Why DVDs are thriving while CDs tank (1 Viewer)

[Dome Vongvises]

I think that people have nailed it on the head why CD's aren't selling so well.

1. Quality
- Like it or not, bands like The Beatles or Pink Floyd created albums (Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band and Dark Side of the Moon respectively), not just a CD with one great single and filler

2. Value
- DVD's have extras galore and more bang for the buck, and CD's only have music. End of story.

I'll agree with most people that if an album was any good, people would still buy it, regardless of its availablility on the "free" net.

I think that music companies need to rethink their strageties. Instead of focusing on CD sales, promotion, and distribution, why not focus on concert tours? I say if an artist is worth it, people will go see a live act, and the record companies can make their money that way. Besides, any Susie-Sing-Along can make an album, but only great people can attract people to a concert.

 

[Mark Cappelletty]

I was at an independent record store -- Rhino Records in West L.A. -- where the prices are generally reasonable (it helps that I'm friends with one of the managers). But when I saw a new CD -- the Japanese pop group PuffyAmiYumi -- priced at $18.98, my jaw nearly fell out of my skull. My friend told me that the music retailers have raised the bar once again so that the retail price of CDs is now, depending on which label, between $18 and $20. That's nuts. It's bad enough that radio has been monopolized by behemoth monopolys like Clear Channel who dictate what we can listen to, but when we can't even afford to buy new CDs, then what the hell do the record labels expect? They labels are just fanning the fire and their arrogance is leading to more downloading and copying.

Fortunately, I too am an indie music fan. But when the "sale" price -- save for the $12 opening-week fire-sale price at Tower, which barely had them in stock -- of the new Elvis Costello is $15.98, something is seriously wrong.

 

[Robert_eb]

I would and I think everyone here would too.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

If the music was good I would. Hell, I pay the current bloated prices if I find something worth own. I've only bought three CDs since Christmas though... Five for Fighting - America Town, Goo Goo Dolls - Gutterflower, and the Episode II score from Sony Classical.

I've found some great independent groups online... why can't they support them over trash like O-Town?

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

While I completely agree that much of what is for sale out there is not worth buying, I can't agree with some of the comparisons to DVD offering better value for the money. 95% of the DVDs out there are of crap films that are not worth owning in the first place. Yes, they have a bunch of extra stuff, but they are still garbage films, much like garbage music.

Further, in my music buying heyday, I would listen to an album dozens, if not hundreds of times. I certainly got more milage out of my music collection than I ever will out of the DVD library, where titles are lucky to see the player twice.

If CD sales are slumping against DVD it is for one reason - buying DVDs is cool, while buying CDs is not. It has nothing to do with outdated or inferior quality on CD - most people couldn't hear the difference on their $100 boom box anyway, especially when they tout MP3 as "near CD quality."

Unfortunately, the music business has changed for the worse, and I agree that one major problem is companies looking for the hot seller, while never investing in artistic development anymore. Everything is short term. However, I would add that the cost of bringing an act to market these days also has a bearing on pricing. It costs at least a million dollars to break an artist these days. It takes a lot of album sales to break even, so the thinking isn't all that out there when considering what may sell or not.

You also have to take into consideration that, unlike the music industry where the CD is the principle product, home video is a secondary market for the film industry, so it doesn't have to reflect the costs associated with the film's production like the CD market does.

I hope that the MP3 craze hasn't ruined the future for independents to market online. Lower cost is not the issue, it is the quality of the product that counts. If the product is good, people will buy it, but the independent faces an uphill battle when it comes to mindshare, which is a very costly thing to acquire. The majors make it their business to creat mindshare, but independents can't afford the advertising, so have to settle for a smaller market. This affects selling price as well, since the cost of production has to be spread out over a smaller number of sales to remain viable.

 

[Robert_eb]

I don't buy DVDs because they are "cool". I buy them because they offer the best audio and video quality available. I would hope that is everyone’s motivation for buying DVDs. I rarely buy CDs nowadays because the prices are just to high, not because they are not cool. If CDs were sold for $10.99 I probably would begin buying again. I have a cd collection of about 2500 and most of these were purchased back in the day when a new release would be on sale for $10.99-$11.99. The last new cd I purchased was three weeks ago. It was Obscured By Clouds by Pink Floyd. It was the last title I needed to complete my Pink Floyd catalog. The price for this cd, which was released in the 70's, was $14.99. I bought it gritting my teeth knowing full well that this goes against my personal policy not to buy a cd that costs over $12.99. That will be the last time I ever pay that much for a cd.

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

I think the members of this forum and their motivation for buying DVDs is far from the average opinion of the general populace. DVD is a hot commodity, currently in the peak of its popularity (even though many of those here have owned the format since its inception). It has a "cool" factor CD doesn't anymore, which accounts for the glut of really second rate titles which sell well. This will wear off over time, as it has with many who were early adopters - I no longer buy the crap, and cherry pick titles I want, just as I do with CD.

It is unrealistic to compare pricing from long ago to today without ajusting for inflation. At the same time LPs sold for $8.99 you could buy a pair of jeans for $25, shoes for $15, and a really decent car for $15K. If we applied the same inflation to CDs they would be over $100 now.

As for Obscurred By Clouds, if I didn't already own 5 copies of it (2 LP, 3 CD), I wouldn't balk at paying $15 for it - I hope you got the remastered version. I would like the film it goes with to be reeased on DVD though.

 

[Malcolm R]

At the same time LPs sold for $8.99 you could buy a pair of jeans for $25, shoes for $15, and a really decent car for $15K. If we applied the same inflation to CDs they would be over $100 now.

Where do you shop?
So, you're saying prices have increased over 11x in the past 20 years ($100 / 9 = approx 11)? You really pay $275 for a pair of jeans? I don't even pay $25 for jeans yet. Other than the car which might be a tiny bit low, your other "old" prices seem more like current prices.
CD's are tanking because of stupid decisions by record labels and a dearth of decent new music. I was greatly looking forward to a new CD from one of my favorite artists. However, in their infinite wisdom, the record label decided to pull the new album and release a Greatest Hits compilation instead. I'm not buying the GH, so they've lost at least one potential sale for this artist.
The labels do seem to be experimenting with reduced price releases. I've seen several $8 to $12 releases lately (though some also feature only 7-8 tracks, so the value has also been reduced accordingly).

 

[Robert_eb]

Jeff, I did get the remastered cd. I was just a little miffed that most of the other Pink Floyd remasters, where I purchased this from, were $12.99-$13.99. Doesn't cost less than a buck to stamp and package these discs that they sell for $16.99-$18.99? That's a substantial mark up. I think if the industry wants to survive they need to drop the prices. Wasn't there a Justice Dept. investigation into price fixing last year? I remeber hearing something about it on CNN but never heard what the conclusion of the investigation was.

 

[Greg Br]

I am no expert in this downloading stuff, but how in the world do you download full bitrate material. The best I see is 160kbs or 128kbs. CD's are 1500kbs, why in the world would I stick a crap mp3 into a audio system I have put alot of money into? Crap in = crap out. I only buy hi res SACD and DVD-Audio if studios are going to price them the same.

 

[Ken Leggatt]

I do not download MP3s I prefer to buy the disc. It is even how I discover new music. I take the plunge and drop my 13 bucks CDN on the CD. You guys in the USA seem to be paying way to much for CD's. I shop at A&B Sound and CD's are not overpriced in my opinion. I don't mind paying 13 to 14 CDN for a CD.

I do agree that a lot of the crap that they are trying to sell is very short on the replay value. After 3 days of listening to the local top 40 station play the same songs every two hours I don't blame people for not buying the music disc, they have heard every good song on the disc till they are sick.

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

Robert, the buck a disc costing is a bit misleading. Even if it cost that much to manufacture (which would only be applicable to exremely high volume titles), like every other retail product there are markups through the distribution chain. The record company sells to a distributor, the distributor sells to the retail outlet. Along the way you have to factor in the shipping of the product from the pressing plant through the distributors to the retail outlets. You also have to factor in how retail works, ie the regular price is adjusted up to make the "sale" price look better. The sale price is still probably only 5-10% over cost, which isn't a lot especially when you consider slow moving product that occupies retail space for several months without generating income.

There is a lot more to retail pricing than the cost of manufacturing. That said, there is a lot of crap out there that isn't priced according to its quality...

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

I am no expert in this downloading stuff, but how in the world do you download full bitrate material.

You don't... you can usually count on a 256kbs version, but seldom higher. As the saying goes, Beggars can't be choosers. That's why I still buy the CD if the music's good.

 

[Keith Paynter]

You know those Time-Life (et al) "Paid Programs" that claim "If you had to get all your favorite songs from all those CD's, you'd have to pay..."?

Even when record companies make compilation CD's of various artists, more than likely you're gonna find yourself skipping half of them.

