LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  April 2010

ARSCLIST April 2010

Subject:

Re: More digital downloads news

From:

Alex Tomlin <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 22 Apr 2010 22:09:44 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (85 lines)

Interesting Tom!  Sorry I don't know how much Amazon or iTunes make but I know labels are trying all sorts and there are a few "new" ideas of selling and distributing music coming but when a major label is behind it its because they want(need) to make money and not because they feel the artist deserves a better cut!  Personally I'm buying more music than I have for ages :-)

-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Tom Fine
Sent: 22 April 2010 14:15
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [ARSCLIST] More digital downloads news

Just got an e-mail from Deutsche Grammophon's DG Web Shop online store that they are moving into
Universal's company-owned online store system, moving away from the 3rd party operator who had
handled the store backroom and fulfillment operations. I interpret this as proof that Universal has
become comfortable with selling downloads directly to consumers, cutting out the middleman. This is
probably necessary for survival as the CD format dies off. If a download song can only be sold for
99 cents, and most songs don't get downloaded very often (the "long tail"), then the smart music
megaglomerate must capture as much of that 99 cents as possible. Paying Apple or Amazon a large
percentage to handle marketing and backroom doesn't produce enough cash to justify the
megaglomerate's existence. My bet is, going forward, iTunes store and Amazon will lose most of the
major-label content or will have to take a much-reduced cut of sales, with most of the pie returning
to the copyright owner. In the case of Amazon, an argument can be made that  it costs less to
provide a download service than to pay people to warehouse and ship CD's, so therefore the copyright
owner is due a better cut -- unknown whether this will wash with the business-savvy Amazon.

Which makes me wonder -- perhaps someone who owns or works for a music label on-list can answer
this -- does Amazon take the same percentage for digital downloads as for physical CD's? Someone
told me, years ago, that the markup on CD's is about double, so the label gets about half the retail
price. This might have changed, because I think I heard this during the collusion years when CD
prices were higher. I think I read somewhere early in the iTunes days that Apple takes a 1/3 cut for
iTunes downloads, maybe more.

Anyway, it's interesting (to me at least) how far the market has evolved since iTunes hit the scene.

1. phase one - MP3 downloads were unsanctioned by the copyright owners, and almost all were piracy,
the Napster heyday.

2. phase two - Napster shut down, crackdown on consumers, DRM formats, eMusic and other small
operations emerge offering legit downloads of DRM-free MP3, but not from Universal, Sony or Warner.
Content mainly from Fantasy Group and smaller labels.

3. phase three - iTunes hits the scene, complete with distribution deals with most major labels,
everyone on board soon after. Original format is DRM proprietary and very lossy, but evolves to
DRM-free less-lossy Apple proprietary format. Amazon soon joins the party with DRM-free less-lossy
MP3 downloads, usually for less money than iTunes when priced on a whole-album basis. There is much
overlap between Apple, Amazon and eMusic, but not 100%, and some eMusic downloads are still very
lossy (not upgraded from original 128kbps offerings).

4. phase four - the labels dip their toes into selling directly or at least directing consumers
directly to download sites. I would assume this coincides with the death of brick and morter retail
stores, so labels no longer have to worry about teeing off distributors and rack-jobbers.
Universal/Verve was early with this, with the Verve Vault website where you could click and buy the
out-of-print albums right from iTunes. Other models are like DGG's, where consumers can buy
high-bitrate MP3 directly from the company's website. Smaller labels got early into offering
downlaods direct to consumers, sometimes including booklet materials, and I now notice that some
small labels like Daptone are offering FLAC downloads of full CD resolution at a decent discount to
buying the physical CD. This makes total sense for anyone who doesn't own CD plants -- the margin is
probably better than paying to have CD's made and then distributing and holding inventory.

5. phase five - around the same time as phase four, a niche market emerges for better-than-CD
resolution PCM downloads. HDTracks and Linn, plus some others, are first in this market. Pricing is
comparable to suggested retail for SACD. My bet is that this absorbs the SACD niche as the physical
format submerges.

I think the end of 5" optical discs is inevitable, but it will be a slow fadeout. Also, it seems
obvious that there's a lot of excess inventory in warehouses and in the retail pipeline, so it will
take years for most titles to completely disappear (much less time for popular titles). Also, it
will probably make sense for megahits to be issued on CD for quite some time. I think the back
catalog stuff is definitely headed out of print, though.

One man's analysis ...

-- Tom Fine






-----------------------------
Registered Office: 15 Stukeley Street, London WC2B 5LT, England.
Registered in England number 1421223

This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the email by you is prohibited. Please note that the information provided in this e-mail is in any case not legally binding; all committing statements require legally binding signatures.


http://www.inflightproductions.com

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager