By BBC News Online's Alex Webb

While EMI's restructuring has been expected for some time, the depth of the cuts announced on Wednesday have been a reminder of the cold winds blowing around the world's music industry.

Many observers will be wondering how many of the 400 artists which EMI says it will drop - a quarter of its world roster - are from the UK.

But there are those in the industry who feel that EMI's problems should be put in perspective.

EMI acts like Pink Floyd still sell in millions

Alison Wenham, chief executive of the independent labels' organisation AIM, told BBC News Online: "It could even be good news for talent out there.

"The indie sector has never had to respond to the global business in the same way as the majors - they're smaller units, principally operating in the UK.

"If you're flexible, an early adopter, you can pick up artists, so it may be time to review the idea of the big deal with a big cheque from the major," she said.

Paul Scaife, director of ClickMusic.com, agrees that the indies stand to gain: "The indies are holding their own and they might take advantage of buzz bands who start to feel nervous about going to an EMI label."

But talent in the market for getting signed could still feel the effects, Mr Scaife told BBC News Online.

The UK is likely to escape the worst

Ajax Scott, Music Week

"Without doubt this will affect A&R. Anyone who thinks about getting signed is going to be very nervous about who they're dealing with at EMI.

"And it'll be interesting to see how the current roster of artists reacts."

Music Week's editor-in-chief Ajax Scott is more sanguine.

"In the UK they have already dropped some artists and the rosters are fairly lean, and I think that their UK labels like Parlophone have been quite successful of late, so the UK is likely to escape the worst.

Wenham: Sees opportunities for indies

"What they've got to do better is find more artists and market them better. They've done this in the UK but in the US they frankly haven't.

"They've new management there, but the jury's going to be out for the next 18 months."

There is some agreement that the US end of the record business has been the source of EMI's problems - not the UK labels, nor the highly-profitable music publishing arm.

There's no rule that says a British record company must rule the world

Charlie Gillett, Oval Records

BBC broadcaster and manager of Oval Records Charlie Gillett told BBC News Online: "EMI bought Capitol records in the 1950s and most of its troubles have come from trying to stay afloat in America.

"As a British record company it's a very successful one.

"But there's no rule that says a British record company must rule the world - these things go in ebbs and flows."

There is also agreement that the restructuring was necessary.

Radiohead: A valuable act for EMI's Parlophone label

"It does reflect what's happening to the multi-nationals," believes Alison Wenham.

"They're all in need of major restructuring to try to cope with the transition to business online, piracy and the sense that music commerce is in danger."

Ajax Scott concurs: "It needed to restructure, and it's doing something others will need to do.

"The business is fundamentally changing and the record companies all need to look at what business they're in.

"What EMI has done is started focussing on its core competence, finding artists and marketing them."

But will this put the veteran music company out of danger?

Paul Scaife thinks not: "Obviously changes were needed.

"They're intended for the long term, three years or so - but by then I imagine someone will have stepped in and bought them."