Karaoke Forums

I believe this is more than sufficient to conclude that non-KJ's buy the bulk of the music the providers distribute.

The real numbers are impossible to determine so certain amount of critical thinking must be used to come to any conclusion. You can either play the devil's advocate all you like, but math doesn't lie.

No matter. I am not here to convince you or anyone else of this.

What I can tell you is that I know Me and Lonnie can't be supporting all of the karaoke companies ourselves.

_________________
-Chris

Why doesn't karaoke get on that Unlimited downloads > keep what you download > pay per month. Like the other companies do.

You believe WHAT is more than sufficient? Blah blah blah. Ya got nothin'. Because I just know.

_________________
DJ Don

I believe you are just pushing buttons, for one.

But to answer your question, I believe my math equation is more than sufficient to prove that non-KJ's produce more revenue for the karaoke companies than KJ's do. If you don't want to take the time to plug numbers in yourself, that is on you. But don't ask me to prove something you refuse to take even a skeptical look at.

Besides.....If the last year has proven anything at all it's that facts and proof don't matter one little bit to a huge swath of the population. So long as people warm and fuzzy about their own position, that is all that matters.

_________________
-Chris

You haven't proven a thing. Your best answer was, 'because I just know.' The rest was bs. Who's pushing who's buttons??

_________________
DJ Don

No, I provided the equations as proof which you obviously haven't bothered to plug any numbers into.

So now I dare you to plug numbers into them in an effort to prove me wrong. Hell, come up with your own equations to prove me wrong.

In fact, if you think I am so wrong in my assessment, prove me wrong with your own proof of any kind.

_________________
-Chris

X = # of KJ's = (50,000)
PX = percentage of X that pays for music (10,000)
A = average number of tracks per year that each PX buys (200)
AC = average cost of a track in $ (1.50)

PX * A * AC = total sales in $ by KJ's 10,000*200*1.50 = $3,000,000


Y = # of KJ's (50,000)
PY = percentage of X that pays for music (10,000)
B = average number of tracks per year that each PY buys (200)
BC = average cost of a track in $ (1.50)

PY * B * BC = total sales in $ by all others (10,000*200*1.50 = $3,000,000)

what am i missing? these are the same equation with the same answer.
both look at the percentage of KJ's that pay for music, average tracks bought, and average spent.

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

Uhhhhh.... Shouldn't Y = # of NON-KJs????
Otherwise, your equations are identical (with the exception of you using X as an obvious typo (for those who know anything at all about basic mathematical equations) in your PY definition).

And, even if you make that correction to your equation, where is one supposed to get those numbers to plug into the equations. Does the Seller (or Manufacturer) know who the customer is (whether they are a KJ or not)? Does the Seller (or Manufacturer) keep a record of these sales (and who/what the Customer is)? And is the Seller (or Manufacturer) going to give that information to any Tom Dick or Harry (or Chris Avis) who asks for it?????

Chris, your challenge is an EMPTY CHALLENGE, because anyone can plug in whatever numbers they want to into those equations (just like Paradigm Karaoke just did).

I don't think there's any question that home users consume more karaoke tracks than do professional karaoke operators, probably by a factor of 100.

Home piracy is a problem, to be sure. Home consumers used to account for most of SC's sales. We don't even sell to home consumers anymore, so that's a 100% loss of market.

But home piracy is also a problem without a solution. The RIAA's experience in fighting home piracy has shown that there is no effective way to use the court system to go after home pirates. It's difficult to discover them; when you do, the courts often aren't sympathetic; and even if you get a judge who will enforce the law, juries are often reluctant to award significant damages (with a few notable exceptions). So what you have is the proliferation of subscription services that deliver the music for a small fraction of what record producers used to get for it. No sense in lamenting it; it's the world we live in.

You might not be aware that SC actually pioneered the karaoke home subscription service. The Karaoke Channel was a Sound Choice product, and it remains the most successful home subscription karaoke product available today. It generates a lot of revenue for its current owner, Stingray Digital. And that's perfectly fine.

So, you might be wondering, why do we spend so much time blaming commercial operators for the state of affairs? If the home pirates have cut off the majority of the revenue, does that let the commercial pirates off the hook?

No. The reality is that if every commercial operator paid for all of the music they use at the rates that are currently on offer, Phoenix would be a robust producer of karaoke music.

There are something on the order of 50,000 commercial karaoke systems active in the US at any given time. If 90% of them use SC products, that's 45,000 users. The current lowest price for a HELP license is $159/month. That would generate $85.9 million a year in revenue—more than ample to produce all the karaoke music the market could use, at the highest quality, and we would probably throw it into the HELP license at that. Publishers would be beating down our door to get a piece of that.

It's not that we don't blame home pirates, too--we do--we just can't do anything about them. We can do something about commercial pirates, so we do, and if they paid for the product at the rate they use it, we'd all have a merry Christmas.

There is something you don't have any control over? Say It ain't so Jim. Getting full compliance on the host side might take some doing since you have been at this now for 7 years and they're more illegal hosts than when you started. Sort of an act of futility isn't it?

