smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | ronald and karen sanchez <eldeluxe@mcn.net> |
| Subject | this is not the death of the CD |
| Date | Fri, 05 Sep 2003 12:38:46 -0700 |
[Part 1 text/plain us-ascii (5.6 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
Well you see down loading a song from Not Lame or Career Records site is a different
matter than Napster and all that followed. Indie labels on the web are one of the few
positive sides of the current situation. Since we can hardly get airplay this is a
legitimate form of advertising directly to the real audience. Best the old shotgun
approach of advertising on the radio.
My records have showed up on download sites, and I guess I haven't been bothered, cause
some one is listening to our music. That's better than not.
My point is backed up by an article in Christian Science Monitor this week. They interview
college kids who are proud that they haven't bought a cd in four years because of the ease
of PTP downloads.
You are probably right that some people who do illegal downloads do go back and purchase
cds. But how would you feel if a kid came into your shop and stole the new Radiohead cd,
but then came back next week and bought The Bends?
And despite my reluctance, I do buy on line from Not Lame, Parasol, DGM, Eel Pie, Luna,
Mod Lang (but that direct on the phone to my pal Paul) and a few other selected outlets. I
just am happier if I can walk into a shop and take a look around at everything... I don't
enjoy scrolling through long lists of used stuff on my computer. And if I walk into your
shop and you see I've picked out some really good albums, singles, mags and cds, you might
point me at something else I might want, or even better yet give me a small discount on
the $100+ stack of stuff I've laid on the counter...with a smile.
I should add that I worked in shops for nearly 10 years, living off promos and free tix.
These days I have no problem paying for concerts or cds. I do buy as much as I can used,
but more than a few purchases last week up in Missoula were full priced new ones. Paid for
my REM tickets too.
RS
DanAbnrml9@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 9/5/03 1:01:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> audities-owner@smoe.org writes:
> We were talking about the downloading issue last night, and the only real
> analogy I can make is shoplifting. Sorry kids...
> Well, you can say that, if you want, but the fact is that without internet
> record stores (NotLame in particular) and mp3s I probably never would've heard
> of Bobby Sutliff or The Windbreakers. I've never seen a Bobby Sutliff record on
> the shelves, ever, and likely never will.
>
> I don't say this to put you down, but to attack the notion on behalf of some
> artists that this is merely "stealing". To say so is to ignore the incredible
> promotional powers of the internet--and even ILLEGAL downloading (in fact,
> particularly illegal downloading) can be an incredible boon for lesser-known
> artists when it comes to at least getting their name/music out there. How often do
> you get radio airplay? Not often, I assume, but people probably do download
> some of your mp3s. And I personally don't buy the argument that mp3 trading
> will kill off CD sales since ALBUMS are a major pain in the ass to download in
> full. If you want a song or two to sample, or just like the single from an
> album, then yeah--that's pretty easy. An entire disc is an entirely different
> story, and at $12 I'd rather just buy it if I actually enjoy the few songs I've
> heard. I have a chance TO hear a few songs if I can download them.
>
> I don't mean to look at this through rose-colored glasses. After all I work
> on the retail side of the music industry for an independent retailer that is
> already seriously considering its exit from the music retail business completely
> in favor of selling fun junk. The industry is facing a crisis, and
> downloading IS a huge part of it. But its impact could easily be lessened by
> implementing a few measures--re-introducing the single, promoting more artists so as to
> appeal to a broader range of tastes and ages, and reducing the (artificially
> inflated) price of CDs. For those who DON'T think that's a factor, consider
> this--my (fairly sizable) chain has been increasing the prices on many of our
> catalog titles for about 3 years because THE RECORD COMPANIES CHARGE US MORE, AND
> THEY TELL US TO RAISE THE PRICES. We fight them whenever possible (they often
> do this, in part, because of some quasi-legal deals enabling Best Buy and
> other behemoths to offer the lowest advertised price in our region, which is
> complete bullshit and we often sale-price their catalogs simply to spite them). Our
> average mark-up on CDs is a mere 14%, which is nothing when you consider that
> we have rent, employees, and other overhead costs to consider.
>
> But I don't blame downloading, at least not completely. I think that the most
> telling piece of info I've seen recently--and I've seen it used in several
> respectable publications--is a graph detailing CD sales over the past 10-12
> years. CD sales PEAKED in 2000 (which was WELL into the Napster boom, in fact 2000
> was most certainly the peak of Napster as well) and then dropped back down to
> 1998 levels, where they are at present. But it's worth noting that in 1998,
> CD sales were higher than they'd ever been, so the number of units currently
> being sold is actually still a very respectable amount. It's also worth
> considering that after 2000 the nation entered into a major recession that curbed
> spending on luxury items (like music), and we still haven't emerged from this.
>
> For the time being, I choose not to believe the sky is falling, even if it
> does wind up changing a bit... --Jason
-- Ronald Sanchez
Director Of A&R
Career Records
www.CareerRecords.com
The Donovan's Brain Web Site
www.Donovans-Brain.com
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.