RIAA Sales Compared to Download Statistics 694
OneInEveryCrowd writes "According to an article at SFGate, although the recent crackdown and lawsuits have caused a 22% drop in downloading, the drop in CD sales actually accelerated during the same period. My own response to the RIAA crackdown was to get a Netflix account, get into fansubs, and swear off CD purchases for life. If this was mainstream behavior CD sales would have dropped to zero. I was still pleased to see that many people responded in a similar fashion though." An EMI executive has a piece giving the standard industry view, but this piece about Universal slashing CD prices may be more telling.
RIAA Sales (Score:4, Funny)
CD Sales (Score:5, Insightful)
Uhh last time i checked i cant just go and buy a 50 pack of brittney spears for $19.99 USD. so hmmm, if everyone spent the same ammount they would have on ONE cd for 50 blanks, they would out sell CD's by 50:1.
Re:CD Sales (Score:4, Interesting)
So, saying that blank cd sales are up (especially from record stores) is in effect saying that consumers are giving money to RIAA and exercising a right (which they paid for!) to copy CD's for home use.
If the comment also included data CDs, then the author is completely ignoring the fact that computer users actually write data to CDs. In any case, I suspect the conclusions drawn from that sentence are going to be horribly wrong by 95% of the non-technical folks reading it.
HUH?!?! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:HUH?!?! (Score:5, Informative)
A better place to look might be hrrc.org [hrrc.org] where they have more interest in the consumer's rights.
Also, it's Audio home recording act, not American... sorry. And thanks to the poster that clarified the differences between audio and data CD's, I didn't know that.
Re:HUH?!?! (Score:3, Interesting)
The "tax" this guy is talking about is given to the RIAA to help recoup losses from illegal copying but in no way gives people the right to copy.
The bottom line is: Pay for your music. You have the legal right to make copies of the music that you pay for. You have NO right whatsoever to infringe on other peoples copyright
Re:HUH?!?! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:CD Sales (Score:5, Informative)
Superficially, they look the same, use the same dye technologies, etc.
To assist tracking, CD-R[W] media has a spiral pressed into it which the write laser follows. The return from the pressed spiral is not strong enough to pose a problem for CD players. The spiral also wobbles at a fixed rate to provide a timing reference. This feature is called "Absolute Time In Pre-groove", or ATIP.
At the beginning of the ATIP, a further sub-wobble encodes data such as the media dye type, recording speed, laser power,... and whether the media is an "audio CD" or a "data CD".
Early Philips audio CD recorders will accept only "Audio CDs" as indicated in the ATIP. They also implement the serial copy management system (SCMS) and refuse to make a second-generation copy.
Your typical burner, OTOH, doesn't give a damn about audio vs. data or SCMS, so you can burn to your heart's content.
CD players, not equipped to read the ATIP, can't tell the difference either.
The idea behind "music" vs. "data" was to charge a higher price for the music blanks, and to use the uplift to compensate the industry for piracy, while letting users of "data" blanks get away from the levy.
Of course, in reality it doesn't work that way at all. Almost no one buys music blanks any more (unless they happen to own a Philips recorder), anyone can copy a music CD using a computer data CD-R burner onto a data blank, and certain countries levy data CDs as well as audio. Oh, well...
Not quite true (Score:4, Interesting)
s/Philips recorde/any AHRA-compliant recorder/
Any standalone recorder, whether made by Philips or otherwise, is legally not permitted to record on "data" CD-Rs. This restriction is mandated by law with the Audio Home Recording Act.
PC equipment happens to be exempt from this law.
Re:CD Sales (Score:3, Interesting)
Strange to think of this as "back in the day" already, but even on Philips audio recorders we
only needed *one* music CD.
You got ready to record your track. You put the music blank in, and armed for record. Then, you pried (!) the drawer open slightly, pulled out the audio disc, and put in a regular CDRW.
Re:CD Sales (Score:4, Informative)
Sec. 1008. - Prohibition on certain infringement actions
No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings. (Title 17, Chapter 10, Subchapter D, US Code)
Re:CD Sales (Score:4, Interesting)
It's called the Audio Home Recording Act, which basically said that you can make copies of things at home, but in return the **AA's collect a levy on all recording media and recorders sold, and you can only make a copy from a first-generation copy of something.
A good link is here [duke.edu].
The main problem is that the law was passed 10 years ago, and nobody had any idea that the Internet would take off so much, and if I read it correctly, it doesn't protect you if you download. I think the problem with downloading is that the downloaded music is not a first-generation recording, so you can't let someone else copy it. Although, I wonder what happens if you use one of those 99cents download services, and then let people download from your server. I think there are other issues in that computers aren't covered devices because they don't have the necessary !copying protection and don't pay royalties. It's a mess, but it appears that doing a CD->CD transfer with a CD player is ok.
Well it worked elsewhere (Score:5, Insightful)
Who'd have thought it: a depressed economy leads to changes in price elasticity. I demand the Nobel Prize for Economics
Re:Well it worked elsewhere (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Well it worked elsewhere (Score:5, Insightful)
Here the big record companines want their latest manuifactured boy band to get to number one, so they promote the single for months before realease to get pent-up demand, then they launch the single at a huge discount to the normal price, and it gets to number one. Then they raise the price massively to try and recoup their losses after the first week.
The result of this is that if you hear a single and want to buy it, the chances are it's either not out, or it's overpriced at 4.99 (that's $7.90, not for an album, but for a SINGLE!).
The artists make no money at all from singles because high overall sales have been sacrificed for one week peak sales, and the discount price is only achieved by record companies GIVING shops the CDs for free, which they recoup from the artists under the name of "marketing expenses"
Sucks, doesn't it? But wait, I've only told you half of it...
The all important charts here are compiled by the BPI, and a few years back theye were getting their asses kicked by small dance labels that were actually putting out music that the public liked. The BPI was paying a fortune to get the small label acts to remix their tired formula pop, and still losing the sales batte. In order to stamp out long dance tracks with plenty of remixes, they introduced a rule that a single only qualifies for the charts if it is less than 20 minutes long, and has less than 4 tracks on it, which favours low value for money baladeers.
To make matters worse, the chart rules allow 2 different CDs for each single to be released, as well as a DVD single (The DVD single is only allowed to have 1 video track on it, the video is entirely static for 2 of the tracks!) so to obtain all the versions of a track that the US gets on 1 CD single, we would have to buy 3 disks at 4.99, making a total of 14.97, which translates to $23.70
That's TWENTY THREE DOLLARS SEVENTY CENTS for the same music you americans get on one single, and to listen to it all, we have to swap CDs, and also have a DVD player that doesn't actually show moving pictures most of the time!
Is it any wonder the single is dead here?
Re:Well it worked elsewhere (Score:5, Insightful)
Seems to me that one of these is a feature-packed disc with a few hours of full-motion video that cost many millions to produce and that one of these is 13 short tracks of minimally interesting audio that cost a fraction of what the other cost to produce. Even more telling, Lawrence Fishburne hasn't appeared at any MPAA gatherings giving speeches like Courtney Love's "Math" speech. So I also wonder which set of "artists" is being more fairly compensated for their work.
Re:Well it worked elsewhere (Score:3, Informative)
Who'd have thought it: a depressed economy leads to changes in price elasticity. I demand the Nobel Prize for Economics
You forgot to mention "by a monopoly".
Economincally speaking, the Music industry is not pricing the music as there was any competition, based on how much margin they must have to survive and possibly grow,
but rather as a monopoly, based on how much the consumer can/is willing to pay.
Re:Well it worked elsewhere (Score:3, Interesting)
The UK top 20 charts don't look that much different from the US top 20 charts. Whether any of us like it or not, the top 20 is where the majority of sales are made (hmm... maybe that's why they're the top 20).
They are making real music decisions, and buying real music.
I think one of the big differences is that the RIAA's numbers tend to be RIAA sales. N
Re:Well it worked elsewhere (Score:3, Interesting)
How does Dance of Death compare to their Brave New World album? I really liked that one, and I was so pleased when Bruce came back to the band. (For those not aware, Bruce Dickinson was Iron Maiden's original singer; he left for a new solo albums, and eventually came back t
The moral of the story is.... (Score:5, Insightful)
not so B&W (Score:5, Insightful)
And your black-and-white portrayal of the situation assumes there is no one who belongs to both groups. I would predict significant crossover, actually.
I don't use kazaa, but I've had people play mp3's of their stuff at work, and occasionally these didn't get rigorously deleted when those people left. End result? I've bought a few of those albums, music that I never otherwise would have even tried. I have never wanted an album and gotten mp3's instead.
Re:not so B&W (Score:5, Insightful)
The situation is not so simple for the record companies however. Record companies are making less profit, and without proving it, are claiming that file sharing is the cause of this. They are using their unproven assertions to get laws passed (like the DCMA) that reduce my rights and enhance theirs. They don't have to find a way to conform to the current laws; they can get them changed.
The record companies can apparently get the laws changed to favour them (like the copyright extension act); and consumers are just supposed to accept that record companies have more power over government. Well, I think consumers are using the tools at their disposal, technology and sheer numbers, to make up for the lack of power over the government. Legally or not, file-sharing people are sending a message to the record companies that the current system for distributing music sucks. I think the record companies are deluding themselves if they think they can use the law to maintain the current system where artists and consumers get screwed and the middleman gets all the profits.
Personally, I have never downloaded music, but I really don't care if other people do. If the record companies are right and they are driven out of business by file sharing, I won't shed any tears. I'm not buying music now, so it doesn't matter to me if the record companies go out of business.
Re:not so B&W (Score:3)
The argument of the file trader is that certain people in the recording industry and RIAA itself have failed to make the logical connection between file trading and lost revenue. File traders are often more active in purchasing music. Legally attacking them is a bad knee-jerk reaction.
BTW, I say recording industry and not music industry because there is an important distinction. No one at Gibson guitar o
Read carefully: MP3s increase CD sales. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re #1: No radio, no MP3 downloads... no purchase.
Re #2: Tons of this crap on radio (i.e. hear it but don't like it) because radio isn't an open forum, it's bought and paid for and it's hard to find variety if you don't like what radio is doing right now. Okay, let's face it, there's a lot of crap in MP3-land too... but the barrier to entry in MP3-land is lower, so artists that can't get on radio or that haven't been played on radio for years can be found in MP3-land.
[And no shite I won't pay for what I don't like and don't ever plan to listen to again-- repeat listening is after all, the express purpose of recorded music.]
Re #3: Every now and then something I like is on radio (and then I buy it), but mainly I find it through downloading MP3s (and then I buy it). But the point is, if I like it, I buy it. Because I want to do my own, high-quality rips instead of the net-quality stuff. Because if the three tracks I've heard are good, the other four might be worth having as well. Because I want the artist to make more. Because I want to have media around in case my hard drive dies and I need to re-rip.
Discourse:
I've bought at least 75 albums over the last two years that I first heard as a download or when someone emailed me a 128k mp3 file and said "wow, listen to this." Before the MP3 "era" I bought maybe 5-10 discs a year and often was dissatisfied with those. After MP3 started to happen, my CD purchasing increased exponentially and so did my level of satisfaction with each purchase.
I have 60+ gigs of MP3s, and I can show you an original CD to back every single one of those tracks up. Happily, I can put all those damn CDs in boxes in storage rather than having them take up space in my living area thanks to MP3. And yes, sometimes I do email one to a friend and say "wow, listen to this!" and I know that I have generated a number of CD sales this way.
Here's the kicker that drives RIAA crazy: probably 50% of the CDs I've bought after listening to MP3s are indies. Often I have to write the band after tracking them down on the 'net just to buy a copy because they're not out there in marketing channels. I know for a fact I've sent people to live performances... More than once I've emailed a friend an MP3 track along with "Hey man, this artist is going to be at XYZ in your town." Friend listens to track, likes it and *boom* another ticket is sold to the performance (and the artist makes a buck)... and nine times out of ten, the friend also buys a CD at the performance-- *boom* another CD is sold also.
The problem isn't that MP3s hurt sales of all music. The problem is that MP3s drive only the sales of good music-- and with barriers to entry (ala radio and RIAA contracts) removed, artistic expression isn't something the RIAA can get any kind of government-sponsored monopoly on. That is of course in contrast to, say, marketing and distribution channels in a particular commodity (i.e. crap music).
P.S. Please do not respond with an Ogg post.
Netflix? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Netflix? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Netflix? (Score:5, Funny)
Nonsense! I've been eating non-free-range-organic meat for 15 years now, aNd mY BRAin iS figsdjkfhjklsadhfjkllasdfhkj
Re:DVD/CD Cost Effectiveness (Score:4, Funny)
Makes perfect sense to me (Score:3, Insightful)
DVD rental 'on demand'. The medium is irrelevant, he could have been donating money to the public library or gardening, but the point is that when you boycott one thing, the money you spend on it necessarily goes to something else, even if its into a bank.
Me, I've not spent money on DVDs or CDs, and have instead gone to see movies (which are generally not money making propositions!), traveled, and gardened. Money well spent I
Real response (Score:5, Informative)
Seriously, though, his main point is he's giving up on CDs for other forms of entertainment and that's a shame.
There is another way. Go out there and start checking out the stealth galaxy of independent music. And when you find something that you really like, send 'em an email and let them know that you want them to stay independent and free from DRM and RIAA rotten tactics.
Start with CD Baby
http://www.cdbaby.com/ [cdbaby.com]
Or just start browsing. A random selection of links from searching independent musicians and independent music.
http://www.indiemusic.com/ [indiemusic.com]
http://www.musicbizacademy.com/directory/indiemusi c.htm [musicbizacademy.com]
http://www.secondfret.com/ [secondfret.com]
http://www.hotbands.com/ [hotbands.com]
http://www.sonicawareness.com/ [sonicawareness.com] http://www.narcopop.com/musicians/ [narcopop.com]
http://www.rainmusic.com/ [rainmusic.com]
http://www.musicianmp3.com/ [musicianmp3.com]
http://www.indie-music.com/ [indie-music.com]
http://www.galaris.com/ [galaris.com]
http://www.internetdj.com/ [internetdj.com]
Looks Good (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes! So it wasn't the downloading that caused poor sales afterall. It was the
crappy music + high prices + strongarming.
Also, congratulations to all who have not purchased CD's in protest. Keep up the good work.
Re:Looks Good (Score:5, Funny)
I also would like to thank those of you running pirate operations selling fake CDs on the street and in retail outlets. Way to go.
We don't need no water.
Re:Looks Good (Score:5, Insightful)
crappy music + high prices + strongarming.
Crappy music indeed. It seems that the industry after pushing grunge really hard was looking for the next new thing and jumped on the rap bit and engineered music garbage pushing it really hard in all mediums and exposures. I watched part of the MTV music video awards and never felt so out of touch with the music industry which any marketer will tell you is death. Lots of the new popular music completely misses the target for me and I am sure much of the music buying public. For me, I have been focusing on expanding my collection of older bluegrass, jazz and finding all that punk stuff that never made it to CD. Most of those purchases are not from the current RIAA libraries and I am sure many others are doing the same type of thing or ignoring music entirely leading to the current numbers.
Re:Looks Good (Score:3, Insightful)
About the only new stuff I like tends to be electronic or weird, most of what they're pushing now is cookie-cutter crap. Seems like it used to be that musically talented individuals got played, rose in popularity, and sold more records that way.
Now many performers are just products to feed thi
Re:Looks Good (Score:3, Interesting)
That's exactly how I felt. I've been totally out-of-step with the music being pushed for the last few years. I was thinking, maybe I just got old. Then I realized, I'm just 22 right now...
Re:Looks Good (Score:5, Insightful)
Please quantify this: Don't buy music from big labels. When appropriate, go to see artists in person and buy CD's from the guy with the mohawk and the piercings behind the merch table. Elsewise, buy from the record label, or at the worst, a low level distributer.
