Hi Folks,

I was watching the reports of David Beckham getting 250 million to come to the US to play soccer (yawn) but it made me think of something that seems lost today in music. Remember when you used to wait in anticipation for the next album by your favorite stars? I do. This Beckham deal is based entirely speculation and excitement over what he MIGHT do. Do any of us still have that excitement over the next album from the big music stars? Or is there so much product out there all the time that it's ho hum no matter who it is?

Your thoughts?

Brian

I still get moderately excited, sometimes.

I think the enthusiasm fades with age. When you're a teen, you heavily identify with your music; you make it part of your identity. I think that become less important as you get older. I still get excited about new music, but now I'm less concerned about what my musical tastes *say* about me.

I'm pretty sure there are teenagers out there desperately awaiting the next Fall Out Boy CD with the same enthusiasm as I did waiting for the next R.E.M. album.

I can remember really liking every song on an album. Nowadays, its lucky to get 3 good tunes on any given CD. There are exceptions. I also remember looking at my album covers for hours on end. I thought that they ruined an art form when they reduced everything to CD size.

But now you can go to a website and read volumes about your favorite artist. That's what kids do now and it's frankly a lot more info and interesting. The next is becoming more and more portable to the point that it's far more portable than even record albums were. I am trying to find a larger MP3 player that holds at leat 150 gig because I have over 50K song files and I want to take them all with me.

Brian

LOL
Ok, 50,000 songs, say 4 minute average = 200,000 minutes
divide by 60 and that's 3,333 HOURS
divide by 24----138 days
divide by 365 is .38 of a year
24/7 without ever hearing the same song twice

Is there that many good songs out there?????

By the way, I think the money CEOs and Sports people and Howard Stern, etc is DISGUSTING and the divide between the haves and the have nots could eventually lead to the downfall of our country, as the HAVES almost always make decisions based on keeping their money and power, not based on what is good for the country as a whole.

Herbie

Herbie,

I don't agree that everyone's money should be divided up equally. Why reward people who can't be bothered? And why take away the carrot for people to be innovative and driven? If we don't have the motivation to be able to one day make a lot of money and get a cool car or house or keyboard/guitar or to be able to raise our kids with lots of toys or travel or whatever it is that someone might want to do as a reward for hard work, then most will simply not do anything (especially those jobs that no one would naturally want to do). That's always been the downfall of the communist nations. Sure.. some people will work no matter what. I've been doing it free for 9 years. BUT... when you rely on a tiny number to do ALL the work (and let's face it.. I enjoy what I do.. I wouldn't show up if I were digging ditches or ringing a register etc..) while enough of everyone else doesn't bother doing their less rewarding jobs because they get paid no matter what, society collapses and no one gets paid. In poor nations, the process is so unlikely that anyone can financially succeed that most folks just don't bother at all. Not because they're not ABLE to if given a chance (because I believe almost all humans are capable of doing almost anything if given hope and opportunity), but without that potential of success, there's little hope at all. For a system like ours to work, you must have a small number of mega successful people. And the reason that a few make sick amounts is that those around them are hoping to succeed on their coat-tails. Since they'll never have that talent, they hope to "buy" that talent and go along for the ride. But we all know that as often as not, mega deals flop and those looking for the easy way out fail hard. That opens up opportunity for everyone else to step in.

As for numbers of songs.. ironically I've already heard all the 50,000 tracks I have, but unlike the music awards stuff, I did it over many years. A lot of it is stuff from my old Record, Tape and CD collections. Some is from work I've done for some media companies and others are just from stuff I've bought on line to date. I am not even counting the JPF tracks. I will likely start listening to that stuff again in a few months. (I need a break from it to get a fresh perspective). The fun thing about a big music collection is they are like little markers for your life. It's nice to be able to pull something from any era you've had and instantly get an audio assist to recall that time. = )

Brian

Growing up in the 70's I definately remember waiting with bated breath for the next Zeppelin or Floyd album, and there would be a line of people at the local record store {remember THOSE?} on the day of their release. There are still a few artist's who still get me that way...{John Prine, Todd Snider, The Stones} all of whom's last albums were great!

