Labels? there is 4 major labels.
All of them backed by multi billion or even trillion dollar companies.
They have closer to 90% of the market and 100s or thousands of indie companies share the rest. Mac Mille is probably the most successful and big companies and investors backs up the company distributing his music as well.
The question is if it wasn't so problematic, why would these labels need all these resources and history to own the market? Basic economics say concentrate on what you do best, earn bread and pay for the services you need from others who do their shyt the best. Just look at Apple mad cash reserve, mad revenue, mad growth and they still have their biggest competitor building chips and memory for the iPhone and iPad. They stand for over 10% of Samsungs revenue alone. Why? The R&D costs, the risk, the time, the expertise and on is most likely not worth it. Instead they will keep on buying from Samsung even if they've got a billion dollar beef.
You not telling me nothing I don't know. Im just calling bullshyt.
Take Cash Money for example. They handle everything on their end. Marketing. Recording. Mastering. Touring. Merchandising. Universal just presses & distributes their music. That's the only thing keeping them from being an independent entity. I'm calling bullshyt that its soooooooooo cost-prohibitive to add that final procedure. You can record, market & tour on your own but, it'll break the bank to put CDs in Target. Tech N9ne can put his music in FYI but, Jay-Z can't & he has 20x as much in resources. Nah nikka. That's bullshyt, it has to be greater forces at hand.