February 26th, 2004


Previous Entry Next Entry
12:01 am - on movies I'm going to have to see and things that I hoped I never would...

(19 comments | Leave a comment)

 
on movies I'm going to have to see and things that I hoped I never would... - graffiti.maverick — LiveJournal

• Recent Entries
• Friends
• Archive
> ChrisMaverick dot com
• profile


Art & Photography
> 365 Days of Mav
> Elseworld.com
> Mav's Flickr Stream
> MavTV (youtube)
> Party Nook

Wrestling
> International Males
> IWC Wrestling
> BDW Wrestling
> CWF Wrestling

Other
> 1KWFFH
> Mav's DVD Library
> Verdandi (currently down)
> Mav's Schedule (currently down)
> Mav's MySpace
chrismaverick. Get yours at flagrantdisregard.com/flickr

Comments:


[User Picture]From: sui66iy Date: February 26th, 2004 - 06:15 am (Link)

Re: PS

Is it? Here's an alternative story:

Music sells because Clear Channel plays it. You only hear a few songs, so if you want to buy a new album, that's what you buy.

Aside: this may not work all that well. It's tough to "predict" hits (the movie industry fails routinely as well). A good way to do it is to throw a bunch of stuff out there and see what sticks. But this is not what Clear Channel does: they pick only a few things at a time. This is slower and less reliable. Odd coincidence: music industry profits are way down. Perhaps for reasons other than file sharing... But Clear Channel may not really give a shit, since they aren't the music industry. All they care about is advertiser revenue.

Now Clear Channel is homogenizing its DJ content. Sounds a lot like what they've done with music. Is there a good business argument for doing so? Who knows. Maybe they figure that as a near-monopoly, people will listen no matter what they play, so they might as well have the simplest, most homogenous format possible, so as to reduce costs. Maybe Stern costs a lot. Or maybe they are run by free speech hating zealots. Perhaps they really are afraid of the FCC.

Anyway, think twice before assuming that Clear Channel's motivations are as simple as "we sell what sells". Monopolies and near-monopolies don't have the same economic imperatives as normal companies.
[User Picture]From: chrismaverick Date: February 26th, 2004 - 07:07 am (Link)

Re: PS

eh... feedback loops are feedback loops. Its a chicken and egg problem. I do see your point. But I don't think its the same thing. CC plays certainly types of music because they BELIEVE its what sells. Whether that's because they caused it or not isn't relevant. They are taking a capitalist stance. If you can create the demand and supply the demand, then you win.

In this case, CC believes there is a demand, but they fear the consequences of filling the demand. They are doing something not in the interest of making money, but fear of losing it to the govt.

That said, yeah, monopolies are bad.
 

• Go to Top
LiveJournal.com