And I don't get how people don't see the conversation about IP and piracy as the *same conversation* "Well, the price point you have to compete with is $0 All you're actually charging for is the convenience of not having to look for a torrent"
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @lawnerdbarak and
People want to pay for art they like. That remains true. And it's how people with Patreon and large, niche, fanbases work. Sci Show is free to watch on YouTube, and yet it has Patreons.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @phyphor @lawnerdbarak and
People *want* to pay for art they *like*, but in the old days they *had* to pay for art they were merely curious enough to take a look at (And then the ones who actually were fans and really liked it paid more)
2 replies 1 retweet 20 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @phyphor and
The latter model is objectively "worse for fans" because you have to pay more money, but that also makes it better for creators Once you hit a certain ceiling it is, I hate to say, a zero sum game
2 replies 1 retweet 13 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @phyphor and
Like shit "selling merch" or whatever isn't new In the old days, if you liked the band you had to buy the album first just to hear the music, then you ALSO bought the merch Removing the first step is objectively taking money away from the band
2 replies 1 retweet 18 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @phyphor and
Like yeah if you look at it from a purely consumer POV it "sucked" and you were always getting "ripped off", but you had no choice As you say, then, as now, people still paid for stuff and people still made a living It's just the greater burden was shifted onto the consumer
2 replies 1 retweet 12 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @phyphor and
Like that's the sense you get, anecdotally, when you talk to fans about the '90s and before Being into music was a constant tax, on your paycheck Back in the day you had to spend so much more just to keep up with shit Buying all these albums you listened to once and hated
2 replies 1 retweet 12 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @phyphor and
It was the expense of being a fan It sucked, especially if you were poor, although you could get around the financial barrier to entry with a little effort (It's that price discrimination thing again -- bootlegs and mixtapes existed but they took effort to get)
1 reply 1 retweet 8 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @phyphor and
But, I mean, that money was keeping the industry alive All the bullshit albums you bought that weren't worth it and all the movies you went to see in theaters that weren't worth it and so on, that was people's paychecks
2 replies 1 retweet 12 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @phyphor and
Because the number of people who've heard of something is always so much higher than the people who really like it, at every level -- it's not people paying for music they *like* that keeps art afloat It's people paying for music they *don't like*
1 reply 1 retweet 10 likes
That's what people openly say "God, can you believe back in the day we used to just go to some random shitty movie in theaters to have something to do Now I only go to see movies twice a year, and it's the big Marvel movies that I feel like you *have* to see"
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @phyphor and
I hate to put in these blunt and cynical terms but it's true Supporting music means supporting the bands you don't like It means an ecosystem where 100% of the people who just randomly check a band out subsidize their career for the 2% who become true fans
2 replies 2 retweets 14 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @phyphor and
If ONLY the true fans ever pay you anything -- 98% listen once, go "meh" and forget about you, 2% go "FUCK YEAH" and tip whatever they can afford -- you may have a more authentic and enthusiastic fandom but you end up poorer A *lot* poorer
1 reply 1 retweet 11 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.