BY KURT HANSON Continuing its movement beyond industry trade publications
and into the popular press, the
issue of music industry problems
garnered almost all of the top of page one and all of page two of
USA Today, the nation's
largest-circulation newspaper yesterday.
The five-part piece, by USA Today's Edna Gundersen, began, "No
wonder pop fans are singing the blues. Radio sounds like
a broken record. CD prices are heading off the charts. Labels are
out of tune with the digital age. New acts fail to strike a chord
with listeners.
"It's time to face the music.
The $14 billion recording industry, struggling through its
first sales slump in a decade, faces challenges on several fronts,
not the least of which is a tarnished image in the eyes and ears
of fans who feel ripped off by greedy, tone-deaf bean counters.
In 2001, album sales dropped 2.8% compared with 2000, the first
dip since SoundScan began tracking sales in 1991..."
The entire article is here.
A summary of each of the various subtopics follows.
"A burning issue:
Music piracy and downloads"
"Popular music has been upended by every technological
advance from electricity and the phonograph to cassette tapes and
recordable CDs. The switch from analog to digital accelerated the
pace of illicit duplication and
distribution, sounding the loudest alarm yet...
"TheRecording Industry
Association of America, on behalf of labels, is vigorously
seeking to stamp out proliferating Web sites that permit free downloads
of music. Users argue that peer-to-peer file-sharing, even more
prevalent now than in Napster's heyday, is a legitimate
means of sampling and trading music and that the industry's
substitute sites are clunky, incomplete
and too rigidly priced...
"The industry is counterattacking in court, a slow process,
and with anti-copying devices, which consumers resent and tech heads
will no doubt override. Labels have yet
to tackle pirates head-on with superior Web sites, attractive subscription
deals and enough free downloads to stimulate purchases.
"Enhancements, such as the bonus DVD attached to the
first 2 million copies of Eminem's widely bootlegged new album,
are one tack that may lure the cyber set back to stores..."
The article also points out
that consumers bought 1.2 billion
blank CDs in 2001, yet album sales were down a relatively
meager 22 million units
from the pervious year (to 762.8 million).
Even if one believes that the sales decline was due to
bootlegging (rather than, say, the quality of that year's released
product), the numbers suggest that 98%
of CDs burned are NOT
activity that hurts CD sales.
-- KH
CONTINUED BELOW
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
CONTINUED
FROM ABOVE
"Hey Mr. DJ, open the request
line" "Radio remains one of the most powerful marketing tools
available to the recording industry, despite skyrocketing costs
of gaining access to the airwaves via independent promoters. While
word-of-mouth, video and Internet brush fires occasionally catapult
unknowns to stardom, radio remains the most
reliable and efficient means of enticing listeners to
record stores. Yet many fans surfing the airwaves are far from satisfied.
"The complaint:Consolidation has made radio
even more cookie-cutter bland,
with narrow, unimaginative playlists. Demographic
targeting and audience testing eliminate variety,
stifle regionalism and foist
the least objectionable music on the public...
"Radio's urgent challenge is recapturing baby boomers.
As it does a better job of acknowledging younger listeners, radio
does a worse job of acknowledging anyone over 35," [Airplay
Monitor's Sean] Ross says. "There are no commercial classical
stations in Detroit, Philadelphia or Miami anymore. The labels have
learned in the past five or 10 years to reach the 35-year-old who
wants to buy a Bee Gees record even if it's not on the radio. (Labels
that) find a way to market to 45-year-olds who grew up
on rock 'n' roll will have an advantage."
This
is all largely hooey. True, radio is now largely owned by
a few multi-billion-dollar corporations...but previously it
was owned by a somewhat larger number of multi-hundred-million
dollar corporations! The variety of formats was no
wider ten years ago than it is today, and regionalism has never
been significant since I've been in the industry.
Internet radio offers an excellent workaround for both
labels and for listeners...but it would have been just as welcome
ten years ago as it is today.
-- KH
"Money
for nothing:
Music fans suffer from CD sticker shock" "Until recently, the ceiling on list prices of CDs hovered
at $18.98. Then Universal hiked the sticker price of Ja Rule's Pain
Is Love and The Scorpion King soundtrack to $19.98. The
upside of the pricing game is that some rising acts, including N.E.R.D.
and Andrew W.K., are entering the playing field sporting a lower
price tag...
"The complaint: Shelling out $16 to $18 is too much
for a record with maybe two hits and lots of padding.. Retailers
pressuring labels to reduce wholesale
costs contend that selling an album under the "the magical
price point" of $10 would discourage CD burning, according
to Billboard...
"The RIAA reports that the average CD price fell by
40% between 1983 and 1996, while the Consumer Price Index rose nearly
60%...
"The outlook: Labels can streamline their operations,
tighten budgets and adopt a more flexible approach to pricing, especially
in the download realm, where an invitation to cherry-pick singles
rather than gamble on whole albums might better suit cyber-savvy
consumers."
That
MUST be a misquote about the average price of a CD falling by 40% between 1983 and 1996.
It's amazing to walk into a Borders today and see that
MPAA members can somehow release a two-hour DVD disc of audio
plus video plus
loads of special features for a lower price than RIAA members
can release a disc containing 45 minutes of audio
only (that was recorded 15 years ago)!
-- KH
"The thrill is gone:
Music fans find dearth of quality" "Perhaps the most nebulous whine in fandom concerns
a perceived dearth of good music. Roughly 27,000
titles are dumped into the marketplace annually, yet
many consumers, particularly casual or older fans less prone to
rooting out new sounds, grumble about a shortage and pine for the
days of plenty.
