[andrzejpw]

Quote:

Originally posted by mclaren20 Im not trying to say that we should download music. i am a teenager, and i dont download any more music. i stopped once, well when i started to come here. but i know that teenagers probaly downlaod the most music. all of my friends do it. they themselves also admit that they would buy more if CD's werent so expensive.

I'm a teenager as well. Would I buy more music if cds were less expensive? Sure. But this hobby prevents me from downloading poor quality mp3s.

 

[mclaren20]

Quote:

Originally posted by andrzejpw I'm a teenager as well. Would I buy more music if cds were less expensive? Sure. But this hobby prevents me from downloading poor quality mp3s.

same goes for me man, i probaly misunderstood your first reply and took it the worng way.

 

[bundee1]

Do a search here cuz we discussed this crap before.

 

[Lisa]

In Holland the price of an LP was 25 guilders. Than CD's came and LP's were no longer on the market for new music and within a year (or two) the price of an album went up 15 guilders. That's $7 or $8!
Now a new released CD is over €22,- (€1 = $1,17)which is almost 50 guilders!
In 20 years the price of an album has doubled.

I know that when music would be cheaper I would buy more. I think a lot of people would buy more music if it was cheaper.
Not saying downloading is justified but if music was more affordable to teens they would probably download less and buy the album for a change.

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

Originally posted by Trounce It is the blatantly extravagent lifestyles of the artists, the incorrigible marketing strategies and exorbitantly and unnecessarily large salaries of the studio execs that drive up CD prices.

Although I agree with you that CDs, on the whole, cost only pennies to produce, I think you should reconsider the "extravagent lifestyles of the artists" comment. VERY FEW artists get any money at all from the sales of CDs (only the top artists). The high price of CDs can be blamed entirely on the record companies.


Quote:

Of course, though, without a shadow of a doubt I support my favourite artists, and they are numerous, but for the odd LP with one or two decent tunes, I am not going to shell out my hard-earned money for a nice case and a marketing push.

Then you really have no right to listen to those "one or two decent tunes." If they aren't good enough for you to pay for, then you don't value them enough to listen to them. It's really that simple.

In fact, downloading them is 100% counterproductive. By pirating them, you're telling the RIAA that the music is valuable/desirable to you, and that if only they could prevent you from downloading it, you might actually buy it (whether or not this is true is irrelevant -- what matters is that you're proving to them that the music has some amount of value). If you and all the other music pirates stopped stealing music AND stopped buying music, that would send an entirely different -- and more effective -- message that would eventually result in lower prices.

 

[minya]

My reason for "pirating" music is pretty simple: I'm ****ing sick of buying ****.

For the last year and a half or so I've only bought the occasional thing I haven't heard on MP3 or whatnot first. And I buy a lot of music.

It supports what's good and whittles out what's bad. Everyone wins.

- Chris

 

[chadbang]

Quote:

My reason for "pirating" music is pretty simple: I'm ****ing sick of buying ****.

My sentiments exactly.

I'm now 45 years old. For 35 of those years I'd spend most of my pennies on music. I figured once around $16,000 on records and CDs. I'd say I still own or listen to about 1/30 of the stuff I've wasted my money on.

Well, I've learned my lesson. I'm not wasting my money of the crap they're merchandising out. Now I'm downloading it for free. Hey, so sue me and the 4 million others doing it on Kaaza. I've already paid my dues, RIAA. And most I what I'm downloading I've ALREADY BOUGHT BEFORE, except for the new stuff I'm supposed to be buying now ... that sucks.

Come on, what's the old expression: "Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?" I think you have to be silly these days to be wasting money on crap when you can listen to it once as an mp3 and then deep-six it someplace. Admit it, most albums get one or two listens then go to the great collection in the sky.

As far as we "pirates" are concerned, is everybody here forgetting the recording companies just settled a suit that they've been PRICE FIXING for years? You want to talk honesty? Come on, they've raked in Billions in profits off those cds that cost $2-$3 to produce. Anybody here from LA? Ever seen Rick Ruben cruising around in his black Rolls in Beverly Hills? I have. This isn't a good will mission. This ain't about ****ing "art". Every since it began ripping off African American artists to launch the great rock'n'roll machine, it's been a business populated by sharks and thieves.

