????周二,， 流媒體音樂(lè)服務(wù)商Pandora公司的股價(jià)出現(xiàn)下跌,。韋德布什證券（Wedbush Securities）分析師邁克爾?帕切特將其“跑贏大盤(pán)”評(píng)級(jí)下調(diào)為“中性”。之后,，這家音樂(lè)流媒體服務(wù)公司更是一蹶不振,。周三上午，它的股價(jià)出現(xiàn)小幅回升。有報(bào)道稱(chēng)蘋(píng)果公司（Apple）即將推出音樂(lè)流媒體服務(wù),，帕切特提到Pandora面臨著這方面的競(jìng)爭(zhēng),。他指出這只是該公司面臨的“逆風(fēng)”之一。

????而Pandora和整個(gè)音樂(lè)行業(yè)所面臨的最強(qiáng)逆風(fēng)乃是錄制音樂(lè)市場(chǎng)價(jià)格的持續(xù)下降——不管價(jià)錢(qián)是由用戶(hù)支付還是由廣告商支付,。無(wú)論音樂(lè)以什么方式實(shí)現(xiàn)交付,，一個(gè)鐵的事實(shí)是，數(shù)量越來(lái)越多的用戶(hù)不再希望為音樂(lè)付費(fèi),，或者說(shuō),，至少是不希望花費(fèi)太多。廣告費(fèi)率處于非常低的水平,，尤其是在人們?cè)絹?lái)越青睞流媒體音樂(lè)的移動(dòng)平臺(tái),。

????因此，流媒體用戶(hù)受到了擠壓,，而唱片公司和藝術(shù)家也是一樣,。《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》（The New York Times）的本?西薩里奧周一撰文探討了這樣一種現(xiàn)象,，即當(dāng)音樂(lè)進(jìn)行流播放時(shí),，除了最受歡迎的藝術(shù)家以外，其他人從中獲得的收益非常之少,。即使音樂(lè)流播放一百萬(wàn)次,，產(chǎn)生的收益可能也只有幾千美元，甚至更少,。在周二發(fā)表的后續(xù)博客文章中,，西薩里奧提出了一個(gè)重大、而且至今仍然懸而未決的問(wèn)題：人們還會(huì)繼續(xù)希望擁有自己的音樂(lè)嗎,？或者未來(lái)就在于流媒體這個(gè)偉大的“天國(guó)點(diǎn)唱機(jī)”（celestial jukebox）,？問(wèn)題的答案將幫助確定音樂(lè)行業(yè)能夠預(yù)期獲得哪種類(lèi)型的收益。而且,，這還沒(méi)有考慮音樂(lè)行業(yè)周邊的很多法律問(wèn)題，比如如何針對(duì)不同的流媒體用戶(hù)和廣播電臺(tái)（包括網(wǎng)絡(luò)和線(xiàn)下的）制定版稅稅率,。

????一些觀察人士指出,，上世紀(jì)80年代CD問(wèn)世的時(shí)候，藝術(shù)家們同樣受到了擠壓,。CD被看成是特種產(chǎn)品,，在一開(kāi)始的時(shí)候，藝術(shù)家只能從CD銷(xiāo)售中獲得相對(duì)較少（如果有的話(huà)）的收益,。CD迅速成為最受青睞的音樂(lè)格式后,，一切都改變了，而音樂(lè)行業(yè)也出現(xiàn)復(fù)興,，并在上世紀(jì)90年代末達(dá)到了頂峰,。樂(lè)觀的人認(rèn)為,，這個(gè)行業(yè)的這段歷史也會(huì)因?yàn)樵诰€(xiàn)音樂(lè)再次重演。

????Shares of Pandora fell on Tuesday and stayed down after Wedbush Securities analyst Michael Pachter downgraded the music-streamer's stock from "outperform" to "neutral." Shares were recovering slightly on Wednesday morning. Pachter cited competition from Apple's reportedly forthcoming music-streaming service. That was just one of the "headwinds" facing Pandora, he noted.

????But the strongest headwind facing not only Pandora (P) but the entire music business is the continued fall of the market price of recorded music, whether that price is paid by listeners or by advertisers. No matter which type of delivery, the hard fact is that a growing segment of the audience no longer expects to pay for music, or at least expects to not pay much. Ad rates, particularly on the mobile platforms that people increasingly favor for streaming music, are in the basement.

????So the streamers are squeezed, but so are the music labels and the artists. The New York Times' Ben Sisario on Monday examined how little all but the most popular artists earn when their music is streamed. Even a million listens might yield just a few thousand dollars or less. In a followup blog post on Tuesday, Sisario noted a big, so-far-unanswered question: Will people continue to want to own their own music, or does the future lie in streaming -- the great "celestial jukebox?" The answer will help determine what kinds of revenues the industry can expect to earn. And that doesn't even take into account the many legal questions surrounding the music industry, such as how to set royalty rates for the various kinds of streamers and radio outfits (both on the Internet and off).

????Some observers note that artists were similarly squeezed when CDs came along in the '80s. CDs were considered specialty products, and at first, artists got relatively little, if any, money from their sale. That all changed as CDs quickly became the favored format, and the music business saw a renaissance that peaked in the late '90s. The same thing will happen with online music, the optimists argue.