After years of "controlling" the industry by keeping CD prices at what they want consumers to pay & essentially presenting people with what they deem to be "good music", they are still "money grubbing corporate swine" for lack of a better words. When they do allow the release of an album, it is not the sound/talent that they listen to, but how much money it will possibly make.
It's getting tighter in the music industry, with the buyout of many labels, it's going to be harder & harder for new groups to get a start. When Seagams Corp. acquired several music labels, it immediately dumped music artists that were deemed no longer "profitable". This is exactly what Sony music did several months earlier.
In a commentary presented online on ZDnet, an annonymous commentator who used to work for a major label, along with "unprofitable" artists, was also laid off when the workforce was trimmed, offered an explanation of the inner workings. This is the way it works according to him:
When a group/artist is starting out, the record company will *lend* the group the money to make an album. All the costs of studio time & other ammenities are tallied and taken out of any profits that the album generates. The group/artist will not make any money from any of the albums until the 3rd or 4th one. The monies that the group/artist does directly acquire are from concert tours & merchandising.
It's evident that file sharing will never die....the genie is out of the bottle, so to speak.
It's too bad RIAA doesn't know/care about the real power behind the music...the people. By alienating those people, they, hopefully, are ensuing their own demise.
Wouldn't that be a shame