|
|
Posted by NunYa Bidness on 12/10/05 20:39
On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 18:59:51 GMT, Justin <nospam@insightbb.com> Gave
us:
>NunYa Bidness wrote on [Sat, 10 Dec 2005 18:28:34 GMT]:
>> On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 17:14:27 GMT, Justin <nospam@insightbb.com> Gave
>> us:
>>
>>>NunYa Bidness wrote on [Sat, 10 Dec 2005 16:08:57 GMT]:
>>>> On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 20:35:22 GMT, spam@uce.gov (Bob) Gave us:
>>>>
>>>>>On 9 Dec 2005 11:06:11 -0800, "Goro" <evilninjax@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Who said they PAID for the mp3??? :)
>>>>>
>>>>>Hard to believe but most people would rather buy an album than fool
>>>>>with pirating it. Plus they get the "real thing" in terms of the CD
>>>>>with its glitzy label and all.
>>>>>
>>>>>CD sales dropped significantly when Napster was forced to shut down as
>>>>>a free source of music. Why? Because it actually encouraged sales of
>>>>>music by letting people sample free. Then after they discovered they
>>>>>liked the music on the sample, they bought the album instead of
>>>>>pirating the rest.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That accounts for MAYBE 10% of those out there ripping files from
>>>> the net.
>>>>
>>>> Most folks that rip mp3s do NOT go out and buy the CD.
>>>
>>>Actually, I'd say it's closer to 80%. I know I discovered a lot of new
>>>artists because of Napter and Audio Galaxy back in the day.
>>
>> You are the exception. Just because you went out and bought a disc,
>> doesn't make your number accurate. You guessed.
>
>My guess is no better than yours.
>
>I know I, my wife and several of my friends bought CDs after sampling
>and discovering online.
>
>> My claim is more accurate when one compares the amount ripped in
>> Usenet alone with the sale figures. You HAVE to be way off. I was
>> being conservative. It is likely more like 5%.
>
>Usenet isn't exactly a sampling of the general public.
You don't get it. Usenet posts do not even include those that are
made available through the web. The numbers would be even worse.
Thanks for beefing up my case though.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|