Comments on: Will Yahoo, AOL, drop online radio? http://www.p2pnet.net/story/14162 p2pnet.net - reader powered Wed, 01 Feb 2012 15:11:09 -0300 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: @ readers write above http://www.p2pnet.net/story/14162/comment-page-1#comment-220850 @ readers write above Thu, 29 Nov 2007 16:42:58 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/story/14162#comment-220850 Since the internet radio (and terrestrial radio) are just 'distributing and promoting', the RIAA's 'product', much like the RIAA is doing for it's 'content providers', why don't the radio stations get to have a deal similar to what the RIAA has with it's 'content provider'? I mean I keep reading about how $0.50 from a $15 album goes to the artist ($20 if it's 'older stock'). So why doesn't the RIAA get paid 0.5/15 of the profit from a song. There are ~30412800 seconds in a year. So for a 3minute song (180 seconds), that would be 180/30412800* 0.5/15 = 1/5068800*income (hmm gross or net?) (Someone check my math,eh). So for the 0.11 to stand, the radio company would have to make 557,568 in those 3 minutes. Ok. I know I went to the extremes a little bit. Let’s go the other extreme. We'd have to reduce the time to actual play time (i.e. say radio is 1/3 music 2/3 talk/commercials), and the $0.50/$15 may have changed (hahahaha, damn that's funny). Lets assume $1/$15 is paid to the 'content provider' and use the 1/3 music to calculate the payout. 30412800 becomes 10137600 and we have 180/10137600*1/15 = 1/844800 and for it to be 0.11 per song, it'd need to be Using this and the $0.11 per song the radio station would need to make, $92,928 in 3 minutes. Hey, if it's fair for the RIAA to do it to the 'content providers' (the artists), is it not fair for the radio stations to do it to their 'content providers’ (the RIAA)? Since the internet radio (and terrestrial radio) are just ‘distributing and promoting’, the RIAA’s ‘product’, much like the RIAA is doing for it’s ‘content providers’, why don’t the radio stations get to have a deal similar to what the RIAA has with it’s ‘content provider’?

I mean I keep reading about how $0.50 from a $15 album goes to the artist ($20 if it’s ‘older stock’). So why doesn’t the RIAA get paid 0.5/15 of the profit from a song. There are ~30412800 seconds in a year. So for a 3minute song (180 seconds), that would be 180/30412800* 0.5/15 = 1/5068800*income (hmm gross or net?)
(Someone check my math,eh).

So for the 0.11 to stand, the radio company would have to make 557,568 in those 3 minutes.

Ok. I know I went to the extremes a little bit. Let’s go the other extreme. We’d have to reduce the time to actual play time (i.e. say radio is 1/3 music 2/3 talk/commercials), and the $0.50/$15 may have changed (hahahaha, damn that’s funny).

Lets assume $1/$15 is paid to the ‘content provider’ and use the 1/3 music to calculate the payout. 30412800 becomes 10137600 and we have 180/10137600*1/15 = 1/844800 and for it to be 0.11 per song, it’d need to be

Using this and the $0.11 per song the radio station would need to make, $92,928 in 3 minutes.

Hey, if it’s fair for the RIAA to do it to the ‘content providers’ (the artists), is it not fair for the radio stations to do it to their ‘content providers’ (the RIAA)?

]]>