MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: 'Crisis of Proliferation'  (Read 3480 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: October 06, 2015, 04:04 »
+4
I read an interesting little article by Stuart Maconie ( UK writer and DJ) in last weeks Waitrose magazine (upmarket UK supermarket), about a well known French academic  called Jacques Attali. He wrote a book in 1977 called "Noise: The political economy of music" where he predicted a future where there would be so much music and it would be so easily available that it would cease to have any value. He called it the coming 'Crisis of Proliferation'. Maconie then went on to describe the current situation in the music business, looking back to the 1970's where a record in the charts could sell millions and provide a decent pension plan, and comparing that with a successful band nowadays who, despite worldwide acclaim were struggling to buy a one bed flat in London.
Ring any bells anyone ? Sounds much the same with the image industry.
« Last Edit: October 06, 2015, 06:46 by john_woodcock »


« Reply #1 on: October 06, 2015, 04:12 »
+2
Yes there's a lot in that. In music its now live music thats the money spinner with many bands reforming to do whole album tours and also the promotion of high cost vinyl and collector  packages for us oldies. The cost and ease of production has also plummeted.

Whether the solutions have parallels in the photo industry I don't know.

 

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything

« Reply #3 on: October 06, 2015, 09:36 »
+2
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/34344619/all-about-that-bass-writer-says-he-got-5679-from-178m-streams


That is quite a slap in the face isn't it?  2 writers at presumably a 50/50 split = $11,358 for that many streams. 

What exactly is a stream?  Isn't a stream something like Spotify where you don't actually download the music?

What would make this story more interesting would be to hear what he received in total, publishing right, paid downloads, radio play, tours, tv appearances, I think I've seen in tv commercials as well.  Surely there was more income than $5679.

On a side note, remember Billy Ray Cyrus's version of Achey Brakey Heart?   I remember an interview with the writer of that song and his first royalty cheque (I think they were quarterly) was $250,000. 

« Reply #4 on: October 06, 2015, 10:01 »
0
Well, world is changing everyday, and what it was once a good business now is worthless...

The question is, are we living this transition now??

« Reply #5 on: October 06, 2015, 11:01 »
+2
What would make this story more interesting would be to hear what he received in total, publishing right, paid downloads, radio play, tours, tv appearances, ...

Beyond that, what was the total income received, not just the total songwriter royalties. The record companies - or sometimes a publisher who owns the rights to the music - are like the stock agencies are for us.

If, for the sake of argument, the share a songwriter used to make of the total income was 50% and it's now 10%, that would also explain some of the rather sad numbers songwriters are seeing.

When SS did the deal with Facebook, if there were any sums paid to SS as part of signing the deal, the contributors don't see any of that money, only the 38 cents for each image used in an ad. Likewise if there are fees for the streaming deals, that cuts out the artists.

« Reply #6 on: October 06, 2015, 12:24 »
+2
A big and growing share of the public now believes - 'assumes' would be a better word - that music is free.  Physical media is ending, and even downloads are on a shaky basis.  The future is streaming services which are subscription based - sound familiar?  A microstock subscription is basically a stream. 

And beyond that, free but with embedded ads.  And that will come to microstock too - free image banks, all you have to do is rake your eyeballs over a few ads.  The middlemen are totally in control, the content creators can't get any accounting of usages, and there's no "sale price" on which to base a commission.
« Last Edit: October 06, 2015, 13:43 by stockastic »

Hongover

« Reply #7 on: October 06, 2015, 21:58 »
+1
That's what happened to the App market in the past few years.

They have it way worst, because a good image can take less than 30 minute to produce, while a good app takes weeks or months. Now that everyone wants apps for free, many categories have become nearly valueless.

Being in both sectors, I can tell you guys that I make way more money selling images than apps and they take up less of my time. SS alone doubles what I make in the App Store.

« Reply #8 on: October 06, 2015, 22:28 »
+1
That's what happened to the App market in the past few years.

They have it way worst, because a good image can take less than 30 minute to produce, while a good app takes weeks or months. Now that everyone wants apps for free, many categories have become nearly valueless.

Being in both sectors, I can tell you guys that I make way more money selling images than apps and they take up less of my time. SS alone doubles what I make in the App Store.

I was a software developer until a few years ago.  I remember watching that 'app' thing get started, and become big - and yet I was always thinking that no one could possibly make any money at it.  You couldn't even charge $5. But the economics of software development still applied - any app worth paying for takes man-months of effort.  You'd have to sell many thousands of copies to even begin to make money.  So in the end, an app by itself would never be profitable - it would have to tie into some service, be part of some company's bigger picture, to pay off.    I'm pretty sure lots of guys spent countless hours on apps that turned out to be a waste of time.
« Last Edit: October 07, 2015, 09:08 by stockastic »

« Reply #9 on: October 07, 2015, 01:25 »
+2
That's what happened to the App market in the past few years.

They have it way worst, because a good image can take less than 30 minute to produce, while a good app takes weeks or months. Now that everyone wants apps for free, many categories have become nearly valueless.

Being in both sectors, I can tell you guys that I make way more money selling images than apps and they take up less of my time. SS alone doubles what I make in the App Store.

I'm sure I read recently that only the top 10 selling Apps in the Apple App Store make any money.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
9 Replies
4882 Views
Last post October 27, 2008, 13:04
by RacePhoto
74 Replies
23703 Views
Last post June 02, 2009, 01:27
by leaf
68 Replies
18949 Views
Last post June 07, 2011, 03:48
by ShadySue
Capitalism is the crisis

Started by Tror « 1 2  All » Off Topic

46 Replies
38820 Views
Last post July 07, 2013, 08:22
by Fred
11 Replies
12463 Views
Last post April 09, 2020, 07:59
by Bauman

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors