[hank777]

I am very familiar with how this works so I promise you I am not "looking at it the wrong way" but describing how things actually work. I am not making this up.

Labels create band demand. Concert promoters do not. I promise you this is causation and not correlation. People go see shows because they have the record and know the band. I am sure you have never gone (willingly) to see a show from a band whose music you didnt already have and/or or know pretty well. The band marketing (the label) created the market environment for you to know and like their music. People do not go see artists because they saw some add in a local paper advertising an artist. It doesnt happen. Promoters only provide awareness so that if you are a fan you will know that this band you like is in town.

[sanswork]

Labels don't create demand, they might want you to believe that since it makes them sound important but they don't not anymore anyhow.

I have actually gone to lots of concerts where I had no clue who the band was as have many people I know. Most cities have a pretty active live music scene with lots of people who will go to just about any show they can, and those people start spreading the news.

Also getting rid of the labels removes nothing at all except for mass commercial cd distribution. Even then I doubt the online music stores would disappear since a lot of people will pay for the convenience.

[llimllib]

Hank, I agree with you overall on this issue, and I liked your article, but your argument in this comment is terrible. You are appealing to your own authority and you're not provably right in any sense.

[hank777]

You are right. But sometimes authority and experience are relevant. I cant help that I really do know what I am talking about on this matter. I guess I could go out and interview some other people about how this part of the industry works so that I would be relying on someone else's authority and not mine, but we don't all have equivalent knowledge on everything. I have been involved in music for a long time and know how this part of the business works.

I am not sure how, other than expressing that, that I can explain this. This is not really a judgment issue but about explaining the dynamics of an existing market. If you would prefer to believe that I don't know what I am talking about that is fine. But at minimum I would suggest, if you are really interested in how artists today become successful that you do a little independent (and therefore not tainted by my bias) investigation from people that are really in the biz. The funny part is that there really is nothing to argue about here. No one in music will tell you that concert promoters create demand for artists. It feels a little surreal to even be arguing the point.

[sanswork]

If you read what I said I never said concert promoters were the people that create demand, just that labels aren't the only way to create demand and the disappearance of labels will not cause the disappearance of promoters or live music either.

[enra]

And why free music doesn't count as advertising for the band and creating the demand?

[hank777]

I am not sure exactly why, but it just doesnt work. The numbers are very clear. With very young artists, free music can get them exposed enough to get a record deal, but not enough to sell performance tickets. You can of course always fall back on the "well it hasnt worked but it will" argument, but as of today, it has not worked. There is no argument at all about this. The statistics are very clear. Of course I cannot see the future, but there is little reason after quite a few years of the internet, for me to believe the economics and behavioral dynamics are going to change. Of course anything can happen but it doesn't seem like a good bet.