I'm anxiously awaiting the next Blue Merlot CD! Well, that might be a while, as we just got the first one out....

Yes, there are some people that I want to know "what's new" but I seem to have more patience now! Also, the entire package -- the CD, the packaging, booklet/liner notes, artwork, etc. is something I like to get my hands on. I can find the same stuff and more online, which is also great, but there's something about having it in my hands.

I'm glad, though, to have the option of MP3s and downloads and internet radio. There's more music to discover. Right now, the fun of discovering new artists and new music ranks up there with looking forward to the new release from a favorite.

Brian

I was NOT saying money should be divided up equally, nor that talented people shouldn't be rewarded....but 250 MIL? To play soccer? I remember when you used to say someone was a millionaire and it meant VAST wealth. I'm sorry Brian we do not disagree on this point, just the degree of it. Are you gonna tell me this guy couldn't be happy on 50 million? That isn't enough? Ya ya ya it's the marketplace...I don't care...the marketplace is not always right, and certainly not morally conscious.

I have to agree with Brian. If you're willing to work your ass off at being innovative or talented, then you deserve to be rewarded. I know musician's love to think that the stuff they create is God's gift to the world. I'm delusional just like the rest of us. I also know that I work my ass off compared to a lot of my musician friends. It's why I've made some headway comparatively speaking. Will I be rewarded for that hard work financially? I'm betting yes.

I don't mind CEO's of huge corporations making big bucks. But I do mind them getting ridiculous pay-offs for poor performance, but I can't do anything about that. As for sports guys - they're the ones that get butts in the seats, why shouldn't they get rewarded? Howard Stern, he's my favorite radio entertainer. If you don't understand he's being a comedian, then you're likely to only get offended. He started for peanuts, built an audience by saying things people wanted to hear, and also couldn't believe they were hearing (funny thing is - people that hate Stern listen to him longer than people that love him). That sells advertising and boom, he should be rewarded for getting ears to hear advertising.

People generally get rewarded for what they do. If you're lazy or don't value yourself, you'll likely resent those that aren't lazy and do value themselves.

What people do with their money once they make it is their business.

Jody

Herbie,

250 million is just fine. You see, what if he provides the boost in ticket sale and TV rights and US support for soccer and the brands he represents that they want for their 250,000,000? If he does, they are going to make a LOT more than that? So isn't he the most deserving entity of all to get that money? Should he take 50 million so that Nike or whoever can make the other 200 million extra? Why is that a good thing? I'd much rather see the people directly putting it on the line make the big money than the souless corporations because all they are are machines... give the money to the HUMANS who create the interest/wealth/value. The corporations will still get their cut. Imagine.. if he's getting 250 mill.. they must expect to get billions in return. Sounds pretty fair to me. And if it fails? That's part of the risk that set his value. If he was a sure thing/non failure, they would have had to give him a billion dollars probably.

As for corporate heads making too much money.. as a stockholder in several companies, I try to find companies with responsible boards and representation of the rank and file stockholders. When that isn't available, or you have stockholder apathy, you get bad deals like the Home Depot guy. Those board members should all be fired (i.e. unelected). But most likely shareholder apathy won't change a thing (just like voter outrage rarely plays out in full force at the polls).

If I decide I want to pay Herbie a billion dollars because he can do something that will have a good shot at earning me 10 billion dollars.. who is to say Herbie isn't worth it? Especially if it's MY money in the first place? Is it better to spend it on one thing than another? Would buying more yachts and sports cars and fancy houses be better? In reality, a huge chunk of that money goes directly into the TAX base.. the rest will likely either get invested in other companies or spent on items that drive the economy. So what difference does it make, in the end, if 1 guy spends it or 100 guys spend it?

Brian

Guys, I really do NOT disagree with what you are saying...I think it's just the SIZE and the AMOUNTS that are being thrown around----it just boggles my mind and my gut says "No one is worth THAT much" ---- but if he's worth 250 mil to something who thinks they might make 5 BIL.....in theory that's fine----but I still just can't comprehend those numbers. Maybe I just think too small and that's why I'm stuck where I'm at....gggrrrrr

Herbie