Some labels i've bought from recently:
vagrant records [vagrant.com]
hopeless records [hopelessrecords.com]
fearless records [fearlessrecords.com]
and a low level distributer: interpunk [interpunk.com]
Yeah. If you can give money to the artists more directly, do so. Remember, we're not mad at the content producers, we're mad at the middle men and the big labels.
~Will
Re:Looks Good (Score:5, Insightful)
If it's crappy music... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:If it's crappy music... (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, if it is crappy or not, you don't know until you hear it. That leaves you with one of two options:
1. Get the music from an alternate source to preview - then buy what you like. (Alt sources include radio, friend who purchased, or DOWNLOADING)
2. Just buy the CD for ~$20.00 and hope it doesn't suck.
Of course, if you have already purchased it, it's too late when you find out it sucks. That's why many people download first. Then buy what they like. It is not uncommon to trash most, or all of the songs that are downloaded.
People actually delete MP3's? (Score:4, Interesting)
Sure it's anecdotal evidence, but if people were deleting the crap they download, you'd think the crap would gradually disappear from the P2P, servers since no one would have it on their harddrives to share.
Re:People actually delete MP3's? (Score:4, Funny)
no wait! ah whatever, you get my point.
Re:Looks Good (Score:3, Interesting)
These days, music just keeps getting crappier and crappier. I am not a fan of rap at all, and that is all that seems to be thrown at me on certain days no matter where I am (the radio in the car, heading out to the bar with frie
Re:Looks Good (Score:4, Insightful)
I used to find CDs to buy through hard work. I regularly checked record stores for stuff I might like, and bought stuff when it was a good deal. Unfortunately, record stores are stocking fewer titles and prices increased to the point where I almost never found anything worth the price; so I stopped even looking.
If enough record companies lower their prices, I might just start making the effort to shop for CDs again. That is, of course, as long as the CDs aren't copy-protected; which I refuse to buy.
Re:Looks Good (Score:3, Funny)
Social? Friends? Have you forgotten where you're posting?
Re:Boycotting CD purchases isn't necessary! (Score:3, Insightful)
RIAA Price Cuts (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:RIAA Price Cuts (Score:5, Insightful)
Ayup.
Metallica is probably the best example of RIAA un-logic. Imagine...a band that starts off in a garage, doing stuff like Metal up your Ass. Then for some reason nobody knows, begins covering Bob Segar tunes, testifies to the senate against Napster, and then wonders why their sales are down???
I wouldn't piss on Lars Ulrich's head if he was on fire.
Weaselmancer
Re:RIAA Price Cuts (Score:5, Funny)
Talk about effed-up logic -- I'd piss on his head even if he wasn't on fire!
piss on flaming Lars? (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe he'd forgive you for downloading his songs if you put out his head fire. Plus there's some delicious irony in having someone appreciate your pissing on them that's just oh-so hard to pass up...
Re:RIAA Price Cuts (Score:3, Interesting)
But to have corporate america push it to the kiddies, claiming it's the best thing since And Justice For All? Give me a break.
The point is that while corporate america is busy suing their best customers, they aren't doing what they should be doing - promoting good music. The metal scene has flown right by Metallica, they longer stand for anything. If only kids out there knew what ex
Still don't know what to buy (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Still don't know what to buy (Score:5, Informative)
Step 2: Look at the label. If it is a small or Indie label its likely they will have similar music by different artists.
Step 3: Repeat Step 1.
Using this method I've become a fairly regular purchaser of music from Asphodel, Beat Junkie Sound System, Global Underground and Ninja Tune. None are RIAA members so I get great music I like and stick it to the RIAA at the same time.
Note tastes are subjective and not all small labels specialized in one music genre.
Try before you buy! (Score:5, Funny)
Sales price drop = drop in income/profits (Score:5, Insightful)
Could the 22% drop in downloading have happened... (Score:3, Funny)
- cnb
Re:Could the 22% drop in downloading have happened (Score:5, Funny)
Downloading is the new mindset (Score:5, Insightful)
Most people these days are used to the idea of "try before you buy". Take away that ability, and sales will drop.
The people who download without buying would naver have contributed to a sale anyhow. Those that would have bought are being alienated.
Prices are cheaper, but where are the good bands (Score:5, Insightful)
I love alternative music, but lately everything has sounded like Creed, or some crappy form of pop-punk.
I haven't bought any music lately, but I haven't downloaded any either.
Once they quit trying to make everyone sound the same, I will probably start buying music again, as long as the price is resonable
Re:Prices are cheaper, but where are the good band (Score:5, Informative)
I love alternative music, but lately everything has sounded like Creed, or some crappy form of pop-punk.
Here are some starter sites. I highly recommend checking them out.
New Music Canada [newmusiccanada.com]
Epitonic [epitonic.com]
GarageBand [garageband.com]
Bought a "copy-protected" CD... (Score:3, Interesting)
Now I have to listen to the CD in 2 song chunks as I drive back and forth to work (and from what I've read - it sounds like I'm lucky to have it work on an in-car player...)
Not going to buy another music CD for quite some time...
Re:Bought a "copy-protected" CD... (Score:3, Insightful)
I did the same last month for a band [delerium.com] who I really like and want to support (they're not that popular and IMHO make very good music). While it did have the 'copy protected' or whatever logo on it, I was happily able to rip it with CDex [n3.net] and am now listening to it pretty regularly on my iPod. Insofar as my experience goes, I haven't really noticed any difference from regular cd's (yet).
While it's possible that the copy protection on it could be different from the one that everyone's talking about, I doubt it.
In Canada... (Score:5, Informative)
they have the Canadian angle on the story, but:
Cassettes are going to be priced at about $9US, compared to $13US for a CD, yet tapes cost a lot more to manufacture;
In Canada, there is the infamous CD copyright levy which allows all Canadians to copy CDs for their own use without breaking the law. Because we pay the levy wether, like myself, you backup the software and programs I write for a living, or copy your friends' CDs, it would make it your duty as a Canadian to copy CDs because you're paying for that right. Contrast this with the quote that:
"Mr. Lennox said that all of his company's CDs featuring Canadian artists will soon have copy-protection technology built in."
On one hand, it's perfectly legal to copy a CD for our own use, wether it be our own, or a friends, and in return the music industry collects a copyright levy, and on the other, they're still charging us the levy, but stopping us copying a CD by technological measures. This is obviously wrong. Due to the CD levy, it's also a very grey area as to wether file sharing is also illegal in Canada, especially if you burn your downloads onto CD!
Re:In Canada... (Score:3, Informative)
2003 Levy Guide [pcbuyersguide.com]
or the CPCC:
Canadian Private Copyright Collective [www.cpcc.ca]
The media levy is applied to ANY and ALL media that can or could be used for copying music. So if you're buying a data cd for use with your backup software (or whatnot) the levy IS STILL APPLIED. The levy is applied to Flash RAM and hard disks for god sake in portable devices, not just cd's and tapes.
The levy does allow us to copy discs for our own use. I submit that if the labels start to im
Bad economy and pissed off people... (Score:3, Informative)
1) money is extremely tight, and I certainly don't need to be spending it on crap music that I may or may not like.
2) I hate the RIAA.
Lower prices is the only way (Score:3, Insightful)
CB
Just natural market forces (Score:3, Insightful)
How many whacks with a Clue Stick? (Score:5, Insightful)
How long have people been complaining that CD prices are too high? A decade? Fifteen years? And they are just now starting to get it? I buy, at most, five or six (if I'm feeling frisky) CDs a year and at that I don't buy anything that costs more than $12.00 (unless it's an import or other non-standard, hard to find item).
Price has always been the problem with CDs. Always.
Too little, too late. (Score:5, Insightful)
$12.00 a pop for a CD is *STILL* too expensive.
The recent price cuts are just like the last ditch effort from Wile Coyote brandishing a lace umbrella to ward-off the falling boulder.
So long, CDs, I'll forever cherish the few ones I've been able to afford...
Re:Too little, too late. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Too little, too late. (Score:3, Insightful)
A DVD movie is usually 90 to 180 minutes of entertainment and a bargain at $20. A music CD on the other hand rarely has more than 10 minutes of anything worth listening to.
Substitution effect + changing tastes (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's face it. Most people are now used to visual as apposed to aural stimulation. Think of the mid 20th Century. When people relaxed at home, they were talking, reading or listening to the radio or a record. During the last third of the 20th Century, people were watching TV instead. People prefer to watch moving pictures instead of listening. And now the DVD is providing the same video sales revolution that the CD did for audio sales. Add video games to the mix and even less "entertainment" money is going to be spent on audio CD's. And that trend isn't going to stop. Ever.
When I went to a Large-Media-Store yesterday, I did a quick comparison of the CD section and the DVD section. The DVD section was mostly around $20 with a bunch of older titles at $10. DVD sets were around $40. So let's say that I went to this "L-M-S" with $40 and wished to spend it on something to entertain me. Among the bundles I could buy were:
I don't know about you, but those last two look pretty fucking anaemic compared to the first five. That is why CD sales are down. And why they aren't going to ever recover to the levels they were during the 80's and 90's.
Fansubs are quite addicting (Score:5, Informative)
Fansubbers have an interesting ethical code: the stop distributing and delete their works when the program is licensed for distribution in the U.S. The benefit to English-speaking fans is that they get to see works that would never get licensed outside of Japan. The benefit to Japanese producers is that their works get an English-viewing audience for free, and can then move forward on licensing those vehicles that have a more International (or at least generally American) appeal. Win-win, for the most part.
RIAA discovers cure worse than disease (Score:5, Interesting)
Looks like we've found "worse":
Meanwhile, he noted record stores report that blank recordable CDs are outselling recorded CDs, a trend that shows computer users are not only downloading songs, but copying and burning CDs.
Instead of an online, somewhat trackable, moderately controllable service, the RIAA is now faced with millions of teens (and pre-teens) with computers and CD burners. No single point of control, just my daughter's friend borrowing her CD so she can rip a copy.
The RIAA played the role of Darth Vader in their own little cyberspace opera. "If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine..."
Re:RIAA discovers cure worse than disease (Score:3, Interesting)
Statistics can show anything you want them to. I use 50-60 blank CD's a month, and have yet to copy a CD. And I still get to pay that wonderful Canadian CD levy.
I download . . . TV shows. Specifically Stargate, since I'm a fan, and up till season 5 was broadcast locally in my area. I can no longer get it, but I keep up by downloading it, throwing it on a VCD and sharing it with friends who are also fans. Wh
No (Score:3, Insightful)
A trend that shows computer users are burning a lot of CDs. A CD can be used for a RedHat iso or a collection of files just as easily as it can be used for audio music. Hell, with modern compression you can fit a DVD quality movie on a CD.
They have no proof, but they love to make accusations.
Correct me if I'm wrong... (Score:3, Interesting)
My own response to the RIAA crackdown was to get a Netflix account, get into fansubs
How does renting movies mess up the RIAA's plans?
That's nice! (Score:3, Interesting)
Okay, maybe I'll get that evanescence album eventually. But by and large my RIAA purchases have fallen to nearly nil over the last couple years. And I'm not even trying. If I felt like it I could move into active boycott mode without feeling I'm missing anything from my life. I'm not quite there yet, but either way, I for one am not going to be buying any more Universal albums than before just because in general they don't have the stuff I'm interested in anymore..
RIAA's fundamental flaw in logic: (Score:5, Insightful)
This is pure bullshit. How did they initially combat filesharing? They raised prices. I have never illegally downloaded a single file--instead I've simply gone without.
I went into Borders to pick up a Linkin Park CD. They wanted $20. I walked back out. I did not go back to my computer to download the songs. I've simply lived without them. I'd like to own the CD, but give me a fucking break. $20? Universal's price drop is a good sign. Maybe they'll be able to earn me back as a customer.
Re:RIAA's fundamental flaw in logic: (Score:3, Insightful)
The few times a year that I actually feel the need to buy CDs, I tend to go to places like Newbury Comics [newbury.com] (in the northeast US) that have used CDs. That way I can get a nearly new CD for 5-10 bucks. Yes, I might not get the newest release right away, but usually within a couple of weeks the new stuff starts showing up.
The beginning of the end? (Score:5, Interesting)
So, could this be it? The tip of the iceberg peeking out of the water, leering at the RIAA?
Let's hope so. Let's also hope that the record companies represented by the RIAA realize that it has become the albatross around the music industry's neck forcing the value of their product down.
The price cuts are great - but don't let up folks! We'll know we're winning when the RIAA begins doing layoffs. Until that day - continue the boycott! Don't buy even the cheap CD's. The profits still go towards curtailing your rights.
Remember, the RIAA will do anything to push their agenda, but only so long as the record companies can continue to line their pockets. Cut off the cash flow, and the RIAA goes away.
Continue the boycott!
Weaselmancer
This makes no sense (Score:5, Insightful)
So, wait, your answer is to watch more movies? How does that have anything to do with music?
Once again, we have a false analogy that keeps cropping up in these discussions: that a movie and an album of music have anything in common other than general size and shape. I keep seeing arguments on /. that given $20, people would rather buy a DVD than a CD. Sorry, that's ridiculous! I don't remember the last time I bought a DVD and watched it twice a day for 2 weeks, like I have with some of my more favourite recent albums.
Going further, I can't rip a DVD and watch it on my iPod on the subway or while I'm working, movies take up far more of my attention to enjoy them.
The argument is rather dumb as far as I'm concerned.
Re:This makes no sense (Score:3, Insightful)
You are making the same mistake the industry made, to think that "music" is somehow isolated in the marketplace, and owning it through copyright extension would ensure a perpetual revenue.
What they are finding out is that music still comp
Nice spin doctoring ... (Score:5, Interesting)
That's a gem, using the same logic, if guns outsold waterpistols, that would show that more people are commiting murder. This may come as a shock but CD-Rs can also be used to record data (gasp) or am I the only person in the free world who uses them for this purpose? Also, what if people are creating mix CDs of music they legally purchased? Nah, impossible.
Also, we need to do a little lesson in math:
50 CD-Rs == $10
50 CDs == $750
Does anybody want to bet that even if music CDs were $0.20 each, CD-Rs would STILL outsell CDs.
Nice job distorting the data to fit their pitch though.
Re:Nice spin doctoring ... (Score:3, Insightful)
how many folks go to a record store to pick up CD-Rs for data? Sure, it's possible, but I'm thinking that most folks go to a store that sells computers, etc, for their CD-Rs.
I'm guessing that most think, "OK, I'm going to burn a CD on my PC ... time to pick up some blanks at Best Buy." Just a mindset thing, ya know?
One parting thought ... if they're looking at Best Buy and Circuit City sales, though, given that they also sell recorded CDs, well then, that's
Re:Nice spin doctoring ... (Score:3, Insightful)
So shouldn't they be cheering this fact, since it shows that so many consumers are paying more than double what they could otherwise get blank CD-Rs for, just so they can pay the required fees to get licensing legitimacy?
Nice.. (Score:5, Interesting)
While I may be somewhat divided on the whole RIAA/Filesharing issues, this statement just gripes me. Why is the attitude always about changing what "everyone else" is doing? Why didn't Sherman say "We need to make a product that people are more willing to pay for with their hard-earned money. We need to create value in the eyes of our customers and address their needs more directly?"
Not all CDs are RIAA CDs (Score:3, Insightful)
bravo universal (Score:4, Insightful)
and holy crap, i buy cds of bands i like that i found thru kazaa! what is the world coming to!?
Single as the commodity (Score:5, Interesting)
I forsee the music industry switching to marketing and sales of individual tracks, rather than entire albums, once it's proven that the public is not interested in plucking down $15 for 14 mediocre tracks and that one song that ClearChannel/RadioOne is shoving down our throats.
