Originally Posted by BacteriumFendYoke
I just think the industry has been slow to adapt and are now suffering. I call arrogance.
They have been slow, although adjusting pricing for example wouldn't keep most people from downloading illegally or re-distributing those files. They're not doing it because music is too expensive, they will do it even if the songs were .29 instead of .99 or 1.29. It's just their mentality. It's the same reason people take the little soaps and shampoo from their hotel room. It's just what they do, it's not because they won't spend a few bucks at the store. *
I'm not sure the labels were so arrogant as they were in denial about something as obvious and do-able as distributing digital music themselves. I think most labels have adapted in the last 4 or 5 years, but it was already too late. They could have maintained a better hold on their own product if they'd been in on the ground floor. Some of the labels got what they deserved, but others were dragged down with them. None of it had to happen this way, or this soon.
I suspect labels will exist mostly to administrate 'catalog' recordings as opposed to marketing new artists and their music. As for the people who've been laid-off, and there are many more to come, I'm sure they'll become consultants and liaisons for digital distributors, which will become more crucial as artists try to market their music with firm release dates, and promotion from the various sites. The online sellers will essentially become the new labels, and the music business game will start all over - how to get 'in' with those sellers and other music sites, for the best promotion & exposure. Why get exposure and promote music? So that the artists can make money! If they don't, that process will eventually shrink, our choices for new music will also shrink, and there'll be no blaming a 'label' for that. It'll all be on the hands of those who think music should be free.
* BTW, I should know...