Philips says 20 million Sack-Dees sold (3 Viewers)

[Dennis Nicholls]

Here's a story hot off the presses as it were:

www.sa-cd.net/shownews.php?news=21


I presume this means factories capable of 75 million disks per year, not that they actually will press 75 million disks this year.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

I once heard HDCD had sold a couple hundred million, and that was many years ago...they could be over billion now as far as I know. It is obvious what the real 'preferred choice' is.

I bought 10 more SACDs two weeks ago (more Dylan discs since they are being taken out of print). I like SACD a lot but I know spin doctoring when I hear it.

 

[Marc Colella]

To Everything (Spin, Spin, Spin).

 

[Lee Scoggins]

I think that's right, but I doubt investors would add capacity if there were no demand for it.

Thanks Dennis for the news story. Also of note are some stories where several different sources track new titles coming out at over 100 per month. That's pretty good considering you have a lot of boutique labels that are not exactly the production machines like Universal. I was tempted to use Sony or Warner as an example but changed my mind.

 

[Phil A]

Most probably just counted every hybrid as an SACD sale. Add the Stones, Dylan, Pink Floyd, etc., and it is likely what he is saying. Some newspaper ran a story that Sting's last album sold 650k SACDs (at that point in time). They did not mention the album was available on both regular CD as well as a hybrid. I doubt 650k hybrids were pressed.

 

[Rachael B]

in 5 years of SACD, 20 million, worldwide, isn't really all that good IMO.

 

[Brian+H]

20 million is a luke-warm number to me.
It's not bad but it could be much better if marketing and title support got bumped up.

It seems to me that there is a lot of interest in sacd, but the keg hasn't been tapped, so to speak.

Anybody know how many sacd players have been sold in 5 years?

 

[Marc Colella]

The fact that the figure includes hybrid disc sales (which most people purchased for the CD layer), 20 million is a terribly low number for a format that's been out for 5 years.

 

[Chu Gai]

 

[Rachael B]

So Bob is yet another of your aliases, eh Chu? The beret lends a nice touch!

 

[Lee Scoggins]

I don't think its bad for a niche product mostly marketed to audiophiles.

I wonder how many DCC or MoFi discs sold during their run...

 

[Dennis Nicholls]

According to today's news, Baghdad Bob may even give you some yellowcake with your Sack-Dees....:b

 

[Michael St. Clair]

It would have been a ton if they were free inside specially marked packages of classic rock.

There could only be a comparison if every SACD were dual-inventory, distinctively packaged, and at a street price of $30 (rarely discounted).

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Michael,

I'm not trying to do a perfect comparison. But think about the large numbers involved. Let's say there have been 15 million SACDs sold (haircut from 20 million shipped to be conservative)...of these, I betcha around 5 million or more are pure SACD purchasers. I am guesstimating here based on numbers I have seen for Dylan, Sting, Stones, and DSOTM sales which appear to be less than 10 million total. So on 5 million discs, I think we could compare to DCC or MoFi. DCC's authority is probably Steve Hoffman. In a thread at that forum, there is speculation that their best seller was the two Eagles discs, one or both of which maybe did 20,000. Steve also says that DCC made millions but it was invested badly.

If one label can make millions with a limited number of titles and peaking roughly at 20,000 on the best release, then you can see how the boutiques can keep doing these audiophile releases for a while.

I am aware of boutique albums that will net the producing firm anywhere from $1-5 per disc. I am aware of 3 firms that make at least $3 per disc. With all the SACD capacity online for replication (manufacturing) costs added for hirez is very minimal on a volume basis. Most of the SACDs now sell for $20 or less (MoFi excepted at least at my Tower $31!!).

Mastering is not so expensive. I know boutiques that can keep the cost in the $10-20K range tops.

I think the format very, very likely has enough economic attraction to stay with us for a while unless a hirez BluRay or similar product comes along.

 

[Rachael B]

Lee, the thing is that the majors forced SACD into niche status, proably knowingly...? It's hard to cite a more purr-fect example of predatory marketing than redbook versus SACD or DVD-A for that matter. I think Sony has lost intrest in SACD if they have to provide a CD layer. They're proably looking for the next avenue to get rid of the dreaded PCM as we speak?!?

 

[Lee Scoggins]

It was not forced into niche status. It just started there and has sayed there. It was initially an archival format, then an audiophile one, then a slightly wider format for audiophiles and serious music fans.

I think maybe difficulties with some artists royalty rights and contract terms and conditions has slowed down some title releases, yet output is still strong at over 100 new albums per month.

 

[Marc Colella]

Purely a guess, with no facts to back it up.

5 million are purchasing for SACD playback?
Sorry, I highly doubt the number is even half of that.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

I've seen some numbers tossed around for some of those, but I don't even think they were international numbers.

Even among audiophiles, I've seen Hoffman forum members talking about pickup up hybrid SACDs for the redbook layer (CCR, Zombies, MFSL, etc).

Big multi-disc deluxe sets from Elton John and The Who are also single-inventory (the basic CD remains, but anybody who wants the deluxe set with the extras buys an SACD whether they know it or not).

Then on top of that you have to throw in dozens (actually, I think hundreds) of classical discs that have only been released single-inventory. For these titles, buyers of new classical have no choice but to buy the SACD...and I know several classical fans who listen to their music on 10-year-old shelf systems and just want new CDs.

Then on top of that you have to throw in titles like the complete Police and Peter Gabriel catalogs, which were released as CD-priced hybrids (not sure if they are all single-inventory, but they are priced like it) everywhere in the world except North America.

Assuming that five million SACDs have been sold to SACD consumers looks like a leap of faith from here.

Edit: I just checked Brian Moura's lists. He shows 131 different single inventory titles...and those are just the ones in surround.

 

[Lewis Besze]

My Local BB still carries like maybe 100 titles,just like a year ago,I guess they didn't read the "good news".
I think Lee should quit Sony, and should start to work for BB.They need all the "help" they can get.

 

[Rachael B]

Lee, I'm gonna have to disagree about the evolution of SACD. It is true that the original thought was for a stereo, audiophile format. However, when they decided to go M/C, that was an attempt to go mainstream, however feeble. Feeble it was. The hardware was nebulously priced, stille. The decision to push single-layeredness was laughably stupid. But, from my point of view, Sony & Philips were determined to use SACD as a vehicle to stamp out PCM. !!!!

Now, that it's been established that the market for Sack-Deez is for hybrids, suddenly Sony doesn't want to play. If they can't vanquish PCM, why bother? In Philip's SACD II mumblings last year, they mentioned that SACD I wasn't secure enough! Yada, yada, yada...

The high pricing of SACD's and SA & sumthymes-CD's, and their predatory marketing position has doomed, proably intentionally, them.

About 2 years ago I tried to inform this forum that the two hi-rez formats were being set-up and positioned to simply be price gouging mechanisms. I didn't see the majors, Sony and Warner Brudders, doing ANY of the things necessary to push their formats into the mainstream. Of course, I stille don't!

In other lines of business, they improve their product to try to retain market-share. In the music business it's always about how to gouge another fiver out of the saps. This is why so many people get so cynical and kiss off the music industry. They're tired of the industry's attitude. The industry could offer everybody a better, hybrid SA-CD and try to build the market but they choose to play the gouge game. Hybrid media could ultimately drive the sale of SACD capable players...? The industry chooses not to do so!

I don't buy all these rights arguments either. The non-BIG 5 labels don't seem to have this problem. The BIG 5 labels, all to some extent do. Why? Because they choose to bully both consumers and artists. Earlier this week the New York State Attouney General forced the big five to "find" the recieptients of 50 million dollars of back royalities. Those poor little record companies couldn't find Dolly Parton, Sean Combs, Gloria Estefan, and oh so many other artists so they could pay them.

Guys and gals like them are so hard to track down and locate. Who'd ever think of looking for Dolly down there at Dollywood? That's a hard connection to make! Even I can find Dolly. I've run into her twice at a local A/V joint.

The bottom line is that the industry leaders, the big 5, have next to zero integrity. Everything they do or say is highly suspect and should be taken with a truckload of salt grains!

P.S.- guyz, enough with the argumet about who bought what or why! That contiuing argument has become totally circular!