citation?

Wonder how people manage it then? Magic?

No I don't. I'm trying to explain that people can do all that without a Major sucking away most of their money AND keeping rights to the music.

Possibly, but they have a CHANCE. And they keep all teh cash and the rights and can reach a worldwide audience in seconds.

I don't understand you think that is bad.

https://youtube.com/t/press_statistics


Wonder how people manage it then? Magic?
People win the lottery too, possible does not mean likely.

Yes the have a chance, but a slim one, the big players will make sure that they control the market, using people like you I believe.

I wonder where my video is in the 8 years of video uploaded in one day !!!!!!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/nation...BdQ_story.html

actually it's an hour a second.

Ah, that's videos. Not songs by people trying to make it.

Indeed. But before the internet gave EVERYONE a chance, you only had a chance if you got to a record label, they liked you and they gave you a deal.

Surely as a socialist you see that getting rid of the power of the majors and equaling the playing field is better?

And you don't think people had a slim chance before?

Now they can record and release their own songs, keep the money and the rights. Why is that bad?

Reminds me of people who used to say that the proof that we lived in a democracy was that we could go to Hyde Park Corner and say what whatever we wanted. The fact that your voice would be one amonst many other mad voices and that the only people listening were bemused tourists escaped their logic.

Giving 30% to iTunes for the marketplace they provide is a hell of a lot better than any other first time recording artist deal with a major where they are LOANED the money to record a an album and they have to repay that loan and then they don't own the music anymore.

Yes record companies exploited musicians, but they also brought other things to the table, they took to band to a professional recording studio, they had a professional sound engineer mic up the drums and other instruments. They rehearsed them, recorded them, schooled them, marketed them * (* just for you :-))
They hired in other musicians for different tracks, they produced albums with themes, great photography for the covers and ads, they helped music magazines survive with content.

Freedom, opportunity, education need structure as well as just the freedom to distribute.

You are throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

The new corporations Apple Google Microsoft are just as exploitative and unaccountable.

For this chart - selling an album and a track is not the same thing. Selling a real self pressed album out of your car or whatever, you can only sell to people right there.

On iTunes, with average (and that is the average) of 12 tracks per album, you need to sell 175 albums worth of tracks, and you can sell to anyone at anytime.

There is NO comparison. It is MUCH easier to sell 175 albums online than it is to sell 143 real CDs. If you like the personal approach, you can still tell people to go to iTunes during our set, and yo don't have to be an asshole going around afterwards during the other sets.

And it was impossible to get a contract. Impossible. now merit and marketing are the rules.

Yes but Manwin and the big players will be looking get the most $$$ out of their content once something like ACTA or SOPA is passed. The tube model rose only because it was easy to steal somebodys work and hide behind loopholes. Remove the ability to get free content & make long term profits from stealing content a thing of the past, and most of the problem is solved. Also the file locker / file sharer sites, they are only a result of a temporary situation in the market.

In reality, SOPA or ACTA or whatever will be a game changing turn in the market. Legal tubes exist only because illegal tubes made porn easy to access for free so they had to adapt. Once the pirates finances become an easy target. the legal tube owners may well decide to move to a more profitable model again.

Tubes by themselves are a worthless model when content has to be payed for and can not be pirated without risk. Content costs $$$, hosting costs $$$$, mandatory police-ing of user content will cost $$$$, traffic costs $$$$ so the game will get very very expensive for tubes.

No business in the world can survive by giving away most of its product for free in hopes of the customer buying something down the road. Sure it's not the same in the brick and mortar world and with physical products but the tube model by itself is a fundamentally flawed model that was a result of a temporary anomaly in the market once the market changes the model is not worth shit. Also keep in mind that in the real world they cant steal your stuff and get away with it so the real world will never see a "tube model". I don't care how much new sites/file sharing methods pop up the important thing is the ability to easily take them and their finances down before they mean shit traffic wise.

Again I repeat, people may be used to getting stuff for free but 30-40$ for a membership is not exactly a fortune and the stale free tube crap will not be as appealing when responsibility for content is introduced.

You are a damn fool and SOPA could pass tomorrow without the adult landscape changing.

Content is fucking cheap, no matter what you say or think.

Hosting is extremely fucking cheap, no matter what you say or think.

Policing is a non issue if you purchased the content and disable uploads.

Traffic costs $0 to the big tubes. $0 is pretty fucking cheap.

The level of ignorance displayed here on a daily basis rarely manages to surprise me but this was so fucking LOL that I must say you managed to do it. :thumbsup

No offense but I don't think you have any idea how tubes operate. Sponsors gladly give conent to tubes and in return they get massive sales out of it. :2 cents:

what you mean?

The established tubes have no reason to buy traffic at this point.

There's a huge difference between the way that forums or file sharing sites and tubes operate. They're really not very similar at all.

Tubes make the majority of their money selling memberships. This is not up for debate, it's a simple fact. This means they have to work WITH many of the large adult companies. Where a file hosting site may have an entire site rip for Bang Bros online, because they don't do business with Bang Bros, a tube will have many more smaller clips. Why? Because they're getting paid affiliate commissions from Bang Bros and can't alienate the company. In this case Bang Bros is just an example.

All of you sitting around hoping and dreaming that some piece of legislation is going to come along and get rid of tubes for you had better start thinking up new business plans now.

The Internet is not driven top down but rather bottom up. You can't dictate to surfers how they want to consume content, they're going to dictate to you. If you don't keep up you'll be as extinct in this business as the dinosaur Markham.

Big tubes already have all the traffic, and can easily go legit if not already. Their traffic won't be going anywhere.

