Declining CD Sales (Wall Street Journal front page article)
Mar 25, 2007 at 9:14 PM Post #46 of 71
No, I'm actually 21 years old and am an entrepreneur in the music industry.

You missed my point entirely. The point was that there are VERY FEW people who recognize CDs as a low-value purchase. Those that have are probably resorting to LPs because the number of such people are so low. Most who "switch" to vinyl now do so because they like the greater feel of a physical, tangible entity but for around the same cost. Those are the kinds of people that switch to another format due to "lack of value".
 
Mar 25, 2007 at 10:32 PM Post #47 of 71
Quote:

Originally Posted by Aman /img/forum/go_quote.gif
You missed my point entirely. The point was that there are VERY FEW people who recognize CDs as a low-value purchase. Those that have are probably resorting to LPs because the number of such people are so low. Most who "switch" to vinyl now do so because they like the greater feel of a physical, tangible entity but for around the same cost. Those are the kinds of people that switch to another format due to "lack of value".


CDs aren't a low-value purchase to me. I think Vinyl is a far lower value considering the difficulty of finding capable playback equipment. My car doesn't have a record player, my home doesn't have a record player, etc. I can easily rip a CD to disk and if I was playing a physical CD, I wouldn't have to flip it over at 22 minutes.

Levels/loudness tweaking and copy protection notwithstanding, CDs are still a great value, but they have increased in price over the years. Still, I can go to zunior and grab an album for 11 bucks in flac, and that seriously makes me consider switching away from the mainstream publishers for this model.
 
Mar 26, 2007 at 5:24 AM Post #48 of 71
I must have missed your point, because I still don't understand how gearing the music industry towards middle aged males would cause a rise in CD sales. 18-34 is the demo these guys are trying to hit, then 11-18. Nowhere in the music industry profit model are middle aged males courted. Is that what you see as the problem?
 
Mar 26, 2007 at 5:41 AM Post #49 of 71
While I agree that there are other factors (entertainment and distribution options, etc.), I'm sure the #1 cause of declining CD sales is piracy.

One of the largest age groups for buying music is young kids. They don't have a frame of reference to know that music may not be as good as it once was, they're relatively new to the game. They're pirating the music they like, and it causes a huge drop in CD sales. Not surprising or complicated...at least for that part of the equation.
 
Mar 26, 2007 at 5:13 PM Post #50 of 71
Would music download services have even been created if napster and things like Kazaa, Limewire, etc. had not paved the way creating a huge martek with file sharing of mp3s? That's got me curious, how much an effect the early file sharing had on creating the legal music download business.
 
Mar 26, 2007 at 5:26 PM Post #51 of 71
Quote:

Originally Posted by lowmagnet /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I won't touch digital downloads until they go lossless and non-drm. The fact that CDs exist mean they will continue to exist because they are, IMO, superior to rights-restricted, poor quality downloads.

I just wish people would join me in making paid music downloads a failure until the industry gives our rights to ownership back.



x2...

For me, its not music downloads that are killing CD sales.... ITS THE MUSICIANS. If I feel music is worth the price of the CD, I will buy it. plain and simple. The sad fact is, most top-40 musicians puke out mindless trash that is not worth my hard earned $$$.
 
Mar 26, 2007 at 5:30 PM Post #52 of 71
Quote:

Originally Posted by werdwerdus /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Would music download services have even been created if napster and things like Kazaa, Limewire, etc. had not paved the way creating a huge martek with file sharing of mp3s? That's got me curious, how much an effect the early file sharing had on creating the legal music download business.


100% completely based on Napster's popularity, and the record companies still took years, and sued their consumers, before thinking 'hey, why dont we sell things online.' This is because the record companies are morons. They still havent been able to respond to consumers want (non-DRM mainly, with a few wanting lossless)
 
Mar 26, 2007 at 5:33 PM Post #53 of 71
Quote:

Originally Posted by Blitzula /img/forum/go_quote.gif
While I agree that there are other factors (entertainment and distribution options, etc.), I'm sure the #1 cause of declining CD sales is piracy.


The study that was referenced in post 12 of this thread found that piracy had no measurable effect on sales: http://www.unc.edu/~cigar/papers/Fil..._March2004.pdf

It's an interesting read.
 
Mar 26, 2007 at 11:17 PM Post #55 of 71
How to improve CD sales.....

1. All CDs released with an $8.99msrp. (Double albums ¢17.98 etc)
2. Have a panel of engineers work on a universal compression & range standard for each genre (country, jazz, rock). Then apply this standard to all releases on the label (even the rereleases). The volume knob should be the same for Pink Floyd as well as Pink for example.
 
Mar 26, 2007 at 11:48 PM Post #56 of 71
Quote:

Originally Posted by Rock&Roll Ninja /img/forum/go_quote.gif
2. Have a panel of engineers work on a universal compression & range standard for each genre (country, jazz, rock). Then apply this standard to all releases on the label (even the rereleases). The volume knob should be the same for Pink Floyd as well as Pink for example.


Replaygain is a good model, so why not just match their leveling technique and apply it to commercial releases? Then we wouldn't need something like that.
 
Mar 27, 2007 at 6:49 AM Post #57 of 71
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sherwood /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I must have missed your point, because I still don't understand how gearing the music industry towards middle aged males would cause a rise in CD sales. 18-34 is the demo these guys are trying to hit, then 11-18. Nowhere in the music industry profit model are middle aged males courted. Is that what you see as the problem?


