Skip to main content

Digital Distribution Models Reviewed: The Content Provider’s Perspective (book chapter)

Citation (APA): Peltz, P. (2013). Digital Distribution Models Reviewed: The Content Provider’s Perspective. In Music Business and the Experience Economy (pp. 99-117). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Abstract

Digital distribution has surpassed physical distribution in key markets and will soon be the dominant music distribution model in Australia. Four different business models (free, ad-funded, pay-per-use and subscription-based) and two different music delivery methods (downloading and streaming) currently compete in the market place. The author analyses each distribution model available in Australia and evaluates advantages and disadvantages from the content provider’s perspective. The most striking development is the blurring line between promotion and distribution. Content providers can either lower the barriers to access music in order to facilitate rapid music circulation and create a strong promotional effect to support various revenue streams; or heighten the barriers to access music in order to install an artificial scarcity through excludability, which is essential to implement a business model based on selling musical recordings. In this regard, the variety of different digital distribution models provides a flexible toolbox for content providers to coordinate their overall marketing strategy.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Bibliography of my thesis 'Artist Entrepreneurship In The Music Industry'

Ackerman-Haywood, J. (2010). Artist follows inner drive toward full-time art career. The Grand Rapids Press.  Retrieved January 3, 2012, from http://blog.mlive.com/runningwithneedles/2010/10/artist_follows_inner_drive_tow.html Adler, M. (2006). Stardom and talent. Handbook on the Economics of Art and Culture, 1, 895-906.   Adler, N. E., Epel, E. S., Castellazzo, G., & Ickovics, J. R. (2000). Relationship of subjective and objective social status with psychological and physiological functioning: Preliminary data in healthy, White women. Health Psychology, 19(6), 586.   Adorno, T., & Horkheimer, M. (1977). The Culture Industry: enlightenment as mass deception. In J. Curran, M. Gurevitch & J. Woollacott (Eds.), Mass Communication and Society (pp. 349-389). London: Edward Arnold in association with The Open University Press.   Adorno, T. W. (1941). On popular music. Studies in Philosophy and Social Science, 9(1), 17–48.   Ahlkvist, J. A., & Fisher, G. (2000). And the hits

Why Theodore W. Adorno would follow Chris Anderson on Twitter (essay)

Introduction At first glance, the reader may wonder what Theodore W. Adorno and Chris Anderson have in common and what that has to do with researching the music industry. On the one hand, a sophisticated German philosopher; a critical theorist of the 20th century; a member of the renowned Frankfurt School and a follower of Karl Marx’s thoughts on capitalism and society. On the other, Chris Anderson, a child of the digital economy, a blog writer, a journalist, a business entrepreneur and, according to The Time 100 , one of the most influential thinkers of the new millennium. Both were (respectively are) critically reflecting the media landscape of their time. In this paper I use the ideas of both thinkers and demonstrate the Mediamorphosis in the wake of technological innovations at the example of the music industry. On the one hand a centralized media system dominated by large media conglomerates, on the other side a democratic media system driven by prosumers. Thes two contrasting m