The major labels are whining that music sales are at an 18 year low. They’re now pointing fingers and going after everyone they feel are to blame for their woes. The problem is, the finger pointing and blame game is being directed at everyone except who’s really at blame here- the labels themselves.

Personally, I find it just a little difficult to muster much sympathy for an industry who’s executives pull in 7 and 8 digit salaries. Yes, my heart just bleeds when, for example, I see a magazine spread of one of Tommy Mottola’s multi-million dollar estates, or his mug at some fancy Hampton's party, at someone else’s multi-million dollar estate. Or the latest news that RCA head, Joe Galante just bought Barbara Mandrell’s multi-million dollar spread that sits on 136 acres, as an "investment." And it’s absolutely gut wrenching to read of one of these executives that’s being replaced, walking away with multi-million dollar settlement packages. It just tears my heart out when I read about some label signing an artist, obviously past their sales peak, to multi-multi-million dollar contracts, only to have their releases "not live up to" label expectations, and they lose millions in the process.

The only sympathy I can muster in that regard, is for the ‘little guys" who wind up taking the fall and losing their jobs because of mismanagement and the squandering of millions of dollars: the mailroom clerks, the secretaries and assorted other low ranking and low paid employees, and the artists that never got the chance, because the label " has to" purge their roster in cost cutting measures. Oddly though, during these cost cutting measures, one never seems to hear of any executive giving up a digit or two in salary, so that a few mailroom clerks or secretaries can keep their jobs, or so that talented artists can stay on, to perhaps someday generate more income for their label.

The major record labels were never ranked very highly on anyone’s "most popular" list, though at various points in time, there were a few well respected label heads and labels. However, on the whole, for decades, they were notoriously known for unscrupulous recording contracts, ripping off their artists by not paying them the royalties due them, and assorted other underhanded, dirty dealings. Many an artist found out too late, that within the double talk and loopholes of the contracts they signed, they’d unknowingly given up the rights to their very own work. Or that if things didn’t work out, and there was a parting of the ways, the label held the master tapes "hostage", demanding the artist pay ridiculous sums in order to get them returned. The artist is responsible for reimbursement of studio time, payment for all parties involved in the sessions (ie: studio musicians, etc.), and any promotional expenses incurred for the album. If an artist becomes moderately successful, the vast majority don’t see a dime for their recordings for years. Those that don’t (and there’s many cases of artists that did have huge hit records), often find themselves very deeply in debt, and many have had to file for bankruptcy, because that debt load was impossible to pay off. An artist can fulfill their obligation of recording an album, however, if the label doesn’t like it, they have the right to shelve the whole project without the artist having any say in the matter, and the artist still has to pay for any expenses incurred. With all the mergers that have taken place over the past few years, many an artist has found themselves suddenly on a label they never signed with, and A.) is now stuck there against their desire, or B.) is dropped by the acquiring label, either option at the acquiring label’s discretion.

Unfortunately, up until about a half decade or so ago, this was virtually the only avenue open to a career in music, so these are the chances artists were willing to take. Indie labels were few and far between at the time. They had limited budgets and limited distribution, so therefore lacked the clout and ability to gain mass exposure for their artists. Certain technologies were new at the time, and were too costly for the average Joe trying to break in, to afford on their own. However, in this past half decade or so, the game’s changed drastically, with the advent of the "computer age"- cyberspace...that thing called the worldwide web. Technology has also advanced to the point that recording can now be done more efficiently and at a fraction of the cost than was previously feasible. The major labels grew fat and lazy, and were caught snoozing while all these developments sprung up around them. Now that they’ve finally awoken, they’ve found out that their status as "major", in relation to the music industry, has been significantly downgraded.

Their first mistake was putting all their eggs in the "format conversion" basket with the advent of the CD. The "format conversion market" are the people that went out and replaced their vinyl or cassette copies of albums with CDs. This inflated sales, since if vinyl wasn’t fazed out, and this new technology didn’t spring up, those sales wouldn’t have been there. However, after a decade or so, this market has run it’s course, as everyone has pretty much finished replacing everything they plan on replacing.