My apologies......here are the proper equations....(though I have to say, I really think people should have been able to figure this out based on what I posted)

X = Total # of KJ's
PX = # of X that pays for music
A = average number of tracks per year that each PX buys
AC = average cost of a track in $

PX * A * AC = total sales in $ by KJ's per year


Y = # of NON-KJ's
PY = #of Y that pays for music
B = average number of tracks per year that each PY buys
BC = average cost of a track in $

PY * B * BC = total sales in $ by all NON-KJ's


have fun.....

_________________
-Chris

Chris, I'm not trying to bust your balls or troll you, but you said, 'you just know' that companies would survive without kjs. If you'd said, I THINK or I BELIEVE they do, I'd have politely agreed or disagreed, but you decided to give a snarky reply: 'because I just know' and proceeded to back it up with, well, nothing but straightup bs. Of course, it's not bs in your eyes. You like to argue sometimes for the sake of argument. That empty formula could work against you if there are more kjs buying music than non-kjs. The formula with no numbers proves absolutely nothing and you'll never be able to come up with numbers that will be meaningful. They can always be skewed one way or another by eliminating a certain demographic for example, or other means.

The burden of proof (yes, I know it's not court) is still on you. You said you just know. I asked how and that's where the bs began. And Harrington backing you up still proves nothing without numbers or SOME kind of tangible proof. How do we know KC isn't being used by KJs?? We don't. Of course, it would be foolish to risk doing it, but that doesn't mean it isn't being done. Conversely, Karaoke Channel, for example, is likely being used by home users 100 to one because even the stupidest hosts are smart enough to not use KC to host. This doesn't account for the suppliers that aren't suing for trademark or other infringement.

_________________
DJ Don

I am sticking to my guns. I do know. We all know. Proof doesn't even matter in this case. I don't really care what you or anyone else feels about this. I am happy with "just knowing".





That said.....some inquiries via email could confirm it for you if you really want your proof.

_________________
-Chris

OK, Chip. OLOLOL

_________________
DJ Don

Hey...if christians can "just know" there is a god, why can't I "just know" that KJ's don't prop up the karaoke industry?

Or....closer to home.....

If Trump supporters can "just know" that he will benefit them in spite of all the evidence against it.......

There are those that can extrapolate reasonable conclusions with reasonable data and there are those that will be unreasonable no matter what. Show me, with reasonable numbers, how KJ's of the world make or break the industry and I will be happy to entertain a conclusion other than my own.

Until then........I'm right.

_________________
-Chris

Now this is funny!
At least he's correct that (a) he can't be sure and (b) he's guessing (again.) Business as usual.

Somebody send him some cheese to go with this big bottle of whine... (vintage: "poor, poor, pitiful me")

I don't believe that I recall there ever being a banner ad pop up do you?

And I guess if I have so much power over the great and powerful Slep/PEP entertainment machine that they've canceled any advertising at all is pretty telling. It's a lot more than "rent-free in your head."

Happy Holidays!

Because now, you're a hypocrite. Keep diggin'. Your arguments on this hold water like a screen door in the bottom of a boat.

Oh, and no offense to Chip, but my reference was to you demanding proof from Chip (about the Red Peters thing) and him telling you to go find it yourself. What's good for the goose is good for the atheist, right?

_________________
DJ Don

Because.

Did you "just know" Hillary was going to win because 54.3% of WA voted for her? (surprise! Bet you didn't see that coming.)

And there are those (like you) that feel they don't have to extrapolate anything even remotely reasonable because they "just know."

No, you're "not right." Sorry, but you don't get to hold everyone else to a higher standard than you are willing to accept yourself while you sit in judgment. Who do you think you are? Harrington?

You should "show some reasonable numbers" before demanding the same of others.

I have spent enough time being reasonable here against a very unreasonable set of opponents. It's funny how when I lower myself to their standards, *I* get lambasted for it, but they never do.

No one is questioning the equation I provided (and anyone could have come up with it....I am not special in that regard). So plug your own numbers in to validate whatever position you have.

If I would have provided any numbers at all, at least one person and probably the usual suspects would have attacked me on the numbers. Since "I know" I will get attacked no matter what, I am simply choosing my battles here.

I am sorry that it frustrates you that I am not providing further proof. Welcome to Chris' shoes.

If you believe I am a hypocrite......so what. I stopped caring what some of you believe about certain things a long while ago.

Oh......I smell poop again. Someone should really clean up around here (and actually toss out the garbage instead of putting in the garage and then hauling it back into the house a few months down the road).

_________________
-Chris

I think Chris's point with the equation is that if you put any reasonable numbers into it you'll find that it's very difficult to imagine KJs buying most of the karaoke product that's sold. That's borne out by Jim Harrington's reply--he has access to better numbers and says it isn't even close. It looks to me like Chris's instinct was pretty good on this.

Judging from Mr. Harrington's answer, the main importance of KJs to his industry is that it's easier to stop them from stealing the material because they advertise their whereabouts.