JumpingAnaconda
Winger
No, you are wrong. You are still making the assumption that the price was inflated. You have got no basis for that. There was some room to reduce prices, but there was always a knock-on impact on new talent. And I will tell you again, the price of titles was below inflation at the time mp3s started to have an impact. If titles had risen with inflation then they would be well above what they are now, yet numbers on physical sales catestrophically collapsed in a fashion that was not compensated by volumes on legal streaming and download seIf the greedy f***ing twats didn't charge inflated prices at the time then maybe they wouldn't have suffered so much.
I didn't ignore it all but I see you've ignored your incorrect 22,000 sales example by 2 pensioners from a band who are in no way as big a draw as they were in just the US market. You ignored that it got to number 5 in the UK so no doubt sold a few physical copies anarl and no doubt sold a few elsewhere in the world.
Buckingham/McVie, an example of a product from a long establish brand in Fleetwood Mac, one of the biggest acts in the world, and appealing primarily to a demographic that has much higher purchases of physical media than any other demographic. I am giving you an example of what a best case scenario is. How much do you think that unknown acts are going to be making from their releases? Do you think it will justify the effort? Do you think it will pay their bills? Don't you think they deserve some security from their work?
I know fuck all about royalties and can't be arsed to Google but that £10,000 has to be bullshit as you are saying they'd make £500 a week in royalties over the 20 weeks! Songs at #1 will also sell as downloads (you are just bleating on about streaming and physical for some reason) and even at 5p per download (which is probably less than what they get), they'd only have to sell about 1,000 downloads a week to get £500. If that gets to #1 for 20 weeks on those sales then @tunstall birdman could probably get to #1 hoying a bit music behind his poems.
Maybe you should stop running you mouth off about something you admit you know absolutely nothing about? A lot of your argument is based on assumptions that are completely wrong, as if the money just pops out of somewhere. You maths don't add up, and you clearly do not even know the difference between download revenues and streaming revenues. By the way, they both are infinitesimal compared to royalties earned on physical sales. But lets say that someone did earn 5p per download and they sold 1000 downloads in a week (keep in mind, the way the charts used to work, it was possible to get into the top 40 with less than 100 sales in some weeks, as long as you were getting played on the radio). Lets say you sell those 1000 downloads and you earn that £500. Do you think you arte going to be selling another 1000 downloads the next week? Because the chances are you would be lucky to break 400. So then you are making £300 odd quid that week. Then what about the week after that? Maybe another 50 downloads? You will be lucky to walk away with £700 on what might be your only chart entry of the year. Do you think they should be grateful for that?
In reality streaming revenues are a fraction of a penny per play, and you have to have thousands of streams to make a few pounds. But you just seem to think that is all wrong.
If the money was as bad as you are failing to make out by getting to #1 then what about the person at #5 getting even less, or someone who never even charts, why the fuck do they bother making music? All these wannabe artists, songwriters etc should just do summit else as there's plenty of music out there now to last any kid just starting to listen to music for a lifetime.
And yet again, this is the point I am making and why the industry is on its knees. Like I said from the start, the talent is not coming through. They are not bothering. The only people with any kind of security are those who get the major PR pushes like Ed Sheeran and Coldplay and Rhianna etc. At best the real talent is only getting chances to make half realised productions, fitting around making a living, and this is compromising the work and the art of a lot of these people. But you can not see that paying for records funded the development of other artists, and all the other music that has now fallen by the wayside.
EDIT:
I've just realized that 1000 download sales on a 5p royalty equates to £50 of royalties, not £500, so it just goes to show how clueless @MackemX really is about the whole issue.
Last edited: