Re: Standards Article

George Michaelson (ggm@connect.com.au)
Mon, 13 Oct 1997 09:18:27 +1000

PS I'm not necessarily in favour of protectionism & obviously
monopolistic cartels are pathological. I am an electronic music artist
who supports the ACCC's approach re CDs. The music industry in general
treats artists like slaves & rips them off. I estimate that sales of CDs
of my music have netted approximately $200,000. But I have received less
than $2000 from record companies. My only option is to sue. Even if I
had been payed my due this would be only about $10,000 & I produce
complete masters in my home studio. The record industry sucks.

On a couple of occasions, here and in other online forums I have suggested
that royalties could be payed as a form of exponential-decay over time and
volume. In effect you'd get 90%+ of the profit on early sales, declining
over time to some long-tail dribble. I'd actually assumed this would map
price and that 'early adopters' would pay premium but the longterm price
would decay down to WELL below current prices for books/recordings. Its not
impossible that this could combine with an inverse relationship for % of
profit derived by the distribution channel.

In effect, your 'real' income would derive from the first low thousand sales
and would equalize your revenue with those of U2 and other mega-bores.

As an artist, could you live with that model? Does it have any merit? As a
consumer, I would be very happy to forgo early adoption for cheaper media and
I expect enough fans would have the inverse behaviour to give you income.

Comments?

--
George Michaelson         |  connect.com.au pty/ltd
Email: ggm@connect.com.au |  c/o AAPT,
Phone: +61 7 3834 9976    |  level 8, the Riverside Centre,
  Fax: +61 7 3834 9908    |  123 Eagle St, Brisbane QLD 4000