Double dipping on CDs due to retailer-specific exclusive tracks?! (1 Viewer)

[Phil Tomaskovic]

Similarly, the new Shawn Colvin cd had an exclusive track (U2's "in the name of love") at Borders. Unfortunately Border's has the worst prices and wanted $16.99 when I could get it at BestBuy or elsewhere for $12.99. I could see paying $1 more at Borders for the extra track, but not $4!

 

[Mike Frezon]

Phil: Would the Borders coupons we keep bumping over in Coupons and Bargains be any help?

 

[Phil Tomaskovic]

not sure since the coupons always seem to say they don't apply to sale prices and there will be a sale price like $16.99 regular list price $18.99, I think

 

[Mike Frezon]

Wow! I received a response to my e-mail to Verve records complaining about the competing retailer exclusives with the Diana Krall CD. Check a few posts ago (October 10).
This response came from Aaron, whose e-mail address was slugged "Verve New Music Intern".

Aaron:
Thank you for your response.
While I understand the need for record companies to remain competitive in today's environment, I fail to see how anyone (labels, artists, fans) benefits from retailer exclusives. For fans, these exclusives make their shopping experience much more difficult. They have to wonder when they see a new CD by their favorite artist in a store if, maybe, another store might have some bonus content not universally available. Labels might, in turn, suffer if fans are leery about picking up the product. And, artists (and labels, too!) should likewise be concerned about alienating their fan base.
I'm not sure how record companies see retailer exclusives as helpful to your cause. While you might be competing for space or advertisements with other companies within the retail arena, you are also running the risk of turning away fans with competing retailer exclusives. As I stated in my original note, when faced with competing exclusives, fans are left with the dilemma of deciding between purchasing the product twice to get all available music OR simply missing out on content from their favorite artist.
While the industry may claim that it is the retail environment which has lead to the practice of retailer exclusives (as an enticement to draw fans to the product or get retailers to advertise the product in their flyers), I believe it is the product itself which attracts music fans and would entice the retailers to highlight a particular CD in their flyer. Gimmicks with the potential to backfire (by alienating fans) are not, in my mind, a sensible business practice...but are, instead, a kneejerk approach which could drive fans away by giving them a Hobson's choice.
(As I ponder this issue, I wonder what if Sears and Montgomery Wards had struck deals with Capitol Records in 1967 and Beatles fans who shopped at Sears had exclusive access to "A Day in the Life" on Sgt. Peppers while Wards shoppers had exclusive access to "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds". What a difference that might have made for fans and the artists. Or, don't artists these days have the idea of a CD or album as a planned-out, self-contained work of art?)
Thanks for listening to one fan's concerns--although I know I am not alone in this frustration. I hope you will pass my comments along to management. Unfortunately, though, we see the same bonus exclusives becoming commonplace with DVD releases as well.
Thank you, as well, for your offer to try and hook me up with that extra Krall track. Here is my info:...

 

[AnthonyC]

Anyone remember Elliott Yamin from last year's American Idol? He recently released his fantastic debut. Of course, the number of exclusive tracks only at specific retailers is about half of an album anyway (and considering that the actual album is just over 40 minutes, it all could've fit on a single disc):

1. Regular album (11 tracks)

2. Target version (Bonus disc with 2 exclusives)

3. Walmart version (Two exclusive downloads)

4. iTunes version (Two exclusive downloads)

5. Rhapsody version (One exclusive download)

6. Yahoo version (One exclusive download)

Tracking all of these down will be fun...

 

[Mike Frezon]

Un-freakin'-believable... :rolleyes
Elliott who?

 

[Jay_B!]

this practice is rearing it's ugly head again this week when Mika finally releases his worldwide hit album "Life In Cartoon Motion" in the US. Best Buy and Target are both promising 2 exclusive bonus tracks on their versions of the album. I saw the Best Buy tracks, dunno what Target's got. I'm not too impressed with the Best Buy ones (acoustic versions) so I may get it at Target instead. I've heard the album already and it's well worth the $7.99 it'll be on sale for

 

[Mike Frezon]

This BS has GOT to stop.
I'm still burnt up that I don't have that version of Something's Gotta Give by Diana Krall on that BB-exclusive of From This Moment On.
"Verve New Music Intern" never did get back to me... :rolleyes

 

[Jay_B!]

I don't mind it much at all if ONE retailer has an extra track or two exclusively sold through them, as long as it's a nationwide chain that everyone has access to, ala Target, Best Buy, Wal-Mart or something. What I dislike is when two or three (or more) chains all offer their own version of it with an exclusive bonus track, leading ardent fans to buy multiple copies if they are the type that *must* own everything, much like what was done to McCartney fans awhile back when three different places offered different bonus tracks on copies of his album.

This also happens with music DVD's, remember the KISS-ology release, although I actually sold my soul and bought the Wal-Mart copy (I almost never shop there) because the bonus DVD they had to offer was a superior product than what Best Buy and Circuit City were selling, the bonus disc was twice the length of the others.

 

[EricSchulz]

Jay B!
I was in Chicago this past weekend and was lucky enough to attend a "CD release party" for Mika's new album. I scored a 3-song CD sampler and a CD with four mixes of "Relax". You might want to check out www.dotmusic.com (it's a UK Yahoo music site) for the "live" version of "Grace Kelly", which is just Mika and his piano. I can't WAIT to get this tomorrow!
http://uk.launch.yahoo.com/index.html

 

[MikeH1]

I'm not impressed at all with this tactic. I really really do hope they shoot themselves in the foot as Mike F had said, I absolutley refuse to buy a CD 3 times of one of my favorite artists for 1 or 2 different exclusive tracks on each one. It was one thing buying a "Greatest Hits" compilation with a couple extra tracks (especially if you had the discography) but this is just plain greed.

I can see this is going to become quite a common practice.

 

[Mike Frezon]

This has been an interesting discussion.
And many have brought up the obvious comparison with retailer-specific bonus material for DVDs as we have been discussing the same with CDs. But I think there is a difference.
To me, it seems as if the exclusive music tracks really should be a part of the whole. That is, if Diana Krall recorded 12 tracks during her sessions for release on a CD but puts out ten tracks on the general release, 10+1 for the Target version and 10+1 for the Best Buy version...I feel like I'm being cheated out of part of the actual product...the whole CD. I've already used the example: what if the Beatles released Sgt. Pepper's...but released the track "A Day in the Life" as an exclusive bonus track to Montgomery Wards? It's a ludicrous thought.
Re the DVDs bonus materials: While I would definitely like to have all the available bonus materials that are out there so that I don't miss anything...at least it is not part of the movie itself (a single chapter, let's say) that is being offered to a certain retailer.
CDs are supposed to stand as a single work of art....just like a film with all it's chapters. Not having a particular track is just as offensive as removing a chapter from a movie. (Maybe David Lynch has a real method to his madness of no chapters on his releases! )

 

[Jay_B!]

This has been an interesting discussion.
And many have brought up the obvious comparison with retailer-specific bonus material for DVDs as we have been discussing the same with CDs. But I think there is a difference.
To me, it seems as if the exclusive music tracks really should be a part of the whole. That is, if Diana Krall recorded 12 tracks during her sessions for release on a CD but puts out ten tracks on the general release, 10+1 for the Target version and 10+1 for the Best Buy version...I feel like I'm being cheated out of part of the actual product...the whole CD. I've already used the example: what if the Beatles released Sgt. Pepper's...but released the track "A Day in the Life" as an exclusive bonus track to Montgomery Wards? It's a ludicrous thought.
Re the DVDs bonus materials: While I would definitely like to have all the available bonus materials that are out there so that I don't miss anything...at least it is not part of the movie itself (a single chapter, let's say) that is being offered to a certain retailer.
CDs are supposed to stand as a single work of art....just like a film with all it's chapters. Not having a particular track is just as offensive as removing a chapter from a movie. (Maybe David Lynch has a real method to his madness of no chapters on his releases! )

