Study: File sharers spend more money on music
As I posted back in Dec. of 07, I no longer purchase music, I also don't download it either. I used to. I would download music as a means to evaluate an album, and if I liked it enough, I would go out and buy it. Once the download crackdown started, I abandoned the music scene entirely.
Big media, in their blind pursuit of profit at all costs, completely missed the boat when they started laying piracy charges and started their war against downloading (a war they're finally realizing they lost.)
People are not against paying for content they value, but the ease and access of media on the Internet has skewed the value proposition in favour of the consumer. The fight against piracy wasn't really about theft. It was about media companies desire to control the price of their product. There never was any competition for traditional recorded media. Consumer demand never affected the price of a CD. Since every artist was always available on a single label, there was no competition. If you didn't like what Universal charged for an album, you couldn't price compare Sony Music's offering.
So if you're a fan with limited resources, what are your options? Most people could never afford to pay for every album they wanted. So they started downloading and sampling. They then rewarded the producers of the products they valued.
But media companies didn't like being forced to compete. It affected their bottom line. So they chose to fight.
And consumers like myself fought back, by swearing off them altogether or by severely curtailing our purchases.
It is sweet, sweet irony then, that it appears the big labels are now dependant on the downloaders for the bulk of their sales. For the sake of the artists trying to get noticed and sign on with the major labels, those same major labels had better realize that a fan that downloads and sometimes buys, is better than no fan at all.