What would be even better would be if sales/downloads of those tracks were reported to SoundScan. Then labels would know how popular x song was, and have an idea of where to go with the next single. Keep it at the $0.99 price point set by iTunes, and you're in business.
I"ve given up buying CD's as well-Boycott is easy (Score:3, Informative)
A plea for sanity/defending the indies (Score:3, Insightful)
1) If you're going to boycott the RIAA, then make sure that you're not boycotting ALL CD companies. Most of the indie bands out there aren't represnted by the RIAA, and many of them are helping fight it. (Not that you HAVE to buy their stuff--just don't boycott them if they're not part of the problem)
2) "Boycotting for life" is silly. The point of a boycott is to make someone (the RIAA in this case) change their behaviour. If they've lost you completely as a customer for ever and ever, then there's no incentive for them to fix the problems.
If the RIAA started paying artists fairly (including benefits and healthcare), charged a fair price for a CD, came up with an online marketing model that worked, and quit harassing individuals or trying to break CDs (i.e. copy protection), then we would hopefully applaud them for seeing the light, and SUPPORT THEM WITH OUR MONEY again.
(Unless the original poster was just implying that there's no hope in hell of this sort of reform happening in his life)
RIAA CEOs - do the math! (Score:5, Insightful)
Five years later, the prices didn't go down and my 200+ CD collection was stolen from my ghetto appartment. I was literally in tears. That was more than $2500 and I was still pretty poor due to the early 90s resession. The upside was that stolen CDs were valuable because there was a budding used CD market in the Bay Area. Once Rasputins & Ameoba started selling used CDs in quantity, I stopped buying new CDs altogether. This is early 90's and I already dropped out of the label's direct market. Here I was, a 20-something kid that was so in love with music that I would spend the better part of my expendable cash on CDs and I dropped right off their books because I could buy "Nevermind" for $9 if I waited a month after it came out.
Funny thing is that when I started making serious money, I still wouldn't buy new CDs. I was used to paying $6-9 and there was no way I could go back. I probably missed out on a lot of music, because I was limited to what college kids would buy and return.
Then came burners - I spent many hours burning all of my friends CD collections. Shortly thereafter came MP3s. I was already pirating software on the FTP scene (another economic lesson to be learned for the SW companies, but I'm not gonna stray there), so suddenly, I'm not even buying used CDs anymore.
So where does this leave us? Well, I'm in my mid 30s, make 6figs, and I like a huge variety of musical genres. I could spend $250 a month on music and not bat an eye, but I don't. The labels have alienated me. I virulently despise them, but I am a music addicted consumer. If they offered me something that had value to me, I would embrace the bastards with loving arms.
So, what can they do for me that would convince me to give them my money again? Simple:
1. Save me time - downloading stuff on Kazaa is work: sifting through the crappy files, figuring out which songs I am missing from a given CD, and organizing the 40+gigs of it all - this stuff takes time and my time is worth money to me. Figure out ways to save me time and I will pay a price for it.
2. Selection - I am limited to what the masses are trading. I like obscure shit and am willing to experiment, but not at $12.99 a pop - no fricking way!
3. Ease my concious - I admit it, I feel bad for screwing the artists by downloading mp3s. The problem is, they are already getting so screwed by the labels. It's kinda like buying Nikes - hard to say whether it helping the poor little Indonesian kid or not. Besides, the less that people give the labels, they less they have to offer the artists who should really all jump ship anyway. I buy Timberland clothes 'cause they make a big deal about how their sweatshops are less satanic than others. Treat the artists well so I don't feel bad about promoting your exploitation of them. Tax the superstars a bit to feed the starving artists - music should be a middle class profession.
So, how can the labels meet these needs? Again, simple:
Give me FTP access to a full catalog (all labels in one place)of high quality, verified, DRM-free and properly tagged MP3s. How much would I be willing to pay for this? Figure 2-4 bucks for 10 songs. That's $.20 -
This would
Forrester study predicts death of CDs (Score:3, Interesting)
According to this story [washingtonpost.com] over at the Washington Post, a study conducted by Forrester Research [forrester.com] has "predicted" that online music distribution will kill off compact discs as a music distribution medium.
While this may seem painfully obvious to most of us here on /., since the suggestion comes up in almost every RIAA related article [slashdot.org], it is good to see an "authoritative" organization come up with the same prediction. They may be heard better by the record companies and the entertainment industry.
The RIAA Needs To Realize What They Are Selling... (Score:5, Insightful)
You may your taste in music, and I have mine, but what is clear is that the pablum of the Britney's, Madonnas, Christinas, MAriahs, Justins and the like are CD's with just one or two songs worth buying and the rest of the CD is not really worth listening to -- not even by their fans. So why waste $18.99 or $12.99 on music you just don't like?
Most people learn about new music from either the radio or MTV, and to a degree, from what their friends listen to. Go to any typical American city and you'll hear the same music. In the same order. By the same artists. Over and over and over. I guess that's because two companies, Clear Channel and Infinity, pretty much own nearly all of the radio stations in the land of the free. And they make the record companies pay "promotional fees" to add a song. No payola, no new music.
So, instead of hearing a great song by some hitherto great new artist, something that makes you want to go to the record store and get that CD right *now* you never even know about it. And nobody is going to take a $20 buck chance on music they have never even heard.
