CD Sales Are Down Because...

(The following is satire from the "The Specious Report" but it's being widely circulated because many see more than a little ring of truth to it.)


RIAA Report: CD Sales Down Because New Music Sucks

[Los Angeles, CA] - The 25th anniversary of the audio CD next month is being greeted with dwindling sales figures. But an industry-wide study indicates that Napster-type downloads are not the real problem behind a sluggish market.

The report clearly documents a brief spike in sales whenever something new comes along, followed by a long period of disinterest. "This is because most artists squirt out one decent song, then follow it up with a bunch of crap," RIAA analyst Lorenzo Spazcolon explained. "Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera, Tatu... gimme a break. More people download their pictures than their music."

The biggest industry losers, the RIAA study sites, are companies heavily invested in hip-hop performers. "I guess it's like, how long can you expect people to tolerate some obnoxious twerp screaming bad poetry in your face?" Spazcolon concluded. The documentation indicates that years ago, when hip-hop was fresh, it appealed to an older college-age market. But its success was short-lived. "After all the Eminem 'I hate my mommy' crap, only teenagers listened to it. Now it's cycling down to pre-teens." Spazcolon predicts at some point the hip-hop audience won't have any disposable income. "Do six year olds even get an allowance?"

As a result, the recording industry will now shift its focus from sales to litigation. "Why try to sell cuts online for a buck," he explained, "when we can sue everyone for a couple of thousand dollars each? In the long run, legal action is more cost effective than quality control."

 

Who's paying for all that GOLD? They are LYIN...

 

MAN, is that guy bitter, or what!

 

No, sometimes the truth hurts... I wouldn't be so polite...
Have you see the latest McDonald's commercial? Future baby and it ain't goin nowhere...

 

That article is satire? Looks legit to me!

 

Mr. Spazcolon is the #2 man in the industry!

 

Hey, if CD sales are down, don't look at me!! I've been doin' my part!!

 

I felt like this when I had a spastic colon.

mud-

 

I consider the article to be the truth disguised as satire, except for perhaps the litigation part, although that may be partly true as well. But, to the point of my post: what's the best thing the RIAA could do to reverse the downward sales trend and get people interested in buying again (as opposed to illegal downloading)?

My answer: release new albums that have no more than 8 or 9 tracks, (eliminate the filler), and price them at $8-9 bucks, max. At least, do some trial releases this way and see if it makes any difference. Who wants to pay $14-$15 for 3 or 4 solid tracks and the rest crap?


Your thoughts?

 

One of the labels (UNI?) is experimenting with this strategy as we speak: they're releasing condensed versions of albums that have been out for a while, cutting them down to 8 tracks or so and selling them for under 10 bucks. I saw some of these at CD World a couple of months ago but I don't recall the artists/titles...

 

Cool, hope it catches on. Let us know if you find a link to one of these releases.

 

All of the Music companies have to

1) The have to re-orient their actual size, and business purpose, from the over-large, multi-national, multi-label companies, where they are now, and spin ALL of these companies off, into smaller, nationally, and continent-based entities. When this is accomplished, it is then, that modest profit making goals, will result in actual profit making.

The divestiture, if you will, will make more modest goals possible, while making the profit margins, they seek, NOW. Returning these companies to their original, "smaller" size, and "smaller" scope of operations, and they will be able to make a profit again.

2) Drive MOST of these profits, into 1) developing new talent, and 2) using the internet superhighway, for a viable music delivery system, that is, at the same time, making money, and giving the customer, ALL of the music they want to purchase.

These are ALL OF THE THINGS, NOW, that are illusive to ALL of the Music Companies. The are just like BIG GIANT MONSTERS, who need to be fed, unrealistically, large amounts of cash. There isn't enough money in the world, to keep these companies satiated, at this point. They've trimmed down their talent rosters so much, even another Beatles wouldn't get them solvent. And there is too much, unrealistic pressure on the talent, they do have, to produce even a modest hit. Sizing down, is the ONLY way they are going to make money, in the future, if they are around anymore.

Until there is this radical reorientation BACK, to their original corporate size AND how they used to do business, they are just spinning their wheels, wasting money, and putting off the inevitable. And we all know what's going to happen, in the relatively near future....CRASH AND BURN...ALL OF THEM! One at a time.

 

Capitol did this when they reissued, in the 1970s-1980s, some of their back catalog on LP and cassette (the SM/SN series). They added a disclaimer on the cover which I always hated to see: "This is an abridged version of an album previously issued under this same title."

 

Post Script.....


In terms of product, what's interesting is, these companies are so big, and they have SO MANY holdings (catalogs), I would say at least, some of them 1) don't really know what they have under their control, there are SO MANY companies and catalogs, 2) don't know and have FORGOTTEN to do with what they have, in terms of offering product for sale.

There are people out there wanting to buy music. But it isn't out there for them to buy. And it's trickling out into the marketplace, at a time when EVERY RELEASE HAS to be profitable.

To make this point, think of the many, many releases languishing in the vaults, just sitting there. For example, look at the success of the Led Zeppelin DVD/CD set. It took the Company, completely by surprise. Why ? Well, it shouldn't have been a surprise, is my point.

 

Anyone else tired of the overused "today's music sucks?" What a boring and wrong catch all. Lots of today's music sucks. Lots of yesterday's music sucks. So?

We could at least get a new easy, sweeping answer going. "Today's good music isn't being promoted enough." There. It's still not the complete answer, but at least it's much less negative.

 

Mark is on the mark...

Good points made by all the posters. People here do see the isues on which the "satire" is based.

Seems like the music and TV industries have a lot in common - namely, that the lowest-common-denominator is the holy grail for increasing profits. You really need to search out what little good material gets issued. Increasingly, that material does not come from the "majors."

 

So at least yesterday, in addition to the drivel, the majors put out lots of good stuff, including artists that were "different." Today the whole music scene (as defined by the major labels, anyway) is more homogenized - and the majors, who used to take chances on new talent, are not particularly interested unless they think they have the next "blockbuster." Now they'd rather just crank out Celine and Christine - fits the "formula," you know...

Any new acts with something to offer these days are typically heisted from smaller labels, rather than being signed by the mega-corps initially. The biggies don't seem to have the creativity any more. In the past, many successful artists of the past would put out several records before they finally "hit." The big labels, more often than not, stood behind and supported those acts they had faith in. But as mikenyc pointed out above, the pressure is on now for an immediate hit. Otherwise, the act gets dropped - pronto.

 

Dave Alvin is indeed one of the classics, Mark. Have a lot of respect for him (and Neil).

 

Very valid point on the price of CDs and the length of them. I buy a lot used, and almost never pay the $13.99 price point or higher (I made an exception today on Hoffman's Bob James in Hi-Fi SACD), but even so resist a lot of product I might otherwise check out if I can't find it at that magic under $10 price. Plus, I make it a point to play a CD in its entirety at least once on my home stereo before shelfing it. With this policy, the longer CDs without substance can be painful. Last weekend, I was enjoying playing through the Jackson Browne catalogue averaging less than 40 minutes until I got to the last couple of CDs, which contained mostly forgettable tracks on CDs running in excess of one hour each. Uggghh.

 

Thank you!

New music is out there, I just don't have access to it unless I uh, download stuff. I sure as hell ain't gonna pay $17 for a whole CD if I can't hear it first!

The majors sure aren't handling a lot of new stuff because they say it won't ship platinum.

 

That virtually all of us seem to agree on. Unfortunately for many artists, the majors are the only ones that can afford big promotion efforts. When an unknown artist, through sheer luck, or merit, or word-of -mouth breaks through, the majors are all to happy to pick up that act. But for them to have invested in that artist initially - hah! Not too often. Corporate bean counters don't like risk...