Zack44
Proud Member
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2012
- Messages
- 315
- Points
- 43
There is something I've always wondered about:
Circa 1999/2000, Napster arrived on the scene and and brought on a big fundamental change in the record industry. Since anyone could share and download mp3's of their favorite songs for free, the number of physical units of music (CD's, cassettes, etc) drastically started to decline. Even though the RIAA and every record company eventually forced Napster to shut down and pretty much shamed anyone who took part in internet piracy, it was too late. Pandora's box had already opened and there was no going back. After all, why continue to buy a $15 CD when you can just get the music for free?
It wouldn't be until the launch of legal mp3 stores like Apple's iTunes, and eventually streaming services like Spotify, that the record companies could start profiting from music over the internet. Still, they don't make NEARLY as much profits now as they used to when the consumer had no other choice to buy an album or CD.
Anyway, I've been thinking: Michael was the kind of artist who attributed much of his own success on sales figures of his albums (i.e. Thriller selling 100 million copies). 20 years ago when Invincible came out, Napster had already come and gone. The fans usually attribute Invincible's poor sales either to other factors, such as Sony under-promoting it, sabotage from Tommy Mottola, Michael choosing not to tour because of 9/11, or other things like that. However, no one ever seems to brings up the fact that by 2001, the entire record industry was completely topsy-turvey and didn't know how to adapt to the new changes. When Michael died in 2009, most of the newer audiences started listening to him through iTunes downloads, not by buying a vinyl or a CD at a store.
My question is, was Michael aware on how much of a game-changer that Napster truly was? If he were alive today and releasing music on Spotify, would he be able to adapt? Would he be able to mentally cope with the fact that no one buys physical albums anymore, and that "success" is driven by individual streams that each only earn a fraction of a penny? Did Michael ever have any opinions on the rise of internet mp3 downloads while he was alive? He might have been a savvy businessman in the music industry, but I think it might have been difficult for him to cope with these changes, considering that he flourished so well from people buying his CD's and records.
What do you guys think?
Circa 1999/2000, Napster arrived on the scene and and brought on a big fundamental change in the record industry. Since anyone could share and download mp3's of their favorite songs for free, the number of physical units of music (CD's, cassettes, etc) drastically started to decline. Even though the RIAA and every record company eventually forced Napster to shut down and pretty much shamed anyone who took part in internet piracy, it was too late. Pandora's box had already opened and there was no going back. After all, why continue to buy a $15 CD when you can just get the music for free?
It wouldn't be until the launch of legal mp3 stores like Apple's iTunes, and eventually streaming services like Spotify, that the record companies could start profiting from music over the internet. Still, they don't make NEARLY as much profits now as they used to when the consumer had no other choice to buy an album or CD.
Anyway, I've been thinking: Michael was the kind of artist who attributed much of his own success on sales figures of his albums (i.e. Thriller selling 100 million copies). 20 years ago when Invincible came out, Napster had already come and gone. The fans usually attribute Invincible's poor sales either to other factors, such as Sony under-promoting it, sabotage from Tommy Mottola, Michael choosing not to tour because of 9/11, or other things like that. However, no one ever seems to brings up the fact that by 2001, the entire record industry was completely topsy-turvey and didn't know how to adapt to the new changes. When Michael died in 2009, most of the newer audiences started listening to him through iTunes downloads, not by buying a vinyl or a CD at a store.
My question is, was Michael aware on how much of a game-changer that Napster truly was? If he were alive today and releasing music on Spotify, would he be able to adapt? Would he be able to mentally cope with the fact that no one buys physical albums anymore, and that "success" is driven by individual streams that each only earn a fraction of a penny? Did Michael ever have any opinions on the rise of internet mp3 downloads while he was alive? He might have been a savvy businessman in the music industry, but I think it might have been difficult for him to cope with these changes, considering that he flourished so well from people buying his CD's and records.
What do you guys think?
