
An interesting report from Times Online has showed that, at least for British acts, it seems artists are actually making more money now, with the advent of file-sharing, than they did previously.
The report broke down revenue data for record companies and for artists into three categories, live revenue, record revenue, and royalties. It showed that, over the past four years, while recorded revenue has dropped marginally for artists and massively for the record industry, live revenue for artists has increased over 50%. However, there is no accounting in the report for how much of that revenue increase is from large tours from major, international acts and if any of it is seen by newer groups.
However, the report does show that, in general, artist revenues have been increasing over the past four years on a consistent basis, not only from live revenue, but also from increased revenue from royalties. It appears as though there is now some empirical data to support the fact that it's the recording industry, not artists, who are suffering most from file-sharing. Sorry, Lily Allen. [Times Online]
Actually - it says that live revenue is up - but specifically says that it cannot say whether that revenue is going to the artist or the venue. (look at the original article, where it says "we hit one major snag"...
Just sayin.
Mark Marshall