The system that the RIAA and the radio cartel created is the root of their own problem and instead of blaming the kids that can't afford to spend $100 on five CD's, they ought to look at how they promote and sell the music that they record. Then, if they increase the quality and breadth of their offerings, you might see album/CD/DVD sales go back up.
cheap brokenness... (Score:3, Insightful)
but isn't it Universal that is going to copy protect all their CD's? So even at $12 a broken CD is still a broken CD.
Napster drove sales (Score:5, Insightful)
From the SFGate story [sfgate.com]:
So, is it possible the full-bloom Napster phenomenon actually delayed a drop in recorded music sales? (Online music file-sharing exposed more people to more music than they were being exposed to by other media such as radio, and this could have been driving demand. More demands meant more sales.)
Suffering? SUFFERING??? (Score:5, Insightful)
You find me one person, just one person who's lost their job because of a drop in CD sales. Am I supposed to feel sorry for J. Lo or P. Diddy or whatever the hell their names are this week? Why, because they might have to downsize to a 12,000 square foot mansion with only 2 hottubs instead of the 18,000 palace they're in now? Is that suffering???
I'm sorry, I don't condone stealing, but this is just offensive. You're talking to a guy who was laid off from Nortel in the same year his wife was laid off from JDS, which also happened to be within 2 months of this newlywed couple buying their first house. Trying to make a mortgage payment when your chosen industry is crumbing around you is suffering. Having to sell one of your Escalades is NOT suffering.
Old people with disposable income (Score:5, Insightful)
What's interesting is the choices that the music industry are making when it comes to marketing their product. The 15-25yr old demographic tends to have less discretionary income than the 25-40yr old group, yet the music industry churns out lots of product for the fiscally challenged group. OK, the idea may be that this group tends to buy more music and is more influenced by MTV and radio. Therein lies the problem. With everything else competing for the teen to young adult market, the slice of the pie that goes to the recording industry gets smaller and smaller.
So what to do? Hell, why not legislate some profits then. There's an apocryphal story about candle and gas light manufacturers suing to ban electric lighting and similar ones about horse-drawn buggy folks legislating some ridiculous traffic rules. Why? The new technology would make obsolete their business. But you see where that got the candle makers and buggy builders.
How about this wacky idea: Why doesn't the music industry start marketing and producing product for the 25-40 year old group. We long-toothed, graybearded, geriatrics would enjoy something newer than the constant stream of old Beatles, Stones, 80's era U2, and re-gurgitated 70's "classics" that bombard us. Try something new. Introduce something exotic so that we can talk about it as we quaff our Samuel Adams with our other 30-something year old friends and talk about our 401Ks. We can't exactly listen to Britney Spears or Eminem, you see. We like to feel important, still relevant, and nothing makes use more relevant than being able to "discover" some interesting sounding CD. What'll really shock you is that we have DISCRETIONARY INCOME. How about that! We can *buy* your music. Hell, we'll even pay $18 a CD to be able to be able to put it on our coffee table.
What's even more amazing is that many of these old people enjoy MUSIC. We like interesting lyrics. Some of use are even accomplished or semi-accomplished musicians and appreciate an interesting melody or a novel interpretation of a classic. Heck, even something as trite as musical virtuousity can impress us. I know this is complete anathema to your current marketing philosophy, but what can you lose?
MPAA, RIAA, same issue - different faces..... (Score:5, Insightful)
As broadband technology becomes more prevalent and inexpensive though, the MPAA will be in the exact same boat that the RIAA is in today. (They're already in the first stages of it.)
The whole controversy about "is it right or wrong to download music" ignores the larger reality; technological changes are causing a lack of interest in purchasing music on prerecorded media. 5 years ago or so, the multi CD changers were a big deal. I remember being jealous at the people who got the fancy 200 disc CD changers for their home stereo. (I even ended up buying one for myself eventually, near the tail end of their popularity - on a closeout sale price. It's a Kenwood with a wireless IR keyboard that lets you type in the names of each disc, so it shows up on the changer's display.) Nowdays, these things are selling for $25-45 in the local "Surplus Electronics" hole-in-the-wall stores, along-side beat-up old speakers and Atari 2600 game systems.
People are realizing that it's more beneficial to have the music in digital form, stored on their computer, than stuck on a plastic audio disc. The people I see buying music CDs nowdays are immediately ripping them into MP3s, and storing the originals away as a "backup". They're not even playing the purchased CD itself anymore!
This can and will happen to movies on DVD, as well. PVR's are the first "mass market" example of technology headed that direction. It's just that right now, the sheer amount of data on a double-sided DVD (8 gigs. or so) + the cheap prices on set-up DVD players keeps the format viable for a little bit longer.
Until the MPAA and RIAA come to grips with this, and quit trying to keep a business model centered around providing music on overpriced tapes and discs using a proprietary format, they're fighting a losing battle.
Decline is mostly in the top 10. It's clear why. (Score:4, Insightful)
And here are Billboard's Top 10 albums for this week!
- Mary J. Blige, Love & Life
- Hilary Duff, Metamorphosis
- Various Artists, The Neptunes Present... Clones
- Alan Jackson, Greatest Hits Volume II And Some Other Stuff
- YoungBloodZ, Drankin' Patnaz
- Beyonce, Dangerously In Love
- Evanescence, Fallen
- Soundtrack, Bad Boys II
- Chingy, Jackpot
- Coldplay, A Rush Of Blood To The Head
I think we've located the problem.