Music retail, as we all know, has been on the back-foot for sometime. However we have recently seen the music retail industry take some real body blows. Major retailers such as HMV, Zaavi and Woolworths were already moving music to the rear of the shop and films/games to the front. The supermarkets were even putting more shelf space to games and videos and less to music. 

2008 though saw an increase in this practise coupled with the economic crisis. First, Woolworths went bust which meant that not only music retail (mainstream music and cheap, bottom end product) loost a major presence but, Woolworth’s distribution arm also went under. It was responsible for a major cut of all music (and games/DVDs) distribution in the UK and left many major stores without product to sell. As a consequence Zaavi (used to be Virgin) went under as it was not able to fufill demand and at a time of the year when it would do most of its business, thats not good! 

Seperatly to this Pinnicle, a long standing independant distributor went under. This would have hit the small music shops and of course many, many independant labels. Once again, it was happening at the most crucial time in the industry, whether you are a label/publisher or a retailer. This is the time to sell product. 

Where does this leave us? Well, I think well see a number of labels go bust over the next 3-6 months, and many small shops leave the market place too. Zaavi might be saved, but if it is, the new owners will speed up the type of changes shops such as Zaavi and HMV have been pushing - i.e. relegating music and creating more interactive spaces for gaming and selling hardware and other physical product (clothing and what not). We will of course see a number of labels suffer too.

Once the dust settles, we might find that apart from the top 20 product, there is a much reduced demand and supply chain (to meet that demand) for CD/physical music product. I would be surprised if anyone takes the following decision, but perhaps its time for the majors to consider dropping the CD product in the UK, except for really specialist music, or music with a demographic who are not IT friendly, or for music which is clearly top 10/20 (and then, only sell it on CD for a very limited period of time). 

Either way this bad (Awful) holiday season for the UK, physical music scene has to been seen as a watershed and an opportunity to redefine the business model permanently.

Ars Technica discusses the UKs intention to follow the USA partially and extend copyright on the sound recording (see here). The article discusses the moral issue, the moral issue from the point of the consumer - the public and the concept of something entering the Public Domain. However, there is another moral issue. The issue of the artists. 

When I refer to the issue of the artists I am not backing the Cliff Richard position. They are the artists with reasonable record deals (of sorts) and so might initially benefit from the extension. However, I am focusing the light on all the musicians who were paid ‘buy-outs’ for featuring on records or signed awful deals. They were young and tied themselves into a deal which lasted the length of the copyright. The current 50 year rule gives them a second chance. 

For example they could remaster and print their own copies of the music. Sell it on the net or carry CDs around with them on the gig circuit. With the current demand for live music, there are many acts back on the road. Some are just playing pubs and clubs, but they are out there and they could sell 10/20 CDs a night. Its a potential income for them and a way of undoing a ‘wrong’.

50 years seems a fair amount of time for a record label/original copyright owner to make money from the recordings. Also, I think Cliff Richard just misses the point. If he let his audio recordings expire, then he could sell them direct via his website and gigs just like the wee bands doing the pubs and clubs. He would make a fortune.

Let the copyright die at 50 years. Its morally the right thing to do. Not just for consumers but very much for all the muscians and artists involved in the music originally.

Hot on the heels of my streaming versus downloads rant we have this:

Pret A Manger (or however you spell it) offers free Wifi!

Now, this is not new for our US readers, in that there are whole CITIES which have free WiFi (even though I believe one of Bush’s last acts as Da Presidente is to have said no federal help there as its bad for the market or something. But its ok to throw tons of money at badly run car companies). For those of us though, stuck on this wee Island its very cool. Most coffee houses charge, or at least embarrass you into asking for a pin or password, which means you have to order something.

Not here though. No. Here they have worked out that if people are encouraged to stay, then they might get the tummy rumbles, or thirsty. Where better to have lots of people all getting tumbles and thirsty than in a coffee shop/restaurant. Clever that. 

What does this mean? It means that if the market place works as it should (just as its proven to so well in the financial industry) then all the other coffee houses MIGHT follow suite. THEN, at that point, Ill be more pro streaming, as I can pop in somewhere, get a coffee and watch something from my PS3 at home streaming to my PSP in my pocket. 

As long as the signal works in the loo too, I’m sorted.

As predicted by many, streaming is slowly becoming the way to receive data. Here is a list (not exhaustive) of current random applications and services which use streaming:

You Tube: on computers, phones and other portable devices

Phones: 3G and Wifi allow streaming of video content and music. From ‘consumer phones’ to corporate Blackberry’s, they all allow content to be streamed.

BBC Iplayer: Perhaps not huge outside of the UK (as its a UK only service!), but one of the Nets greatest success stories. Backed by the tax paying public, the BBC have created a robust and high quality system which has been embraced by the public. 

Streaming though is now entering the world of the console and setup box. In recent months and weeks we have had Microsoft enter an agreement with Netflix to facilitate the streaming of its content through the Xbox360 platform, Playstation will soon have music videos being streamed through its media centre and Blockbuster have announced its stand alone streaming box which is similar to the Netflix stand alone products already out there.

In the UK Sky have also launched their version of the IPlayer and there is talk they might go into partnership with console companies to offer the streaming service directly through the console. 

Now most of these services are video first, with audio second. However there has been a steady growth of audio streaming websites (often with music videos) on the net. Some are subscription based and others free to the consumer but funded through advertising. Check our Deezer.com as an example. 

The point is this - downloading might be old hat already. How does this make you feel? Does it matter if the data is actually on your device if the technology allows you to access and recall it whenever you want, whereever you want? 

Now clearly there are limits to this technology. What happens if there is no Wifi or 3G signal? Well lets be honest, in Urban areas that scenario is becoming less common. However for us country dwellers (I live on the edge of town!), we do still struggle to get constant 3G, or even decent speed broadband (where I live we still only get 1.5mb a second!). Streaming You Tube in my household is a non starter at peak times of the day, so expecting high quality audio or video is just a dream! 

However, are people like me being left behind? Well some would say ‘no’ as downloading is still here, still viable. For how long though? Streaming is not piracy free, far from it - but it is a lot more secure than downloads. So won’t content owners push for streamed content as it keeps the content out of the actual hands of the consumer for longer? I.E. its passes through our systems, but unless we are technical, it never leaves a trace we can access. 

Personally I’m not a fan of this new reality. I like the option and welcome it as another way of accessing content (once my home broadband can use it!), but I want to be able to take my PSP on a plane and watch a movie. Something I can’t do unless I have downloaded it. Mind you they have now started allowing mobile phone calls on planes (you have to sell your wife though to fund it), so maybe we WILL be able to stream even when 30,000 feet in the air! 

Whats your opinion? Streaming versus downloads - what wins overall for you?