Ahhh. But you have to look at the cycle. If U2 were starting from scratch today, as virtual nobodies, then an internet release would be worthless. U2 had radio, MTV and years of college city touring, at the right time, to reach their status. Now they have the draw (possibly) to pull people to the internet.executioner wrote:Profits, revenue, and listenership is down by a whole lot on radio. Most radio stations either have flat revenue or their losing money. Even the most listeneed too CCM station in the country lost money last year and they predict losing money this year or at best breaking even. In the Dallas market the 2 most listened too radio stations are talk or sportstalk and their market share grows every quarter. I'll be honest and I tell you I really can't think of anybody off the top of my head that listens to radio; I might listen to the ticket every so often or catch a Ranger game if I'm not at home but that is about it. Radio is dying and will not exsist in this form in 4-5 years. Petra and the other artists need not care what radio thinks anymore they don't drive anything anymore. U2 is releasing all their singles (Off their latest) via internet now and not releasing them to radio and I know others will follow suit.
If what you are implying is correct AND correct for all, then the whole industry should be reversed, with all of the indie and oldies releases being available on the internet only.
Remember, radio primarilly sucks only in the US. In most other English speaking countries, radio is crucial to reaching the masses.
Stations themselves may not have the revenues, but that has nothing to do with listenership. That has to do with ad sales. Ad sales are down in all media forms, because there are more players. It is more competitive all the way around. Networks however, like ClearChannel, Cox, etc are making huge profits. The losses that they are claiming are in PROJECTIONS. But they are still very profitable over all.
