 101: Study Shows That If Record Labels Lowered Prices On Music, They Would Sell A Lot More
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Amazon, Macmillan Fight Over Ebook Prices; After Amazon Removes Macmillan Titles, It Caves To Higher Prices
Re: Re:
On the post: Amazon, Macmillan Fight Over Ebook Prices; After Amazon Removes Macmillan Titles, It Caves To Higher Prices
No, price fixing is when manufactures or retailers get together and agree to a price for all similar goods, and agree not to compete on them.
Book publishers each produce unique products, so there is no real price fixing possible, only a contractual agreement for what is an acceptable retail price for the product between the distributor and the retailer.
If Amazon and Walmart got together to set a retail price for a specific book, that would be price fixing.
On the post: Dear Recording Industry: Three Strikes Won't Save Your Business
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Publishers Beginning To Recognize The Value Of Free... Even As They Fight $10 eBooks
Re:
On the post: Econ 101: Study Shows That If Record Labels Lowered Prices On Music, They Would Sell A Lot More
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Econ 101: If you have multiple markets for the same thing, you don't lower the price in the smallest market so as to hurt your larger market.
60 cents per song would mean 60x12 = $7.20 for an album. When albums retail between 11 and 20 dollars, why would you want to depress the overall market? You might encourage more people to buy online, but your net profits overall would drop. That wouldn't be good business.
Proof that none of you have run a business before.
On the post: Econ 101: Study Shows That If Record Labels Lowered Prices On Music, They Would Sell A Lot More
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
So you can anonymously continue to fair reading101.
On the post: Econ 101: Study Shows That If Record Labels Lowered Prices On Music, They Would Sell A Lot More
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Professor Iyengar, a specialist in pricing and consumer behavior, surveyed only 600 digital music consumers as part of the study
600 digital music consumers. Next.
On the post: Seriously: Where Is The Link Between Copyright Infringement And Terrorism/Organized Crime
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I sort of wish the linux flunkies wouldn't try to push me onto their stuff every time something comes up in discussion. You guys are possibly the only more annoying group than the Jobs Yobs that insist that everything apple is perfect and the rest of us are idiots.
More importantly, you comments about Gimp have little or another to do with piracy. Move along please.
On the post: Can You Fairly Distinguish Commercial vs. Non-Commercial Use In Copyright?
Re: Re:
Commercial or non-commercial (ie, you want to get paid or you don't) pretty much has the same result. Jammie Thomas wasn't doing commercial file sharing (she wasn't charging for the content) but the end results are the same, people who have the product who did not pay for it. The effects of file sharing, example, are commercial even if no money trades hands.
As for Youtube, when you choose to upload something, you are putting it on a commercial service. There is no way for your video to be seen without advertising. Thus, it's commercial even if it is not your specific intention.
On the post: Econ 101: Study Shows That If Record Labels Lowered Prices On Music, They Would Sell A Lot More
Re: Re: Re: Re:
It would be incredibly relevant to see what price point ALL music consumers would consider good for digital media. and perhaps also to see what part of the plastic disc market would be shifted online if the price was right.
Keep an eye on all of the information out there, not narrowly on a single study.
On the post: Seriously: Where Is The Link Between Copyright Infringement And Terrorism/Organized Crime
Re: Re:
On the post: Retail Giant Tesco Gets Into The Movie Business
On the post: Seriously: Where Is The Link Between Copyright Infringement And Terrorism/Organized Crime
Re: Re:
2. and it seems to be organized
3. organized crime pirates music
4. therefore, music piracy is terrorism
You failed basic logic 101, didn't you?
Music piracy isn't terrorism. You so fail that it is beyond words.
However, those who monetize piracy for organized crime may be contributing directly or indirectly to terrorism or related activities.
Illegal activities are what fuel many terrorist organizations. Afghanistan is pretty much the world production leader of the raw plant product required to make heroin. The trail of illicit sales of this drug on the streets of America traces all the way back to those people who fight against the American military in that country. Are they terrorists? Not specifically, but you would have to be pretty stupid to ignore the connections.
Next >>