Do the major labels have a master plan that will guide them to a soft landing in the post-CD era? If you believe the claims of an unnamed music executive told by Michael Arrington in a post at TechCrunch, everything is going as planned. The lawsuits, the stubborn licensing deals, he wrote, are all part of "a master plan."

By 2013 (maybe as early as 2011) it’ll make sense for the labels to finally reorganize their business models around the reality created by the Internet and person to person file sharing services. No longer will the labels be tied to revenue limited to sales of master recordings - by then most or all artists will be under 360 music contracts that give the labels a cut of virtually every revenue stream artists can tap into - fan sites, concerts, merchandise, endorsement deals, and everything else.

But until then, he says, the spreadsheets and financial models dictate that suing customers and partners just makes too much sense. Venture capitalists have directed hundreds of millions of dollars, via their litigation-mired startups, into the label coffers. To some extent those payments will continue, although the big payment days are likely over. Apple still sends a lot of money to the labels for paid downloads, and sites like MySpace Music, Imeem, Rhapsody and Last.fm pay big streaming dollars. Until CD sales really stagnate, all those revenue streams bring in more money than facing reality.

Any chance labels -- along with publishers, performing rights organizations, managers, artists and every other party of interest -- will have a system in place to monetize P2P -- on a large scale -- within two years? I say no. Given the music industry's glacial rate of change, and given the fact that not as much as an embryonic plan is yet actionable, I would say three or four years is optimistic and five or more years is more realistic. (iTunes Music Store turns six years old in a few months. Look what short distance beyond paid downloads the record industry has moved in the last six years.)

Any reason labels should wait two to four years to start reorganizing? Absolutely not.

The basic premise of Arrington's post is hilarious. I'm sorry, but I cannot believe there is a master plan, as if label executives are simply sitting back and waiting for the proper time to unleash the business models and organizational structures that will save their jobs and industry. I have seen the same sense of certainty when executives have in the past spoke in support of DRM, DRM-based subscription models, consumer lawsuits, CD copy protection technologies, and the various next-generation CDs and audio DVDs.

This premise simply does not reflect the uncertainty with which everybody within the industry currently operates. Nor does it reflect labels' missteps, gaffes and wrong guesses throughout this decade. Show me an executive who knows exactly where the record industry is headed and I'll show you someone whose inflexibility and arrogance will end up hurting his/her company.

The truth is there is currently no plan on the near horizon that will make up for lost revenues if so much as Wal-Mart gets out of the CD business. That's the one correct part of the post. There is nothing to replace lost CD revenues. But there is a difference between having the end in sight and knowing what to do when the end comes.

For the next two to four years, labels will pray the CD does not entirely collapse, will witness continued (yet slowing) growth of paid downloads, will be thankful that people pay $3 for a ringtone, and will hope companies find the right combination of hardware and software to create successful music services. If they're smart, they will allow for a wider range of products and services to exist in hopes a handful will connect with music lovers.

And labels might want to put far more resources into figuring out just how to harness the power of person-to-person distribution without losing their shirts. It would take an effort not seen since the Apollo moon missions to get there within two years.