"The complaint: Record labels sign only what they hope
will sell, jumping on the latest bandwagon and flooding the market
with sound-alikes...
"The defense: Stockholders demand results, so labels
are pressured to keep the hits coming and to winnow flat-liners
from the roster. To assure exposure,
they cater to the programming needs of
radio and video channels rather than risk an expensive
promotional campaign for an artist who falls outside the parameters...
"The outlook: Labels have been long aware that radio
promotion is corrupt and wasteful, but now there's some initiative
toward change. There's a drive to devise alternate
means of promoting artists through grass-roots efforts,
à la "O Brother,[Where Art Thou?]" that circumvent
radio and MTV.
"[Former Spin editor Alan] Light says, 'You need new machinery
to get music out there, maybe the emergence of something not tied
to the major labels....
"[Soundscan CEO Mike] Shalett says: 'We need to reach beyond
the traditional avenues of exposure...'"
Something here doesn't make sense. Certainly many
hundreds of those 27,000 titles are record company attempts
at break-the-bank multi-million-sellers. (Five such high-expectation
releases per week per major label would be 1,300 such releases
per year.)
But the balance of the 27,000 titles must be albums
with more reasonable expectations -- e.g., Rosemary Clooney's
jazz vocal CDs, classical CDs, bluegrass CDs, Broadway cast
CDs. These CDs must be
profitable or labels would learn their lesson and quit releasing
them!
And, gosh, what would be a great solution to the needs
that Light and Shalett are describing? Can any RAIN
readers think of one? -- KH
NEW RAIN
FEATURE!
Share your opinions on
the problems facing the record industry...and possible solutions.
This first note is in reference to yesterday's lead story "Chicago
Tribune on radio using the Web for more than just music" here...
"E-mail
marketing moves the needle with ratings and revenue..."
I read with interest both your article on loyalty marketing
programs and the full Chicago Tribune story. There are
conflicting opinions about the value of e-mail marketing, points and
rewards. I've worked with radio stations on all of the above for over
10 years; allow me to weigh in with one more opinion.
Database collection is the single most important elementof
a station's website. If radio does NOTHING else on the Internet
it's okay (sort of), as long as they are collecting listener information.
Benefits to the station:
-- Detailed info on core listeners: name -- address, zip code,
birthday, gender, vs aggregated qualitative information.
-- Ability to market directly and personally back to core listeners
to build station loyalty, increase TSL, move listeners from one daypart
to another -- identify and reward likely diary keepers.
-- Lucrative opportunities to be a matchmaker between advertisers
and likely consumers.
E-mail marketing provides the cheapest, fastest, easiest method
for collecting and communicating data. No transcription,
no bounce back cards, no irksome telemarketing. The station has information
that is instantly available and immediately actionable. The payoff
is in what stations do with this data once they get it.
Done right (a critical caveat) e-mail marketing moves the
needle with ratings and revenue. Is it a separate department as Todd
Cavanaugh suggests? Someday, absolutely! Meanwhile, it's a concept
that must be developed and mined for all it's worth.
Ruth
Presslaff, President
Presslaff Interactive Revenue
These next two pieces of feedback refer to yesterday's article
"Rosen on webcast royalties: 'Now it is time to get paid'"
here...
"It
will be exposed to fans and buyers..."
With regard to Hilary Rosen's comments about "giving our stuff
(music) to webcasters for years." Why shouldn't
they give their "stuff" to webcasters since it means that it will
be exposed to fans and buyers?
Internet radio is not a Napster-like destination. If anything,
the RIAA should be insisting that webcasters include song identification
and links to online music stores at their sites so what is played
can be easily purchased. That is how to get paid.
Dan
Hayden Pathfinder Consulting & Research
"Her
constituents are indeed already getting paid..."
"Now it is time to get paid for it," says Ms. Rosen?
I just heard a CD track by Aqua on DI.FM,
then used the provided Amazon.com
link to buy the album and the group's follow-on album.
Maybe we should -- each and everyone of us -- e-mail Rosen
each time we buy music we first heard streamed!
Maybe after we clog her e-mail a few times she might get the
idea that her constituents are indeed already getting paid.
RS
Blum
"(Webcasters)
are doing the record industry a service..."
I buy CDs based on what I hear on the web radio. I buy CDs
from artists that I would never hear on the radio. I would never
hear them on the radio because they are not part of a "demographic"
dictated by some been counter in an ivory tower somewhere.
In my area (Houston) our radio stations are almost all owned
by Clear Channel Communications.
We are limited by what we hear. When working in Los Angeles a couple
of years ago I heard music played on the radio that didn't get airplay
in Houston till 4-6 months later. What a shame.
The recording industry should leave the webcasters alone.
They are doing the record industry a service.
Scot
VanAlstine
XM Satellite Radio is touting the results of two independent
tests which say XM has
superior sound quality to the Siriusservice.
Sound & Vision Magazine, in their July/August issue, gave
the results of a recent side-by-side comparison study of the two satellite
services. Senior Contributing Editor Ken Pohlmann and Contributor
Leslie Shapiro concluded
that, "at this stage of the game, XM sounds better than Sirius.
The bottom line: Sirius sound quality was inferior to XM's -- to a
significant degree."
Noted
mastering engineer Bob Ludwig (right) also gave XM the edge over
Sirius after a side-by-side evaluation. While the Sound
& Vision tests were done in similarly equipped vehicles
and compared the sound of the services directly to each other, Ludwig
compared selections from various of formats of music on each service
to the original compact disc at his Gateway
Mastering Studios.
After 10 hours of comparisons, according to an XM press release,
Ludwig said, "Overall, XM was more natural sounding and a much better
music experience."