well, usually the bonus tracks are usually tracks not intended for the original album, usually songs that are b-sides (like what Best Buy is offering on copies of The Killers' Sams Town, the two extra tracks are UK b-sides) or alternate/acoustic versions of songs. I recently picked up Mellencamp's Freedom's Road (a really good album that is unfairly overlooked because of the annoying "Our Country") with a bonus disc of four acoustic versions at Best Buy.
I don't think it's fair to compare albums like Sgt. Pepper and Dark Side Of The Moon being messed with when I don't think A Day In The Life or Eclipse would've been "exclusive tracks". If this practice was around in the 60's, we likely would've gotten Penny Lane or Strawberry Fields Forever as an exclusive bonus track instead of A Day In The Life, which was an essential part of the album

 

[Mike Frezon]

Jay: I see your point about the addition of B-sides to the US release of former UK material. That would truly be "bonus" material.
But Penny Lane and Strawberry Fields Forever aren't essential pieces of Sgt. Pepper's? Heresy, my man!
The Krall example I keep using are tracks which were recorded during the same session as the CD material...but simply doled out with exclusivity attached. If this were the 60s, I think they would have been included (if space on the LP allowed) with the others...unless she thought they were sub-par. But if sub-par, why release them at all?

 

[Jay_B!]

I just read that Beyonce Knowles is about to reissue her most recent album with 12 bonus tracks.

I think I dislike this practice which is very commonplace in modern r&b music is even worse, sell three million copies and then rerelease the album with a bunch of new tracks to lure the fans to part with another $15 to rebuy songs they already have. Mariah Carey and Usher did this several years ago too. Why not just release these new songs onto an EP or something?

 

[Jay_B!]

looks like all hell breaks loose with this practice next week with the release of the new Maroon 5 album, either you can go to Target and get an exclusive bonus DVD, or Best Buy with a bonus cd with 2 exclusive tracks, or Circuit City where you get a free download. I am going to get mine at Best Buy because I doubt I'd watch the DVD more than once, and I prefer physically owning my music than downloading.

 

[John Berggren]

To be honest, I think these retailer exclusive tracks encourage piracy. I want to be able to buy an album once by an artist. I'll buy it if it's a double disc. I'll even buy singles with b-sides. I'll even buy a CD/DVD combo on seperate discs, but it drives me insane when there is an itunes exclusive track and a best buy exclusive track and a borders exclusive track. You know many people are buying the album once and searching the internet for the exclusive content.

What's going to make them stop at the exclusives and not just take the whole album?

 

[Jay_B!]

To be honest, I think these retailer exclusive tracks encourage piracy. I want to be able to buy an album once by an artist. I'll buy it if it's a double disc. I'll even buy singles with b-sides. I'll even buy a CD/DVD combo on seperate discs, but it drives me insane when there is an itunes exclusive track and a best buy exclusive track and a borders exclusive track. You know many people are buying the album once and searching the internet for the exclusive content.
What's going to make them stop at the exclusives and not just take the whole album?

I agree with that, why not just release a limited edition version with a bonus disc with all six or whatever "exclusive bonus tracks" together?

 

[Mike Frezon]

It's a practice that certainly seems to have more downside than upside. Since the point of the practice is to raise awareness of a release by giving a retailer an exclusive (and thereby hoping they promote the crap out of it in their own advertising) record labels can't make the case that they think most people who buy the release won't learn about the conflicting exclusives. The point of the exclusives is to draw attention to the release!
As I wrestle with the illogic and frustration of the practice, I keep going back to the only explanation I have at my disposal...a few lines of an e-mail from an intern at Verve:

I feel it has a corrosive effect on the fan of the artist as well.

 

[Ron Reda]

You can add the new Maroon 5 disc to this list. It seems that each retailer has different bonus tracks. I personally went with Best Buy's...the CD was only $10 and has 2 bonus tracks.