Fat Tuesday

Springlike weather in the Ozarks today. It’s a blue sky and 70 degrees out with a slight, pleasant breeze. I’ve got all the windows open in an effort to air the place out after a lengthy rehearsal yesterday. It smell like coffee and stale cigarettes in here. I feel sympathy for Robert (drummer), the non-smoker.

I know that when I talk of merger/anti-trust stuff, that it probably leaves most folks uninterested. I also question the importance of this stuff in my world but it is pervasive.

There are currently four major record labels. Now, Warner is attempting to merge with E.M.I., which would leave three.

What is troubling about this merger is that it seems to have the support of Impala. Impala is a group of independent music types. This concerning anti-trust, is taken directly from the Impala website.

To be effective, competition assumes that the market is made up of suppliers, who are independent of each other. However, if certain companies agree among themselves to, for example fix the price of a given product, then such agreements impair competition, and freeze smaller companies out of the market. Similarly if two large companies decide to merge or join forces, the extent of control over the market of that group increases â€“ thus decreasing the possibility of fair competition

So, why would Impala back the merger. This is from a Reuter’s article concerning the merger.

Impala said that under the deal, a combined Warner EMI would, for example, give financial support to such groups as Merlin, the newly launched agency which works to secure licensing deals for independent labels

I think that indie labels licensing with majors is a good thing. It can open up the playing field and bring diversity to the music industry. But what do the words “financial support” mean here? Between the lines, it appears to be an upfront payoff instead of real commerce based on performance or quality. It’s exactly the kind of thing that’s wrong with the traditional music industry.