Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

Heads Roll At Warner Music...


Recommended Posts



  • Replies 8
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I get a kick out of how so very often people's names fit the jobs they have. And I'd better never meet Lyor "Liar" Cohen face-to-face, because I don't think I could keep a straight face.

 

P.S.: Have you noticed that the words "Music" and "Industry" are two words that don't go together very well??

"If more of us valued food, cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." - J. R. R. Tolkien
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by TheFunkman:

I get a kick out of how so very often people's names fit the jobs they have. And I'd better never meet Lyor "Liar" Cohen face-to-face, because I don't think I could keep a straight face.

It's pronounced Lee -- Or (rimes with Eyor the Winnee the Pooh Character) and believe me, when you meet him, you keep a straight face.

 

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This idea about getting rid of people to make financial targets -- yes, I get that salaries are expensive. But at some point, if you just keep cutting and cutting to make things more profitable, there won't be the infrastructure needed to carry a company into the future.

 

I see this happening a lot in a variety of industries. It's like killing a lobster by slowly turning up the water so they don't notice the change. Like suppose a software company has 20 tech support people and has a reputation for giving good service. Fine. So it's time to save some money, so now the company has 19 tech support personnel. No one notices a huge difference, so when sales go down one quarter, two more tech people are let go. Profits are made, but now, the support isn't quite as good as it was...people are a little upset that the phone lines are always busy.

 

So they look at other software, and with sales continuing to fall, the company decides that 12 support people are enough. You get the picture...I think Trent Reznor coined the right term with "the downward spiral."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Normally what happens is they expect the remaining staff to "pick up the slack" or "work harder" - but they usually call it something like "productivity improvement" or whatever. And that's all well and good - it's important to run an efficient operation. The problem is that sooner or later the cuts don't just get rid of the extra fat, but start to damage the muscle of the company - or even slice to the bone. At that point, the end is usually near. Either that, or they hire part time help and / or temps to handle the extra work - that way, they don't have to pay for benefits. :rolleyes:

 

Record company excesses are legendary... and a little work on efficiency is probably a good thing for the industry. However, while artist's and album budgets are oftentimes inflated by silly and outlandish expenses, they at least have to recoup, while the label execs prepare their golden parachutes.

 

Artists - the folks who create and make the music - are the ones who are most likely to get shortchanged at the end of the day. And IMO, all of the consolodation going on with the majors (not to mention Clear Channel et al) is anything BUT a good thing for music in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Philip O'Keefe:

....

 

Record company excesses are legendary... and a little work on efficiency is probably a good thing for the industry. However, while artist's and album budgets are oftentimes inflated by silly and outlandish expenses, they at least have to recoup, while the label execs prepare their golden parachutes...

Hi Phil,

 

Do you have any scenarios of such excesses you could share?

 

'Drew

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Anderton:

This idea about getting rid of people to make financial targets -- yes, I get that salaries are expensive. But at some point, if you just keep cutting and cutting to make things more profitable, there won't be the infrastructure needed to carry a company into the future.

I'm all for capitalism, but you've touched on one of the more unfair effects of capitalism: wealth is always consolidating. When companies layoff workers, they are taking money out of the hands of the "middle class" and increasing profits, thereby putting that money into the hands of the "upper class." Efficiencies are developed, generally, not by the actual wealthholders, but by those they employ. Once those employees have done their jobs, they might be laid off -- as an employee, if you stop working you stop getting paid. But, the owners of the business keep on profiting from the development of that efficiency. The more efficient we become, the more wealth is generally concentrated in the hands of those who already had it to begin with.

 

Anyway, my point is that this is the system we live in, but on a person by person level, it really is unfair and sad. Is it fair that the head of the NYSE got paid like $140 million in one year and line worker at a manufacturing plant got $50,000? On a human level, both are just as valuable, but the system will place more and more in the hands the rich guy, and the system will keep skimming off the top of the line workers. The effects ripple throughout society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...