Pink Floyd on Pandora


Interesting read here:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/06/23/pink-floyd-royalties-pandora-column/2447445/
-- Howard
hodu

Showing 4 responses by mapman

Not sure what to make of that except I'm sure it will work out in the end.
Marty, yeah, shakeouts, acquisitions, etc. seem par for the course when it comes to these kinds of new things. It'll be interesting to see where it goes. Brand/label owned internet music services would seem in line with what has been going on in the entertainment (and news) industry for quite a while, only internet music services and stations are the newer kids on the block. I think it safe only to assume that as long as there is money to made in the music industry, someone will step in to make it.
Danaroo has a good point which I agree with. Those guys need Pandora. Pink Floyd does not. Pandora might need Pink Floyd so they can use them as a seed to help people find other lesser known similar artists. Even newer popular money making artists might need Pandora and their ilk as a means of helping not fall off the map as their star fades. Artists I hear on Pandora like Rhianna, Flo Rida, and many others. Artist like Pink Floyd who are well past their prime but still manage to retain popularity, less so, but not totally. So I could understand where Pink Floyd thinks they are not getting a good deal. Of course, these kind of acts are not starving artists and in most any other industry would be fully retired by now with NO new income coming in (other than retirement savings, Social Security, etc.). So they really need to not buck the system too much and be thankful they are still receiving royalties for their past work.
"What struck me in the Floyd-authored op-ed piece -- and what prompted me to post it here in the first place -- was the idea that Pandora, at least as the writers would have us believe, is attempting to snow the artists, saying one thing while hoping for another. If Pandora wants to change its royalty structure, it should be upfront about it."

I would agree with that. Its an op-ed piece though, so no assurance all the facts are related and assessed unbiasedly. I am not familiar with them so dunno. A cleverly disguised campaign for corporate advantage? Plenty of those that go around. Truth usually comes out in the end no matter what. We'll see....