Yes, I think that's what Aman is saying. And I think Aman is right.

When I turned 18, I had just graduated from high school. I was selling tickets at a movie theater for a little over minimum wage and putting away money for college in the fall. My disposable income allowed me to buy a CD every two or three weeks.

Today, I'm 34, through grad school, have been in the workforce some time and, let's say that I'm not exactly going hungry. I'll pick up 5-10 discs a week if I feel like it and not worry about the price. And I even buy SACDs.

So, would you rather sell to me at 18 or 34? Do you want two sales a month or maybe as many as 30 sales a month?

If they produced appealing new music, I would buy. 99% of what the labels put out is a word the Head-Fi filter would remove. If they bothered to address a consumer like me, I'd spend less time hunting vintage vinyl at junk stores and haunting used CD shops. Since nothing new is any good, what option do I have?
 
Mar 27, 2007 at 8:37 AM Post #58 of 71
Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Yes, I think that's what Aman is saying. And I think Aman is right.

When I turned 18, I had just graduated from high school. I was selling tickets at a movie theater for a little over minimum wage and putting away money for college in the fall. My disposable income allowed me to buy a CD every two or three weeks.

Today, I'm 34, through grad school, have been in the workforce some time and, let's say that I'm not exactly going hungry. I'll pick up 5-10 discs a week if I feel like it and not worry about the price. And I even buy SACDs.

So, would you rather sell to me at 18 or 34? Do you want two sales a month or maybe as many as 30 sales a month?



The problem is that middle-agers demand quality for their money -- real composition, real performers, real sound. Catering for this market requires real investment. It is much easier and cheaper to market for teenagers -- pick up a random chick on the street, liposuct, implant, put her in a tight PVC suit or suchlike, pose her sucking some rod-shaped object. Then you can just let her sing any bottom-drawer song and market her as the hottest R 'n B sensation. Who knows, even middle-age males may fall for that.
 
Mar 27, 2007 at 12:02 PM Post #59 of 71
In some ways, people on this thread/forum really fail to see the big picture.

First of all, stuff like compression and sound quality have really minimal impact on CD sales. Just think how many copies RHCP - Californication has sold with it's atrociously bad recording? Even a lot of real music enthusiastists (I mean those, who buy 50-100 cds or more per year) have absolute no clue about sound quality. I happen to know several people, who have close to thousand albums on their shelves, and still use boomboxes to listen to them. Only a very small minority of listeners are audiophiles, who care about sound quality, and even smaller margin of those actually know about stuff like compression etc.

Second, teenagers and young adults are the most profitable group for music. There are some middle aged men, who buy lots of albums, but usually they are still listening to the old classic rock bands and just buying their remasters, DVDs etc. A vast majority of middle aged men don't really listen to music at all, except some FM radio. Those who do, most likely already have a large record collection and ignore new bands and trends. The kind of people, who think that absolutely nothing worthy was ever made after Pink Floyd. How could you market new bands to people like those?

Teenagers and young adults may not have such a lot of money to spend on albums, but the sheer amount of teenagers into music compared to middle aged men into music is just so much higher. You can also mobilize the entire teenage crowd to buy one single hit album, while older age groups have more diverse tastes. It doesn't matter if teenagers buy only one album in year, if it's something like Linkin Park - Hybrid Theory, which sells over 10 million copies. Someone makes loads of money from that, and every label is trying to do the same.

Last but not least, the quality of music is always left out from those "piracy dropped CD sales another 5%!" arguments. You can't expect album sales to stay high, if the quality of music goes downhill. Modern day artists rarely have long careers and therefore labels don't get wide back catalogues to sell. While classic rock albums are still moderately priced and often bought, modern day pop/r'n'b albums end up in the bargain bin in less than a year, and after two years, absolutely no one is going to buy them. Even more popular modern day artists just mysteriously disappear after two or three albums. It's expensive to constantly find and market new talent and one hit wonders, which also get most hit from piracy.
 
Mar 27, 2007 at 10:11 PM Post #60 of 71
Quote:

Originally Posted by Aman /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Exactly what I've been getting at for a while now!

The music industry has become polarized - extremely generic on one side, and extremely specialized on the other (then there's all the re-issues of older stuff somewhere in between). The problem is that on the specialized side, there's a lot more artists than on the other. The money doesn't get distributed as well because there's so many people to distribute to!



Aman, I often disagree with you, but here I think you're right. I'd also like to point out a corollary to your post. The reason we think of certain types of music as "specialized"/interesting or "generic"/Top 40/zzzz is because the record industry itself has created those boxes and it seems they've now trapped themselves in the boxes. For example, it seems they kept pushing alternative rock acts that sounded like Nirvana, and sold them that way. Now, the majority of listeners think an alternative rock act has a certain "sound" (i.e. like Nirvana) and anything else, even if it's relatively accessible otherwise, (Decemberists, Arcade Fire) is just "indie" and the RIAA/MTV world doesn't know what to do with it. So they created these categories as a way to group a bunch of music "properties" and sell them, but then the box gets watered down and silly looking with crap like Nickelback. Meanwhile, the audience has been so used to hearing "comfortable" music like Nirvana variants that something like the Mars Volta is too shocking to get radio play.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top