When I'm not ranting and raving about the music industry, I work for Corporate America. The one thing I have learned since leaving college is that the only way to survive is to continually forge new ways of doing business, update your business models and most importantly, to embrace change. Somehow, the people who run the major record labels have defied reason, refused to change and as a result are living in an ancient culture. They suckered the entire world into buying cd's at inflated prices from 1990-2000 and saw the industry soar to heights they NEVER IMAGINED! As a result, when Napster came out, they saw it as a threat rather than a promotional tool. Ironically, music sales were at an all-time high in 2000, during the Napster peak. Is this a coincidence? Napster was the biggest thing to happen to the entertainment industry...ever! Now, I want to say that I never downloaded a single song off Napster. I didn't want to have sub par mp3's when I could buy the album at far superior quality. I just didn't understand why people would want such a vast decrease in quality. However, in 2003, friends and people began sending me mp3's of acts I NEVER would have found if not for the free sample. Did I buy these artists records when I found them cheap? You bet. Through these lesser quality files, I got exposure to artists I never would have known about. I didn't just buy their records when I found them, but I went to their concerts, wrote about them and none of it would have been possible if not for having the time to indulge and digest those MP3's.

Here we are at the beginning of 2008 and while I morally agree downloading music is wrong, I have finally come to understand it and why it will continue to thrive. In the last seven years, I have watched the company I work for change marketing and business strategies more times than Spinal Tap changed drummers. However, my company for better or worse still thrives and survives. I've seen lots of mistakes but I've also seen how to make a business successful and it's by adapting to our clients needs and wants. If we continued to sell products they no longer needed instead of brainstorming on new ones, the company I work for would cease to exist. The music industry (specifically the major labels) refused to listen to their clients, tried to quash the technology and forced a premium priced medium of music on them. They were greedy and wanted the gravy train of the 1990's to never end and as a result, they have practically self-imploded because of their greed and unwillingness to change.

What they should have done is partnered with Napster, bought them out and they would have automatically had an outlet for digital distribution on a worldwide basis. Instead, they shut Napster down, offered NO replacement, raised the prices on physical CD'S and now all of the labels are at the beck and call of iTunes. Recently the CEO of Universal Music, Doug Morris admits, in the December issue of WIRED Magazine that the majors dropped the ball and never engaged a technology expert of any kind when they shut down Napster and offered their fans and clients no downloading alternative. Yes, you read that correctly, they all sat around and talked about it but they never brought in an expert to discuss the possible options for making a legal digital distribution system. If you had a heart problem and were suggested to go under the knife, would you talk about your family or would you ask the advice of medical experts? This admission by Morris shouldn't be a shock, but it is and I wonder how any of these CEO's who worked for the labels in 2001 are still employed today for not researching this properly.

The problem the music industry faces is that people want large quantities of music for little amounts of money and the industry does not have a way to get this out to people? I occasionally would go through periods where I would discover an artist and become obsessed with them. I wanted every album of theirs. The problem is that if the artist had twenty-plus albums in their catalog (like the Stones, KISS, Neil Young or Bob Dylan) it would take me possibly years and sometimes as long as a decade to collect every one of their albums. Do you think the teens of today wait five to seven years until they can afford to buy everything? When a teenager discovers Led Zeppelin, do you think they are going to buy just 'Mothership'? No way, they're going to want the entire catalog and while it took me a few years of ordering the Zep discs from the BMG Club, kids can have their entire catalog, bootlegs, live recordings and all in an afternoon of clever web searching. Hours versus years and months to acquire music is staggering statistic most major labels once again have appeared to overlook. Why not offer discounts for mass purchases or clever tie-ins for downloading music? Could you imagine with every copy of the new Led Zeppelin compilation 'Mothership' had a coupon in it to download their entire catalog at a high quality download with a large amount of bonus material (demos, live shows) for $25? I'd buy it! You have a new album coming out, why don't you partner with iTunes and sell all of the back albums as a bundle at a reduced price to tempt the casual fan into taking a deeper plunge into their catalog? The ideas are limitless and since distribution is effortless and cheap, why not do it? I was in Best Buy last week and CD's are still priced at $13-$17. I walked by an FYE today and saw an ad saying 20% off all CD's...nice huh? One problem, all discs are $20 to begin with. Who would buy CD's at these stores? These days, I tend to get most of my discs used, at concerts for smaller acts and occasionally at the big box retailers (Wal-Mart, Target, Best Buy)…but the industry is missing out on more of my money because I feel that .99 cent a song is an inflated price especially since there is no physical item. They need to aggressively price music because as the Radiohead and Trent Reznor models prove, some feel $1 is too much for a new album.

As mentioned earlier, DRM-free MP3's, the Amazon MP3 store and reduced prices are all steps in the right direction but it won't lift sales to new heights and in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if 2008 finds another year where music sales spiral downward. Universal thinks they have the answer by licensing their catalog to a social networking site called "Imeem", where you can hear full length versions of songs via your computer. They're calling it free music. But if you want to download the song, it will cost you .99 cents. I barely listen to any music on my PC and if I want a song bad enough…I want to own it fully. What Imeem is offering is a bit better than iTunes, but I have to tell you, I don't think it's the future. Ownership is very important to the casual music fan. No one wants services like "Imeem". They may have worked in 1998, but not in 2008. What do consumers want? They want DRM-free music to own forever in large quantities for a cheap price. The 160GB iPod can hold upwards of 40,000 songs and if you think a 10-year old is going to spend the equivalent of a down payment on a house just to fill his iPod, you're smoking crack. What the industry needs is a mass subscription service where fans can log on and find anything they want at any time. The Radiohead and Reznor models of choosing your price will probably never catch on. However, if you had a vast wonderland of high quality digital downloads where you paid a monthly fee, I believe the industry could potentially thrive and survive.

Illegally downloading music is wrong and everyone knows it, but the problem is that the major labels have refused to make changes and as they slowly embrace them I unfortunately feel it is too little too late. They have refused to embrace the future. It's time to embrace the future and not fight it. Once they embrace it and stop all of the in fighting, they stand to make millions. However, until they offer DRM free downloads, quick, fast and cheap...many fans, will continue to feel that it is OK to illegally download music.