Talk:World music market

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the World music market article.
Please sign and date your posts using four tildes (~~~~). New discussion topics go at the bottom of the page; click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Frequently asked questions. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Talk page guidelines Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Don't bite the newcomers!

Contents 1 The Usage of the word "controlled" 2 Bronfman=Canada, Bronfman=Warner, Warner=Canada 3 Marked for cleanup 4 Sources 4.1 Erroneous Data 4.2 UMG market share

[edit] The Usage of the word "controlled"

I would like to object to using "controlled".... I am going to change this into "dominated", simply because they can't force the consumers into actually buying the product they produce and distribute. Our common pop history is filled with artists who never became a success, or that became "one-hit-wonders" at best, even though one of the "big four" tried their best.

[edit] Bronfman=Canada, Bronfman=Warner, Warner=Canada

Warner is now Canadian.

I don't think so. Charles Bronfman just led the group- he wasn't the only one. Furthermore, unless the company's registered in Canada as a Canadian corporation, it's not Canadian. If you can show me proof otherwise, be my guest. -RomeW 20:06, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

A company can incorporate somewhere as a foreign entity. Depending on the laws governing commerce in a particular region (both the one where they want to do business, and their home country), it often is more practical for a company to just open office space there and incorporate as a domestic entity. So it's not uncommon to see a company incorporated in many territories, under many different names or under very similar ones. So even if you saw that there exists a Warner Music Group Inc/Ltd/LLC/SA/SARL/GmbH/whatever in country X, that basically tells you nothing about the relationship between the companies or who is calling the shots.—mjb 03:44, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Marked for cleanup

Needs to use period (.) for decimal point, as well as label magnitude of charts (I assume those are millions of units sold). Mactenchi 08:53, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sources

Sources are IFPI World Sales Report 2005-1994 IFPI's statistics yearbooks

The basic data is taken from: MBI, 8. 1998, 3 (London : Miller Freeman) MBI, 9. 1999, 3 (London : Miller Freeman) The BPI Statistical Handbook 1996 (London : BPI, 1996) Phonographische Wirtschaft Jahrbuch 1995. Starnberg: Josef Keller, 1996 NVPI statistics. Eindhoven, 1996 Financial Times Music & Copyright, no. 89, London, 1996

The BPI Statistical Handbook 1995 (London : BPI, 1995) PMHH 19:35, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Erroneous Data

In 2003, the world market was 2.2billion, and has been falling ever since, so it cannot be 3 billion now.

In 2003, the US sold 660M albums about 30% of the world sales. The US market is estimated at 600M a year now, about 27% of world sales. On the other hand, the EU market has expanded following the expansion of the EU itself, though it has been hit by piracy, and should now be larger than the uS market (though official data are not yet in, the total sales of the EU markets in 2003, before the EU expanded already toped US sales).

Last year, the UK sold 240M albums, not 60 something as reported here.

I'll be posting links to teh IFPI pages reporting this very soon.

[edit] UMG market share

UMG itself states to have 25.5% market share. I also doubt that they could improve by 8% in just one year and take away market share from the independent labels. How? This should have been THE BIG BIG news this year. I think the numbers are wrong. I'm sorry I can't provide any better ones, but we should keep an eye on this.