Quote:

If you and all the other music pirates stopped stealing music AND stopped buying music, that would send an entirely different -- and more effective -- message that would eventually result in lower prices.

Who the hell is going to start a music buying boycott? Cesar Chavez? Impossible. Record company executive's lower prices? Ha! Talk about a pipe dream.

It's very nice that CD haven't gone up to $38 with inflation. Maybe because they started out inflated in price by 1000 percent!

 

[bundee1]

Woof Woof Get'em Dog. Tear'em a new one!!!!

 

[Mr.PD]

WOW, Chadbang's 45 years old!!!!!

I gotta say that I don't download, not because I think it is some great crime or anything, I just didn't like the crappy bitrates of the stuff I got when I tried it.

I hardly ever pay more than 12 or 13 bucks for a cd, until the other day. I ordered the Time Life Rock N Roll Era collection, all 20 of them for $265 or so plus shipping. These a damn expensive CDs. I got tired of trying to get this music cheaply and ending up with crappy recordings. I would have been money ahead to get this set in the first place.

 

[Beagle]

Quote:

Originally posted by Trounce It is the blatantly extravagent lifestyles of the artists, the incorrigible marketing strategies and exorbitantly and unnecessarily large salaries of the studio execs that drive up CD prices

You could say that about anything out there for sale. Like a ticket for a baseball or hockey game. Are you paying for 2 hours of fine entertainment (LOL!) or are you paying for the salaries? Or a bag of potato chips...8 cents of potato, 92 cents of overhead costs.

 

[redshifter]

Quote:

trounce: Yea, you believe that all you want, and when you come out of denial, get back to us.

sure sounds like you're trying to start something.

Quote:

I was not trying to start anything, and if you thought so, I apologize. But come on, grow up a little.

it does not matter what i think, you wrote it, and it is obviously a blunt insult with no facts to back it up. now you apologize, and in the same breath tell me to grow up. nice passive aggressiveness--is that term "grown up" enough for you?

maybe my reply was too harsh, i'm that way sometimes. but getting past hurt feelings, fact: cd plants cost millions to construct and maintain. your reply is full of opinions, but i still do not see any facts to refute my argument. please, help me get out of denial so i can come back!

 

[penvzila]

Quote:

Originally posted by Beagle You could say that about anything out there for sale. Like a ticket for a baseball or hockey game. Are you paying for 2 hours of fine entertainment (LOL!) or are you paying for the salaries? Or a bag of potato chips...8 cents of potato, 92 cents of overhead costs.

yeah, but try stealing a baseball game.

 

[Riordan]

Quote:

Originally posted by DarkAngel I just did a little research to see if my "memory " of CD prices was correct. CDs first were sold retail in 1983 and the CPI inflation adjusted price of CDs would be $38 today vs 1983 price. The average retail price of CDs in 1983 was actually $21 (now that's expensive!) so CDs are actually 32% cheaper now than they were in 1983. How many things are cheaper now than in 1983? Also CDs today have 13 minutes more of music on average vs 1983 Cds.........so stop complaining, CDs have never been cheaper. CD Price Research

sorry for the harsh words, but the link you posted is no independent research but a load of shady RIAA self-defense.

you can't compare the prices in the INTRODUCTION YEAR to today's prices - of course cds were expensive when the technology was brand new and sale levels were low.

any technology starts at extraordinary prices - but the point is: in contrast to any other technology i know of cd prices practically STAYED THERE.

 

[Jasper994]

hmmm I don't have a lot to say about the current prices of CD's... it's fairly close to right. On the other hand I really wish the ****ing record companies would throw their dollars at DVD-A and SACD (which by design are much harder to copy) instead of trying to stop pirating! Hell for what they are spending in court, they could subsidise the players! Give us more content! better quality! and above all, stop releasing albums with one good song! I will buy a CD if even 1/2 is worth listening to, but really, $12-15 for one song! get real!!!! On top of it all, many CD's that are out there aren't recorded particuarly well, and sound like garbage! If they want us to keep spending our hard earned dollars, freaking earn it!!!

 

[DLP]

Sorry, didn't mean to drag up such an old thread.