The next mistake was further fragmenting genres into micro-categories, targeting very narrow audiences. Instead of marketing an entire genre of music to consumers, they were breaking it down so that only small portions we being heard. Let’s take the rock genre for example. Suddenly instead of just "rock", we now have such designations as "modern rock", "alt-rock", "classic rock", "oldies"...Where once the consumer was exposed to ALL styles of rock, now they are only hearing a small fragment of it. If you tune into a modern rock station, you’re not being exposed to any past or long established artists. If you tune into a classic rock station, you’re not being exposed to the new artists and music, and so on. And a consumer cannot buy, what he does not ever hear. It seems to be beyond their comprehension that consumers are intelligent, and do have varied tastes in music. They seem to think that because someone listens to Led Zeppelin, they’re not also listening to The Strokes. They seem to think that because someone listens to country music, they’re not also listening to classical or rock or reggae.

Their lack of comprehension regarding consumers’ varied tastes has led them to yet another major misstep. For some inexplicable reason, if a certain artist with a certain sound, within a genre becomes popular, they seem to feel that’s the only sound the consumer wants to hear. This thinking seems to have started with the Seattle "grunge" bands, carried through with the Garth Brooks faux-cowboy clones, the sexed up pop divas (in both pop and "country" music), teen acts, metal/rap, and continues with the neo-grunge bands that began with Creed’s success. Who is going to go out and buy music that all sounds exactly the same? All they did was create an atmosphere of consumer BOREDOM. There is nothing fresh or exciting about recycled leftovers- served cold. Neil Young made a statement regarding what’s ailing the music industry today, to the effect that, if a band wants to sound like Linkin Park, great. But if they want to sound like The Rolling Stones, Bob Dylan, or The Ramones, they should be able to do that too. Everyone shouldn’t be made to sound the same, because people’s tastes are not the same. Again, they’re targeting a very small portion of the market, while leaving the greater portion unserved, thereby losing the greater number of potential sales.

Their biggest- and most fatal mistake was, blatantly ripping off the consumer. The prices of CDs have climbed steadily over the past five years. Five years ago, it was the norm to be able to buy a CD for an average price of $9.99. Today, it has become increasingly difficult to find any music outside of the Top 40, for under $18 or $19. To add insult to injury, the consumer is getting far less- for twice the price. The simple truth is, the labels have been putting out shoddy "product." In an effort to lower their bottom line, they rush releases out with CDs being geared to only the couple of singles that will be released to radio, while the rest of the CD is nothing but throwaway filler- substandard material that isn’t worth the 3 cent cost of the disc it’s recorded on. Consumers got fed up with paying a premium for a CD that contains only two or three good to decent songs. Also making the consumer very unhappy, is their fairly recent strategy of "Greatest Hits" and endless "remastered" versions of CDs, where they add on a couple of "new" or otherwise "previously unreleased" songs. These songs are never released as singles, so the segment of buyers that wouldn’t ordinarily buy a greatest hits CD, because they already own all the songs on the original releases, or already own the original version of a "remastered" CD, is being forced to repurchase songs they already own, just to get the couple that have been tossed in, that they don’t.

The labels themselves have driven away the consumer, and they themselves, are directly to blame for the decline in sales. Now they whine about downloading. However, they can’t justify why a consumer shouldn’t download a couple of songs off a CD from which they already own the other 10 songs on it- which they’ve already paid for. As far as "re-masters", overall, I hear no distinct audio difference from the original versions, yet they can’t justify why anyone should have to pay again for the same CD with the same songs, just to get two or three "previously unreleased" songs. What would possess a consumer to spend $18 for what amounts content-wise, to an EP these days: CDs that only contain only a few worthwhile songs? What would possess a consumer to shell out $18 for CDs from 30 different bands that all sound exactly like Eddie Vedder wannabes? Or even worse- Pro Tools "singers"!!

Yes, they’ve recently tossed the consumer a "bone", by discounting the prices of selected new artists’ releases now and then. And much to their amazement, dropping the prices to $9.99, or even a dollar or two less, has accomplished a major feat: these CDs are selling! But the labels caution that this could backfire if an artist they choose to discount doesn’t sell- they’d stand to lose a lot of money. If the artist doesn’t sell at a discounted price, wouldn’t it stand to reason then, that the artist really isn’t going to sell at $18, so who’s losing what? Now if untested artists are selling well at that price- just think of what the better known artists would move if the prices for ALL music were rolled back. Dollarwise, it still ultimately works out in the end if you sell one at $18 or eight at $9.99, and the whole point is to get as much "product", and thus maximum exposure for the artist, into the marketplace. If the consumer only could afford to buy one CD at $18, if the price was rolled back, they’d be able to buy two, for close to the same price. Inventory would move, and sales would go up across the board to the benefit of all artists.