That's why File sharing is so prevalent. The music industry product today (and that's all it is - product) is a poor business model - profit over prodigy. To borrow from Star Trek, the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many.

When vinyl was in its heyday, singles dominated the radio, but were available separately from the albums. I found myself buying more singles than LP's, unless it was a band I really wanted to pay attention to. One-hit wonders did very well on 45-single sales. How many bands like Boys Don't Cry, Timbuk 3, Wall Of Voodoo, or even The Knack could find success after one radio-friendly hit? (Geez, I'm dating myself here, but the point is the same)

We do not all have the disposible income that the music industry thinks we have. The CD is a very inexpensive format where its actual manufacturing/shipping costs are concerned, yet it sells for far too much.

 

[Tom Brennan]

The other day I was looking at CDs in Borders and I see "The Best of Cream" and the price was $19!?! This is ridiculous. Here's some music that was recorded 35 years ago and that's made it's money time after time and they still want $19. They can go to the Devil. Any screwing the music industry gets from kids downloading they deserve. Remember, just because something is illegal doesn't mean it's morally wrong. And as for musicians, well they should get on the bandwagon and market differently or they can go to the Devil too.

 

[Keith Paynter]

If I came to your house and stole your entire CD collection I guess that's not morally wrong...
File sharing is theft that denies the artist its royalties from product sales. Blank tapes and CD-R media have levies embedded into their costs to recover the losses from copying and piracy.

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

Tom, if you don't like the prices, don't buy it or shop somewhere else. Just because something is priced beyond what you feel is acceptable does not justify stealing it.

How would peple react if better product sold for a higher price, like in every other segment of the market outside the entertainment industry? A really good album costs $50, while a crappy one was $10. Would that make people happy?

 

[David Lambert]

Guys, I'll just add this to the conversation:
I have exactly 436 CD's. My average price per disc is $10.44, and that's with using Columbia House deals and buying used and all that crap. I wouldn't have paid that much for each CD to get just a few songs I like. My rule is that a CD must have at least 4 songs I like on it to get it at all, and that the price per song should be no more than $2.00 each in the most EXTREME cases of "I gotta have this song".
Exactly 92.4% of them are "Best of" or "Greatest Hits", which guarantees that most of the album is chock-full of stuff I like. Soundtracks are included in that figure, by-the-way.
The rest of them are stuff that had very few songs on them I like, are ones that I pretty much asked for as birthday or Christmas gifts, so I wouldn't have to lay out my own money for them.
I bought my first CD today in months and months...I finally decided to get the AC/DC "Back In Black" album on sale at Best Buy for $9.99; that's a price I'm willing to pay for 10 great songs (not a bad one on the album). $1 a song; well worth it. The normal price of $12.99 was acceptable, but as I already had each song elsewhere (including a not-quite-worn-out cassette version of this album, from the days I only had a cassette player in the car) I hadn't plunged yet.
But the

 

[Ted Todorov]

Blank tapes and CD-R media have levies embedded into their costs to recover the losses from copying and piracy.

I don't know about tapes, but data CD-R media DO NOT have any kind of embedded "levies" which is why CD-Rs cost 50 cents each, and of course any attempt to stick a tax intended for the RIAA on them will send people who use them for everything from data backups to home made original music/movie CDs after RIAA prexy Hillary Rosen with pitchforks.

So called "music" CD-Rs are taxed, but their only purpose is for stereo component CD recorders, and very few people have those.

By the way, if people indeed paid a "copying" fee for blank media, then using it for such a purpose would most certainly not be piracy.

Ted

 

[Malcolm R]

While the last thing I want to do is defend the music industry, I do want to point out that the cost to manufacture CD's is somewhat irrelevant.

You're paying for the content, not the physical disc itself. Blank disks are less than $1 because they CAN be manufactured cheaply. However, if you want a CD with something on it, then you have to pay for the content. And as the labels have mucked themselves into higher and higher development costs for smaller and smaller returns, they have raised prices to compensate for this increase in cost to develop the content.

I agree that the loss of the single is one of the driving forces of decreased sales. Fortunately some, including RIAA, seem to be waking up to this fact.

I purchased a ton of singles when I was younger. Singles were reasonably priced, especially for young people, and often contained an extra b-side track that may not be on the album, so they were even better value.

However, with the loss of the US single, my spending on US music has drastically dropped. I still purchase quite a few singles, but they're mostly imports now. But even at import prices, they're still much better value than US albums. I refuse to buy a $17 album for one 3 minute track that I like.