:thumbsup:thumbsup

yeah i'm niggling about the no cost part. they spend tons on traffic and seo.

I'm not so sure about that. I can't speak for every site, but one tube site owner I know quite well with a top 500 Alexa tube site spends nothing at all on traffic. Not a damned dime.

well i know their seo teams are very active and buying. also all the up and coming tubes have traffic / affiliate type programs now as well. your friend's is the exception. most have huge budgets to buy traffic and links.

not hating just stating a fact.

Yeah I'm sure the Manwin tubes, for example, do spend quite a bit on SEO. Maybe that's the difference between being an Alexa top 500 and Alexa top 50 site. Might very well be. :thumbsup

100........Tube Models

At the moment content is cheap I agree 100%. Prices driven down by pirate sites and the current anomaly in the market.

Yes with current prices of content being what they are its easy to get lots of stale content and tube it. Agree again 100%


Yes they got popular by "sharing" other peoples stolen content. Did not cost them much. BUT after SOPA/ACTA whatever comes, then comes my point....

My point: After SOPA who will want to give you his new kick ass content for pennies? Keep in mind that all pirate sites just got an "Easy OFF" switch. Keep in mind the basic laws of economy when something becomes scarce the price rises. Sure theres tons of cheap stale shit to be had. But if you think that after SOPA somebody will be willing to sell you his kick ass new 3D HD content for pennies, well here I do not agree. Sure you may get a 2-3 min clip for your legal tube but this is basically just a free ad for his site and 2-3 min clips do not pay your rent...

The rise in price will not happen over night but the quality of legal tubes is certain to decline. Content producers will have a better angle in selling their content again. BIg tubes will be on glass legs so to speak, basic laws of economy apply to everything and when you take the "safe and easy file sharing" out of the game, the price must go up....

SOPA as it was written wouldn't have made a lick of difference to tube sites. :2 cents:

The artists PAID for all that stuff. The Majors didn't 'give' it to them.

None of that is important any more though. Albums with themes? Come on, prog rock died for a reason.

Mic-ing up drums? That's really not hard. And who cares about cover art when it's on an iPhone screen? The days of gatefold Yes albums are done with.

Structure? Not sure what you mean. Unless you mean the list of things that artists don't need to be sold anymore. They can do it themselves.

No one is throwing out bathwater. More music is made and sold to more people today than every before. It's just the Majors don't own the rights to it now. And they are pissed.

So, in the old days, you got signed and loaned the money to record and album. They album then sold, and you paid the label back. And you didn't own the songs you made anymore. It was like getting a mortgage for a house, paying it off, and the bank still own the house.

How is charging 30% even vaguely similar?

And google and ms aren't really in this game, are they?

Direct difference probably not. But indirect is another story. Basic laws of economy are not to be argued with, increased demand but limited supply always raises the price. SOPA=the supply is now more limited. Also the market will slowly change and adapt to a more profitable content situation. Profit from tubes will go the way of the big block engine after oil prices rose...some will survive but most will have to adapt to something new...

SEO I can see but that's something anyone with a big site would be doing anyhow. I really don't see the tubes buying tons of traffic but if they are the legality of their videos wouldn't change any of that.

Point: We have great conversions on PornerBros, even if we give content for free and stay legal.

seo is buying traffic in a sense, you are paying for traffic in the end.

many tubes have programs like this now webmaster.drtuber.com

Eh, I do believe they buy traffic at 1.75 per k because they sell ads on those pages for more than that. Not exactly what I what I was talking about but I cede to your point.

i know over 400 diy artist

the one thing you keep ignoring is the record company take 95% of the money from the sale.

so to make the same number you only have to get an audience 1/20th as big.

That makes all the difference in the world, you don't have to get anywhere as close

In fact you can make way more money, giving your shit away for free, using mega uploads advertising sharing programs then you could
1. It way easier to give away a song then it is to sell it
2. you don't have to give 95% to the record company.


there are 132 methods right now that i am personally aware off, and they grow each and every year.

I advice every artist to do a kickstarter campaign when they get offered a signing bonus.

To see if their fans will fund them to the same level

So far not one single artist has every gotten more from the record company.

Now these people know how to do a crowdfunding campaign properly so that may be an anomaly

would kreayshawn raise a million on kickstarter? doubt it.

maybe but they are using it to grow their tube and one reason why it's one of the biggest tubes now almost overnight. all the tubes that are blowing up have similar programs.

gideon stick to talking about music promotion it's more interesting then when you talk about fair use.

says the guy who thought clerks turned a profit on the theatrical release

Even though it didn't turn a profit until 6.5 years after it left the theaters.


Well i do know way more about this shit then you do.

Okay, so this thread has deteroriated nicely I see....

Carry on.

You may have missed the news. There was a huge protest against SOPA and it has been killed.

now add the record companies piece and the artist together and then look at the number for sites last.fm

you basically need 8140 people to add you daily playlist and listen to you at work to earn minimum wage.

And that assuming that the playlist is so huge that they can't get thru it in a 8 hour work day.

If they only have 2-3 hours that like 1/4 that number.

http://emotionistic.com/wp-content/u...television.jpg

i was aware and never denied that. you implied they made no money from that.

no denying the hollywood system made kevin smith a very wealthy and famous man.

he may be suffering now, but his movies are awful lately.

he is actually making way more money now

his speaking tour nets him 20k a night

before he records them sells the dvd/cd /smod cast.

http://livefrombehind.com/

you can bet he will make more money from this one day showing that he made from any other movie he ever shot.