But even with this "bone", the labels speaketh with forked tongue. The consumer also knows that as soon as this discounted artist reaches a certain number of sales, their CD will be jacked up to the regular price. The five major labels that remain after all the mergers, are now international conglomerates. The very people that are waging war on music download sites and web radio stations, also own companies that sell the equipment to enable the consumer to use this technology! A bit of a conflict of interest? Oh, and the cost of putting out a CD. The artist, the songwriter, studio musicians, etc., all get paid the same whether they charge $9.99 or $18 for a CD. And of course the retailer has to make a buck or two profit, so where is the rest of the money going? Ah, they say, the cost of doing business- music videos, all the lawyers...those multi-million dollar executive salaries, radio payola. Oh yeah, their latest excuse, radio payola. It’s been going on for years and costing them a fortune. 1.5 million just to promote one Shania Twain single to radio. That old loophole, in that pesky law (that’s only been around since the payola scandal of the ‘50s), and now suddenly it’s all radio’s fault they’ve had their backs put up against the wall. Radio is dictating to them what will be played and how much it will cost.

Puh-leeze!! Yes, it is very true that since deregulation, the radio monoliths that sprang up have all but destroyed it. However, radio needs something to play in order to survive, no? And where does radio get the music that will be played? From record labels. And since this seems to have suddenly become something of great concern to all record labels, if ALL the labels stood together and refused to fork over the cash, where would that leave radio? If they refused to play the music, then they wouldn’t have music to play, and therefore would have no radio station. I’d say blame for this one is 50/50. The labels fed the beast for years, yet still had some control. Then deregulation set the beast free from it’s cage, and it grew so large, that the labels lost whatever control they had to keep the beast in line.

It would seem the major labels aren’t so major anymore, and their days as a major force in the music industry seem numbered. Indie labels are springing up in great numbers, and are gaining clout and momentum. Artists are walking away from the major labels by choice, so that they can put out the kind of music they and their fans want, and they have far greater creative control over their work. Many artists are bypassing the major labels altogether, and are heading straight for Indie labels, or are making a go of it on their own, selling their own music over the web. The matter of downloading will eventually be worked out, where everyone gets their due, most likely in the manner that KaZaA has proposed- a $1 surcharge that gets added onto consumers’ internet subscription bills, which then gets divided among copyright holders. While everyone wants to see the artists, songwriters, etc. get their due, going after and shutting down these sites like a pack of rabid dogs, is only further angering the consumer they are trying desperately to woo back. The majority of people do not use these sites to avoid making purchases, but to help them make informed choices. Since so little of the music being put out anymore is being heard, people want to hear artists they may have heard of, but have never actually heard. Or they want to see if a certain album is worth buying, or whether it was just that one song they’re going to like, before they plunk down their cash. Too many consumers have been burned too many times, and they’re going to do "research" before they wind up getting burned again- a situation the record industry created itself.

The same can be said of web stations. People are finally being exposed to music they cannot hear on traditional radio. If you wind up forcing these stations out of existence by trying to place unreasonable fees on them- not only are you hurting the sales of artists that are finally being given a forum to be heard, again, you are only going to further anger and alienate the consumer.

It’s time for the major labels to stop the finger pointing and take a good hard look in the mirror. They’ve brought all their problems upon themselves, and it’s time they cleaned their own house. Although the music industry is now virtually controlled by mega-conglomerates that also own more traditional businesses, the music industry is not made to work on the growth theory. It has peaks and valleys, upturns and downturns, as proven by it’s history. Music itself is an intangible- it cannot be sold like a box of breakfast cereal, a TV or a car, and it simply cannot be forced to work that way. In order for the major labels to survive, they must stop listening to shareholders, and start remembering the reason they exist in the first place. Let the artists make the music they and their fans want. And start focusing on the consumer, they’re tired of being ripped off and of not being given choices in what they want to hear. The music buyers are sending the message by way of declining sales - all the labels have to do is listen.