Karaoke Forums

The crystal clear implication was that I have no "business education" or "business sense", or I wouldn't have made such a decision. But don't fear, I have a thick skin and am not upset in the slightest.



Absolute BS. Again you have no idea what you are talking and need to actually go to a business school.

Licensing and/or Leasing is a extremely common and cost effective business tactic. Any first year Business Administration student would tell you that saving over 50% on the cost of your business tools is the better move. In fact, it's common sense.

The problem is that many here treat Karaoke as their personal hobby, not as a true business. They think of karaoke music like their personal home, an investment (which is clearly is not). The old "Something to show for it" line pops up often which clearly shows this hobby mentality. The purpose of my business is to make money. Not create an heirloom collection of antique CD's to give to my kids.

But it doesnt. My analogy stands.



So.....it would get your seal of approval if every single SC song ever made was included? Wouldn't that go against your "filler & fluff" argument? Please. The grasping at straws continues.

You act like this is unusual or that GEM licensee's are somehow being misled or gypped. It's quite a stretch and baseless. They offered a 6000 songs set, 4500 more than I had. I took them up on the offer. I don't see how it could be simpler.



If I need help or a question answer, I ask, and they answer. The definition of product support.

No, it would not go against my filler & fluff argument because in that case, it would true be "the entire collection" as a product. Not grasping at anything.


And that's fine... however, I don't see that you will EVER be able to "expand your business tools" with -- as you like to claim-- "the best tracks for your customers" even though you only have 1/3 of the "collection."

Your "deal" was a single shot for a partial of the "collection" and you'll never get the other 2/3rds the same way. You'll just have to go on eBay and pay more for whatever you can find.... Because your "support line" has disconnected itself from you.



Ask your helpful support line this: "When will the rest of the Sound Choice collection be available like the gems?"

I will speculate that the answer will be; "Never."

. OK. I don't need to argue semantics. I WANTED the 6000 song set, no more, no less. Hows that?




I am happy with what I have. I have the best base set in the business.



I am OK with that. I have 99% of the classic, base songs covered by the GEM set.



You are confusing product offerings with customer support.

Besides, while it would be nice to get a few odds-ends, I am happy with my 6000 song set.

I love tomatoes Just got a big bag from my wifes boss - grown from his own garden.

_________________
LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!

And what is to prevent him from buying songs discs that are not part of the GEM series? You make it sound that as soon as someone buys the series that is it for them to compile more music. It is a leased set and nothing more and nothing less. One can buy more if they wish.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

Not necessarily.

The gem set was created and licensed out of the U.K. (according to Kurt Slep);



He won't be buying any of those from SC ..... or discs they are out of .... and they won't be licensing more out of the U.K. either.

So you're right, he can purchase individual songs from other manufacturers like Zoom, Sunfly, etc... but not SC unless he's buying off eBay... but even that's sporadic.

There is plenty of stock available, all of which was licensed and imported at a time when the license covered the U.S.

Squawk all you want, you'll never prove that the stock that you are proposing "is available" was actually imported at all...

Unless of course, you're willing to post the Bills of Lading and customs declarations.

I'll be happy to speculate that you won't get near that one with a 10 ft. pole.

Think of it as an "audit".... would you be willing to go through one? Besides, your client wants KJ's to "show their discs" in an audit and turnabout is always fair play.

Ah, my favorite forum troll: I do work ONE venue near a railroad track. It is a nice restaurant that boasts chefs trained at the Culinary Institute Of America, is focused on an older, more layed back clientele, the average price of a cocktail at that their smaller lounge is $6.50 to $8.00 per drink, and has been written up favorably many times in it's over 50 year existance, and it is called The Wagon Wheel Restaurant. It is also the only venue that still allows me to advertise since SC started crap.

If there is another venue near near those or other tracks of ANY sort, feel free to name it, or feel free to be more truthful in the future.

Now, this isn't to say that I haven't played dive bars or loud clubs. I have played biker bars, strip clubs, large night clubs, big kiddie dives, and little hole-in-the-walls that had their toilets flush directly into the cellar and my feet sticking to the floor.

However, these are the rare exceptions, not the general rule. I like nice restaurant bars because I don't have do deal with as much bad behavior, kids puking on my sandals, the fact that good meals add to the profit margin while I am working. and because- as a non-kid I like working with grown-ups better.

BTW "Bruce", how's Dawn?

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."

1) So I take it that you don't except my apology.... I'll probably sleep tonight anyway.....

2) Well, at least you don't know my background...

3) I completely agree that licensing & leasing can be very cost effective business practices- but disagree that they are in this case, because it is cost effective ONLY if one hasn't already laid out money for the purchase of said items. I will always disagree that as a matter of general practice - not your special case in which you lucked out, probably due to timing- trading product that one has ALREADY PURCHASED for leased product is bad business.

If one were in the process of CHOOSING between a purchase and a lease, one could weigh the options and decide which is most cost effective.

If one has already leased, then decided to buy at the end of that lease it could be cost effective.

However, if one has already purchased,giving up that OUTRIGHT OWNERSHIP in trade for a lease is not a generally accepted business practice.

The only exception would be if the OWNED product was at the end of it's useful life, because one would be back at the beginning, choosing between leasing or buying. Were you you planning to replace all of your discs en masse before this "opportunity arose?". If so you have never stated it. Knowing that might have forestalled a whole lot of wasted posts.

Once again, you got lucky- but I would not recommend it to others.

All of that being said, I am aware that you wanted the GEM set, and I am aware that you are happy with it. I have, from the first time that you mentioned it, congratulated you on your satisfaction with that product, and have stated that I am glad that you are happy with it.

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."

ah, i kinda see where this is going now.......
if i owned a 2010 Toyota Camry with 25,00 miles on it and traded it in for a leased 2010 Toyota Camry with 25,000 miles on it..................

_________________
Paradigm Karaoke, The New Standard.......Shift Happens

Kinda. It would be like returning the 2010 Camry with 25,000 miles you purchased on-sale, and getting a credit for MSRP towards an identical "leased" 2010 Camry with -0- miles.

Except you pay the entire the "lease" up front for 1/2 the price of your original purchase and you have to pay $33 a year forever to keep it.

Would you take that deal? I sure would.

Now you need a chef to prepare chicken fingers and burgers? I ordered food when I was there and it was pretty bad. Does over charging for cocktails make a place up-scale now? I know of some strip bars that charge more than that for drinks. Does that make them up-scale environments too? What comes to mind when you hear the name "Wagon Wheel Restaurant"? I think of some worn out saloon from Virginia City on Bonanza or Gunsmoke. I don't think up-scale when I think about Wagons. The Wagon Wheel is a littlle hole in the wall dive. White Castle has been in business for almost 100 years. Does that make it an up-scale restaurant too?

One last thing. I get the feeling that you think that you know me and you think that I know someone named Dawn. Swing and a miss.

Sticks and Stones and all that....Don't reprimand Harrington for name calling and then do it yourself. It's HYPOCRITICAL.

Oh sorry, missed that. Apology accepted.



I fail to see how the order in which the transaction took place has any bearing on the obvious cost savings on my spreadsheets bottom line.



You will always disagree because you believe that there is some intrinsic benefit to "ownership". The old "something to show for it, even if it costs double" mentality. Why is it bad business? Please tell me exactly what you gain through ownership that I also not have through licensing?



Part of the problem here is comparing it to and calling it a "Lease" or "Rental", which we all know it isn't. This false characterization imlies many things that are untrue. For example a lease implies monthly payments and a finite ending. I have neither. I make no payments and I never have to give them back. It is very "un-lease" like.



If it were a true lease, I would agree. This is a license however and not a lease.

And you are missing several key pieces of the deal. I bought and sold back 1500 songs for a profit. I "licensed" 6000 songs as I could not obtain the extra 4500 ala-carte. They are not equal weight as you describe above.

And I would completely disagree. Ask any contractor if he would return his used backhoe to John Deere for more than he paid, in return for a new leased Backhoe at half the price, with no future payments, that he can keep forever. I guarantee he would take the deal.



Any way you slice it, The GEM license is still a great deal over purchasing the exact same base set, with or without my bonus circumstances. How can you claim that saving 50% over the cost of "ownership" is better? The only thing you gain is the ability to proclaim "I own it", which is worth nothing to your business. This isn't real estate that you will pass on to your heirs, these are business tools that will be obsolete in under 20 years (probably more like 10). Purchase or License, you still have use of the same songs, for a long as you wish. One is just much cheaper. It's really very simple.

This is patently false Bazza. You have "delayed payments" that will begin in 2 years, although you have no payments currently. It's still a lease if you like -- you continually equate it to the terms used in automobile leasing - it ain't a car.

And yes, you will "have to give them back" once you decide you're out of the business and don't want to make the $33/yr payment or transfer them to someone else or SC decides to recall the gems and transfer it to a reduction for "the cloud."

Remember, you don't "own them" you only "license them."

Where do you come up with these fantasies? Seriously, your creative talents are tragically misapplied.

It's speculation I'll admit that..... but not too far from what it appears to be on the surface and so far, I've not been too far off the mark.... That you commented at all is a sign of that.

True, I may have to pay $33 as I have stated. I also believe this "Peppercorn fee" as it is known will be waived as most are. Surely as a court reporter you know this.

Of course, I will gladly pay $33 a year to re-license. It's chicken feed and STILL drastically less than buying them. I would have to pay $33 for over 100 years before coming close to the cost of a purchase. Although I have good genes, I don't think I will live that long.



The car comparison came from Paradigm. A car is leased. The GEM is licensed. You cannot keep your leased car after it ends for $33 a year. If you could many more would lease their cars. You must either give the car back at the end of the lease or BUY it for market value. I don't have to do either. I just re-license.



Huh? What is this crazy talk. I will never have to give them back as I will gladly pay the $33 if required. 20 minutes of work at my rate.



Yup! There is no need to own them as "ownership" doesnt add any benefit. Both the owner and the licensee can use the same 6000 songs as long as they like. I just paid much less for the privilege.

I will admit that many have a hard time with the concept. The comments such as "I want something to show for it" prove this. Some are willing to pay double, just to be able to SAY "I own this", even though there is no tangible benefit to doing so.

I'm not a court reporter.

But I do work with attorneys and court reporters.