>an artist definitely should get what they <BR>>deserve. You're right, a big chunk <BR>>of the percentage points go to <BR>>the labels and other "industry" folks, <BR>>but do you really know how <BR>>the industry works? <BR>>Labels exist because THEY WORK. I'm <BR>>all for grassroots, but if you <BR>>want to distribute to a huge <BR>>network of retailers across this big <BR>>wide nation, and if you want <BR>>to market yourself out there, major <BR>>labels are the outlet.<P>I agree with everything you say, except you are working under the notion that every album SHOULD go out to every retailer, which is the problem with the major label system today. You see, some artists, like Com, are niche artists, that may not appeal to a wide enough cross section of music buyers to justify the expenditure of putting him in every store. That's how great artists fall in debt, because major labels tend to market every artist in the same way: try to encourage the artist to make a radio friendly single/make an expensive video, etc. That program just doesn't work for everyone, especially cats like Com. It finally worked for the Roots, but that can really be pinned more on radio's love for all things Badu (plus MCA's major push) than on some sudden 'change of heart' amongst radio programmers (it's not like they said "hey, he's a really ill lyricist, let's spin this joint!").<P> You <BR>>think Com would have an ad <BR>>in the Source if he was <BR>>pushing his product outta his trunk, <BR>>so to speak? <P>Well, he could. There are numerous indie artists who put ads in the Source, usually G-rappers.<P>>I believe you can be an outstanding <BR>>artist, or you can be an <BR>>outstanding businessperson, but you cannot do <BR>>both.<P>Nah. Rza, for example, is pretty good at both (at least in my mind). Wu Tang has built quite a marketing empire, mostly built around Rza's vision and he still remains a pretty creative producer.<P>> Requires different brain processes, <BR>>and if you try to one <BR>>the other suffers. <P>No scientific proof of that. Rza refutes that theory. So do other artist/businesspeople on a smaller scale...someone mentioned Ani DiFranco...there are also a lot of DIY punk rock folks who handle their business pretty well (keeping an indie label running more than 5 years takes good business acumen, trust me).<P>Case in <BR>>point, see: Prince (he went <BR>>"underground" to questionable commercial success), Hieroglypics <BR>>(3rd Eye vision shoulda blew up), <P>"blew up"? see, considering the money they put into it, it did "blow up". people are too used to thinking in industry terms, equating "blowing up" with double platinum. convincing even 100,000 people to purchase any one product is an amazing feat. the modern day music business views 100,000 in sales as a failure. that's because they spend way too much on marketing in the front end. i'm sure "3rd eye vision" pushed at least 40,000...selling that independently puts $400,000 in the pocket. I don't think they spent half of that marketing the album...that doesn't even factor in 12 inch sales...<P>Anyway, I think that Broke has an interesting idea. Someone pointed out, however, that Com would be dropped. If Broke could mobilize just 10,000 people to follow his idea though, Com would have $150,000 in his pocket ($15 a CD). Think about it.<P>Broke, if you can mobilize enough heads to follow you, you have a revolution in the music business on your hands.<P>Spread love,<P>Spirit<BR><a href="http://amphibians.iuma.com" target="_blank">http://amphibians.iuma.com<;/a><BR>www.soul-sessions.com<BR>Hip-hop forever...power to the people<P>R.I.P. Filli (Amphibians)<P>"There will be no peace until God sits at the conference table" - Chi-Lites