<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &#8220;Worst Year Ever&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://digitalcowboys.com/2006/01/16/worst-year-ever/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://digitalcowboys.com/2006/01/16/worst-year-ever/</link>
	<description>Business Development &#124; Marketing &#124; Consulting Services</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 13 May 2012 03:37:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: JoBuzz</title>
		<link>http://digitalcowboys.com/2006/01/16/worst-year-ever/#comment-110</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[JoBuzz]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Sep 2006 18:58:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://davekusek.berkleeblogs.com/2006/01/16/worst-year-ever/#comment-110</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[2006 its definitly teh worst year of music industry...maybe al over the world. there a hugh catalog of expected albums  this year and the most of them just commercialy failed. its not about commercial music only, some good albums are being rejected by music listeners, somo good songs are just not being listened and i dont think its just a matter of quality and creativity. It just looks like a battle without a special preference about one artist, people is bagging for good songs, thats why full albums are not being buying, for not completing expectations.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>2006 its definitly teh worst year of music industry&#8230;maybe al over the world. there a hugh catalog of expected albums  this year and the most of them just commercialy failed. its not about commercial music only, some good albums are being rejected by music listeners, somo good songs are just not being listened and i dont think its just a matter of quality and creativity. It just looks like a battle without a special preference about one artist, people is bagging for good songs, thats why full albums are not being buying, for not completing expectations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Knight</title>
		<link>http://digitalcowboys.com/2006/01/16/worst-year-ever/#comment-109</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David Knight]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2006 03:45:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://davekusek.berkleeblogs.com/2006/01/16/worst-year-ever/#comment-109</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In response to your quote: &quot;The indie model of earning profits on a broad range of small-scale releases, rather than focusing on blockbusters, may offer a new direction for the majors.&quot;... I agree that the majors will have to change their ways of thinking.  But, the majors are still owned by share holders.  I think that the direction that they take will be more like what you are seeing in the Robbie Williams deal and the Korn deal.  Sign less artists, focus on all revenue streams (touring, merchandise, licensing, and music sales) and take a bigger overall chunk of the money coming in for signed artists.  Not necessarily a bad thing, since this will force labels to pay more attention to the bands they sign.  Also, with companies like Ingenious putting money into bands like they were horses, I think that rosters are bound to get smaller, not bigger.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In response to your quote: &#8220;The indie model of earning profits on a broad range of small-scale releases, rather than focusing on blockbusters, may offer a new direction for the majors.&#8221;&#8230; I agree that the majors will have to change their ways of thinking.  But, the majors are still owned by share holders.  I think that the direction that they take will be more like what you are seeing in the Robbie Williams deal and the Korn deal.  Sign less artists, focus on all revenue streams (touring, merchandise, licensing, and music sales) and take a bigger overall chunk of the money coming in for signed artists.  Not necessarily a bad thing, since this will force labels to pay more attention to the bands they sign.  Also, with companies like Ingenious putting money into bands like they were horses, I think that rosters are bound to get smaller, not bigger.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Julian Bond</title>
		<link>http://digitalcowboys.com/2006/01/16/worst-year-ever/#comment-108</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Julian Bond]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2006 07:39:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://davekusek.berkleeblogs.com/2006/01/16/worst-year-ever/#comment-108</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I assume all those stats are for the US market only? Because album sales in the UK had a record year. Go figure.

&quot;The indie model of earning profits on a broad range of small-scale releases, rather than focusing on blockbusters, may offer a new direction for the majors.&quot;

Perhaps what we&#039;re really seeing (or at least one factor) is the death of the US approach of reducing choice, aggregating outlets and homogenisation. What you might call the &quot;ClearChannel&quot; approach. Very &quot;long tail&quot;!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I assume all those stats are for the US market only? Because album sales in the UK had a record year. Go figure.</p>
<p>&#8220;The indie model of earning profits on a broad range of small-scale releases, rather than focusing on blockbusters, may offer a new direction for the majors.&#8221;</p>
<p>Perhaps what we&#8217;re really seeing (or at least one factor) is the death of the US approach of reducing choice, aggregating outlets and homogenisation. What you might call the &#8220;ClearChannel&#8221; approach. Very &#8220;long tail&#8221;!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

