Freakaholic
not just an addiction
BPI seeks A&R tax breaks
"The UK record industry has called on the government to give it tax breaks on the money it spends on finding new artists."
Full Article:
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/94591/bpi-seeks-ar-tax-breaks.html
Ok, something really irks me about this.
I dont think its just that multimillion dollar companies are asking for tax breaks when they sell CDs for $20 (or whatever they sell them for in the UK).
I think it has to do with their whole approach to A&R. They justify selling CDs for that much, and ripping the artists off from their portion of the profits, by bringing up the costs of finding, developing, and marketing the Artists. Now that the internet makes them unnecessary for breaking new artists.... they need subsidies?
Further... theres the whole problem with A&R in the first place: spending time and money to make artists sound MORE like everyone else out there, money that is then charged to the consumer.
This just irritates me on so many levels.
"The BPI says that its members spend around 17 per cent of their turnover on R&D - or A&R (artists and repertoire) as it is known in the industry - more than any other industry other than pharmaceuticals and biotechnology."
Hmmmm..... do non-developed artists cause possible deaths or sickness in the pregnant and elderly?
Edit: This just occurred to me.
Suppose they get subsidies for A&R. The consumer is already paying for the A&R in CD prices. Once they get subsidies, will we see a drop in the prices? I doubt it. It will simply turn into more profits.
"The UK record industry has called on the government to give it tax breaks on the money it spends on finding new artists."
Full Article:
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/94591/bpi-seeks-ar-tax-breaks.html
Ok, something really irks me about this.
I dont think its just that multimillion dollar companies are asking for tax breaks when they sell CDs for $20 (or whatever they sell them for in the UK).
I think it has to do with their whole approach to A&R. They justify selling CDs for that much, and ripping the artists off from their portion of the profits, by bringing up the costs of finding, developing, and marketing the Artists. Now that the internet makes them unnecessary for breaking new artists.... they need subsidies?
Further... theres the whole problem with A&R in the first place: spending time and money to make artists sound MORE like everyone else out there, money that is then charged to the consumer.
This just irritates me on so many levels.
"The BPI says that its members spend around 17 per cent of their turnover on R&D - or A&R (artists and repertoire) as it is known in the industry - more than any other industry other than pharmaceuticals and biotechnology."
Hmmmm..... do non-developed artists cause possible deaths or sickness in the pregnant and elderly?
Edit: This just occurred to me.
Suppose they get subsidies for A&R. The consumer is already paying for the A&R in CD prices. Once they get subsidies, will we see a drop in the prices? I doubt it. It will simply turn into more profits.
Last edited: