The Price to pay for a compact disc

I remember when the cd first came out i paid $25 a piece for some inports almost 4 times what i paid for vinyl.i walk into a music store and look at the price for the new cd by No Doubt-$17.99.have the record labels got to be kidding.by now prices should have come down a lot.What is the cost to a label to actually get the product out on the shelves.no wonder the cd-r is so popular,buy only one copy and burn 1,000 and make a profit
on top of it.the music industry gets what it deserves-your opinion?

 

$17.99 is high.

However, I'd suggest it's more a matter of where you shop. Mall stores and other chain record stores are hideously overpriced for everything, not just CDs.

$13.99 at Best Buy, though, seems fair to me.

I certainly wouldn't mind prices coming down, but I don't think they're seriously out of line. The price for a typical CD hasn't changed in the 17 years I've been buying them -- between 12 and 15 bucks for new releases, between 9 and 13 for catalog items. That's what it was in 1985, and that's what it is now. I say no inflation in 17 years is pretty good.

And no matter how expensive they are, it doesn't justify piracy.

Ryan

 

Yeah, $13.99 seems ok to me, but I remember buying new titles for $11.99 a few years ago. It feels like "landloard disease" when you know the prices are just going to go up no matter what. Absolutely sad!

I made a point waay erlier that I walked into a local mall, and into a Transworld (gag-cough-puke) store called tape world. Took one glance, and G&R's "Appetite" (normal stock version Geffen) was selling for $19.98.

 

You can still get new titles for $11.99, if you know where to look. The places I usually go to for newer titles are Best Buy, Borders, Circuit City, and Target; in the Sunday ads, they usually list new titles from $11.99 to $13.99, and if the titles in particular is popular, they'll be on sale even more regularly. Right now, I'm seeing "Love and Theft" and "All That you Can't Leave Behind" for $10 to $11 at various stores all because of the Grammy's.

 

Yeah, I pulled the $13.99 price off the Best Buy web site just now. I'll bet it was $11.99 the week it was released.

Ryan

 

But the thing you have to remember while the net price is about the same to the consumer, the list price of the item has risen for new releases and there is less profit made by the retailers. The retailers are basically eating the rise to the higher list price. Best Buy and Circuit City use low prices as a “loss leader” on new releases to get you into store so in the future you’ll buy a toaster or some other home appliance that has a higher mark-up.

 

I buy a lot of CDs (I've got about 180 piled up now that I haven't had a chance to listen to since buying) and even so am fairly discriminating when it comes to purchase price. If it's a new release by a major artist, I will either buy it on sale out of the box the first week at Best Buy or Target for about $11.99 average, or I'll wait until it turns up as a promo or used. If it's a more obscure title, I'll shop ebay or various e-tailers for the best price. If it's an in print title that is not an import-only release or likely to go out of print fairly quickly, I will NEVER pay as much as $13.99 for a CD. You have to learn to be patient in waiting for the right price. The only CDs I could imagine paying $18+ for are imports or out of print titles that are not likely to be reissued any time in the near future. That price point is for my parents and other mall shoppers that only buy CDs on rare occasions and don't care to get reamed by the record companies and retailers.

 

The Cost of CDs

Guys, I was a Production Manager for years for a Record/Tape
Manufacturer Broker.

My company got records, tapes and Cds made for small labels, individual artists, Radio Stations, and companies like The New York Mets, when they wanted to make a promotional Cd.


I can tell you this. When Cds fisrt came out in the 1980s', the cost to produce them was about 5 to 6 dollars each because SONY only had one plant, orders had huge backlogs, the material was hard to get, the printing machines were super expensive, ect.

Thats why Cds in 1985 cost 12 to 15 bucks.

TODAY, the cost of manufacturing a CD is PENNIES, gentlemen.
Some plants even offer FREE CD pressing if you give them the label printing and surface printing.

Yet, CD prices have not come down , in fact they have RISEN.

Know why? Because the Record Companies will charge the absolute maximum they feel they can get away with, the consumer be damned.

Why was the EMI Beatles "Red and Blue" Cds pressed on Two Cds when the total tracks count was only 24 tracks?
It would have fit perfectly fine on ONE cd. The answer is that as a double set, thats how they got 35$ retail for it.

There is NO justification for this...none whatsoever.

 

I have a hard time spending more than $11.99 for a new cd. I get mine online for as low as $9.99 (mymusic.com). The retail prices for new cds have really gotten out of hand.

It's interesting from a business stance that most of the record companies are crying bloody murder about their sales/profits and cd units sold for 2001. The immediate response is that online and mpeg copying is killing the business. Anyone with a basic business degree or equitable experience knows that the problem with the recording industry is a limited talent pool and increasing prices.

Sure people are making and sharing some copies, but I don't beleive they would or even could buy the stuff at these inflated prices. Besides, a lot of today's cds only have a couple good songs and are priced at $15.99 or higher. It's just ridiculous.

If the record companies want to sell more cds they should put out better albums and charge less. Then people would buy more and be less inclined to make illegal copies. Am I the only one who sees this? As a former marketing executive for McDoanld's, I know the profit is to be had by selling millions of units at a fair and relatively reasonable profit margin.

If any of the major lables are reading this, I am currently available and can guarantee to increase your sales and bottom line profits. Email me and I will send you my resume!!!!!!!!!

 

Indeed it is, but surely you're not suggesting that all you pay for is the cost of the physical medium? You still must pay for the art. This is no different than any other form of entertainment. It costs $1.00 to print and bound a hardcover book, yet they typically cost $25.00. The cost has little to do with the medium that the art is delivered on. VHS tapes cost MORE to manufacture than DVDs do, yet they are virtually always priced cheaper.

You mean like everything else in the World has? Do mortgages cost the same as they did 20 years ago? Do Automobiles? Does Bread? Does Milk? Does Cereal?

Prices go up, that's life in America. As far as the CD goes, we've seen essentially less than a $2 increase in price and that even depends on where you look. I just picked up the new Alanis Morissette CD today for $10.99 -- it was (no lie) $19.99 at the Sam Goody in the mall -- I went to the local record shop and got it for under $11.

This makes a nice little conspiracy theory but for the most part it is incorrect. It costs a lot of money for a major label to put a CD out. They have to recoup that money somehow. The label has to be paid, the manufacturers have to be paid, the songwriters have to be paid, the musicians have to be paid, the engineers have to paid, and then if there's any money left after that....the artist is paid. CDs cost a national average of $14, yet artists typically see less than 30 cents for each CD that's sold.

At $20, CDs would be too expensive, at $13 or so, I feel they are a fair price for what they deliver, and I would never condone piracy no matter what CDs cost. If you can't afford it, don't buy it. Why lay blame at the feet of the big, bad, record companies?

 

Ah, but there is the rub. When CDs first came on the scene, the record companies did not agree to pay the artists any more royalties for CDs than for LPs and CTs. However, they charged $16.98 list price for a CD and $8.98 list for the equivalent LP. The labels and not the artist pocketed the profit. As far as I know, the royalty rates have not changed significantly but the labels have been able to get rid of the low profit CTs and LPs through the success of the CD. From my time working in a record store, I know the record companies charge retailers about $11 per new disc, and the amount the retailer discounts off list is up to it. Some places like Best Buy use CDs as loss leaders to sell electronics. However, I think the companies are still making a killing off each individual CD and for the most part not passing the profits on to the performer, with the possible exception of superstars such as Whitney Houston and Mariah Carey.

 

There's always the "Used" option...Always a Bargain.

 

You mean like everything else in the World has? Do mortgages cost the same as they did 20 years ago? Do Automobiles? Does Bread? Does Milk? Does Cereal?

Prices go up, that's life in America.

>>>>>Really? dont computers cost a FRACTION of what they cost 18 years ago? Doesnt a 27 inch TV cost a fraction of what it did 18 years ago?

Why? Because they became cheaper to produce.

Do you think a Sony RESISSUE of the 'New Christy Minstrels" cost any more than 1.25 to make? It doesnt. They use an existing master. They use existing artwork. they dont remaster, Yet, the title still sells for 11.99. Thats SOME profit margin.

 

Once again, you've missed the point entirely.

So the artists, engineers, etc... for "New Christy Minstrels" have already been paid enough and don't deserve any further royalty? So Sony should price the CD at $5, talent be damned?

The price of a CD has virtually nothing to do with the big, bad record companies overcharging the little guy. It has to do with how the slice of the payment is handed out. The record company gets $11 for a brand new CD, that's it. You want someone to bitch at for the $19 CD....bitch at the retailer, they're the one trying to pocket the $8 profit, not the record company. The Record label gets the same thing whether the retailer sells it for $12 or $19.

I don't see why people have such a hard time separating the art from the delivery medium. Have you ever created anything in your life? Say a painting or a poem? So, according to your logic, you should only sell the poem for the cost of the paper it's printed on. Does that sound reasonable to you? I certainly hope not.

 

Jack Benny lives!

Very seldom do I ever pay over $12-$13 for a new CD (DCCs are the exception when I find one). But 3/4ths of the CDs I buy are used. There's a lot of places around here with great used selections around $3-$8. Recently I found Clapton's Slowhand gold MFSL @ $2.99 and Queen's A Day At The Races gold MFSL @ $7.99. That's the only way I'll buy many of the new remasters. Went to a mall store the other day (FYE) and CD prices were $19.99! What a joke.

 

Hey Ric - here's the picture from your sig that I've made transparent around the Beatles:

 

Actually in real dollar terms, these things are cheaper today than they were 20 years ago. Average annual incomes are appreciably larger than they were then, yet the items you mention haven't risen at the same pace. Gasoline is cheaper today than it was in 1982 - about $1.00 ($0.98 here in Louisiana) a gallon now just as it was then.

Despite all of that, recordings SHOULD cost less than they do, I'll certainly agree.

 

Thanks HZ! Much Appreciated!