zoetmb

The RIAA has always had a problem with computation unless they're calculating percentages first and then rounding off units and revenue for the report.   Streaming actually works out to 81.5% revenue share (up from 77.1% in 2018 and 66.1% in 2017) and digital downloads take another 7.9% for a total of 89.4%.   Physical media is now down to 10.6% (it was 32.4% five years ago).   Note that they also revise figures a year after the fact. Several of the 2018 numbers dropped in this report compared to what they originally reported for 2018 a year ago.  

Even though paid streaming subscriptions increased over 2018 by 28.8% in number of subscribers and 27.5% in revenue, the number of subscribers actually dropped from what the RIAA reported for the first half of the year.   For the first half of the year, they reported 61.1 million subscribers, but for the full year, they're reporting only 60.4 million.   That's the first loss in streaming subscribers since they started reporting. 

In recent months, there was a lot of hype about LP's outselling CD's based on a bad headline in Rolling Stone magazine.  LP's were never going to outsell CD units in this timeframe, but what the article actually alleged was that revenue from LP's was going to exceed CD's, but even that didn't happen.  In 2019, 46.5 million CD's were sold representing $614.5 million of value at list prices and 19.1 million LP's were sold representing $497.6 million.   However that 19.1 million LP's did represent a 14.4% unit increase over 2018 and is the largest number sold since 1989, when 34.6 million LP's were sold.   (CD's peaked in 2000 at 942.5 million units, vinyl LP's peaked in 1977 at 344 million.)  So LP sales would have to increase by about 23% or CD sales would have to fall by about 19% (or any combination) for LP revenue to equal CD revenue.   

gatorguy said:

linkman said:

What sort of control does a company have over product placement like this? I know that Microsoft has to pay to get their products to appear on screen anywhere, but Apple does not. If I were a film maker and I wanted to put an Apple product on screen without any of Apple's approval/disapproval would I be completely free to do what I want?

Apple does pay, but traditionally in product rather than cash.

More recently they've had to modify tactics and enter into paid promotion contracts with some media companies which is why you now see “promotional consideration sponsored by Apple"  far more often than just two or three years ago. Why would they have to pay? Studio and broadcast media increasingly see Apple as a competitor rather than helpful partner and are far less apt to show them on screen in exchange for a couple of computers and a few iPhones. 

Years ago, the filmmakers paid for product placements.  Then someone figured out that it's the studios who should be getting paid and it's since become a big business with agencies cropping up just for product placements.  I doubt it has anything to do with film production companies seeing Apple as a competitor.  

Sometimes, if a director really wants a particular product in the movie because it's an appropriate prop, the product company doesn't pay.   I used to work for a publisher and we had a big set of books for the legal industry that frequently showed up in movies. We developed a set that was hollowed out on the inside so they wouldn't be so heavy.  Well before Google, we also had CD-ROM products. One filmmaker wanted one of those products for a well-known movie, but he insisted on one of the products from an international division even though the plot took place in the U.S. AND he wanted shelves full of them.   I actually manufactured more product just for the movie and in the end, they didn't use it or it wasn't noticeable and they could have used some empty boxes and wrapping paper and it wouldn't have made a difference.    Another famous film has the characters going to the library to search something related to the pattern of a murderer (before Google) and they wanted to use our search product and interface.   We supplied a special version that would display what they wanted and once again, it wasn't used for the film.   After that, I stopped going out of my way for filmmakers.   We'd only supply off-the-shelf product.  

And when there's no specific deal, every prop in a movie that has a copyright or trademark has to be cleared, even a poster hanging in the background of a living room set or a book jacket or magazine.   I personally think that if something is just in the background and not an integral part of the plot, it should be considered fair use, but that's not the current law. 

randominternetperson said:

Sounds like a legal shot in the dark to me.  Good luck convincing a judge that my playing a song from Apple Music is a "public performance."

That's not really the issue.  There's performance rights (the recording) and there's publishing rights (publisher/writers).   Publishing rights used to be cleared only through ASCAP, BMI and SESAC, but in recent years there's been a crop of new PRO's that have cropped up and this seems to be one of them.   

The rights to use the recording for streams is cleared through Sound Exchange (although Apple might have an option of making a deal directly with the record label).  As long as Apple is using Sound Exchange, they should be in the clear on that regard.   The Publishing rights is another matter:   if these songs are not part of the ASCAP, BMI or SESAC catalogs, Apple could have an unpaid obligation and even though this company sounds scuzzy, Apple cannot just skip out on paying publishing rights.   

But this company does seem to be exaggerating value.  Their lawsuit against Spotify is asking for close to $2 per stream.   If only.   Streams pay fractions of a penny, not dollars.  On the Billboard charts, they count 1250 paid subscription streams or 3750 ad supported streams as 1 album equivalent  which means a single song is the equivalent of about 104 paid subscription streams or 312 ad supported streams (assuming 12 tracks per album).   If you assume that the retail value of a single is worth $3 and a typical publishing royalty is about 6%, each paid stream is worth about $0.001728 and each ad supported stream is worth about $0.000576 to a publisher.    If half of the 550 million streams are paid and half are ad supported, that means Spotify would owe them $600K, which is a long way from $1 billion and that's if there were really 550 million streams.    

Kuyangkoh said:

Soli said:

lkrupp said:

I hope they advertise this as “Assembled in the USA from imported parts” as opposed to “Made in the USA.” The latter would be misleading. 

Has Apple used made, assembled, or USA in the past, as opposed to Designed by Apple in California?

Never seen Made in USA stuff anymore, other than Babies....sometimes inceptions by foreign bodies, hahahaha

Except that in the summer of 2017, manufacturing output in the U.S. hit an all time peak.   It just doesn't employ the number of people it once did because of automation.     Apple sold 18 million Macs in fiscal 2018.  If one assumes that this machine would constitute 5% of Mac unit sales, that's about 900,000 units needed each year.   That means each employee has to build about 36 Macs per working day.   

I don't know how much Apple pays factory workers, but if they make $20 an hour (about $40K per year), that adds $20 million a year to the local economy from wages alone. 

wood1208 said:

urahara said:

tyler82 said:

Am I the only one that likes the butterfly keyboard? I liked it from the first moment I typed on it. I've never been a keyboard snob though. I like the chiclet keys in the apple wireless keyboard, and the super heavy clicky keys of mechanical keyboards. I loved the old ADB Extended Keyboard/ Keyboard II. Guess there's never really a keyboard I've never liked on a Mac.

I love my MacBook Pro 2018 butterfly keyboard. Especially the smaller travel distance!

Millions of users bought 2016-2019 MAC laptop models; they have no issue with keyboard and many like it. Recently bought 15" and didn't see issue. The problem is minority(probably heavy users of keyboard) who complain lot and loud is heard the most. I tried 16" magic keyboard and has bit better typing experience than butterfly.because most of us grew up want feeling key travel. and 16" provides best of both(scissor,butterfly)

My daughter and son-in-law bought MBP's in the last year and the keyboards are already problematic and have to go back to Apple for replacement.  Keys either don't work or repeat.   I have a late-2016 MBP and while the keyboard itself has worked fine, the center of the key has worn away on the A, S, L and N keys revealing the light below.    (And my machine also needs a new battery, for which one Apple store has quoted $450, which is making me really angry).