what about dischord?
they jut print on their cds how much it would cost to buy the cd directly
from them.
makes it awfullyhard to mark it up much.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dirk van den Heuvel" <dirkv@groovedis.com>
To: <chad@thedownbeat.org>
Cc: "Acid-Jazz Mailing List" <acid-jazz@ucsd.edu>
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 4:25 PM
Subject: RE: Labels
> Chad,
> the reason why you don't pay $6-7 when buying direct is because the label
> can't live without distributors and retailers RIGHT NOW. That means that
> they have to be careful not to piss us off :). Selling to you at what we
> distributors pay would do that and risk us not carrying the records, ditto
> for the stores...for the money they make off you they can't afford that.
> Yet. A similar thing happens many times when stores buy direct--they get a
> better price, but NOT the same price as a distributor. That's to keep
> everybody happy and doing their job.
>
> And the system is never paid for...there's always rent, phone, labor, etc
> costs that must be paid. Plus dead stock. Bad debt. You get the idea. The
> start up costs are comparatively small. And that's true whether we're
> talking about a distributor like me (ESPECIALLY a small distibution
company
> like Groove Dis) or a record store. And lastly on a philosphical note I'd
> like to think a good distributor (or a good store) deserves to make a
living
> for ADDING some value. We are not a freight company. We don't simply take
> records from one place and send them to another (though there are many
> so-called distributors who do exactly--and only--that). Ask anyone who
buys
> from us, store or deejay, if we add some value and I'm sure they'll say we
> do. And for that we deserve to make a living (mind you I said living not
> "killing").
>
> Hoping I don't sound (too much) like a corporate tool (though I AM on
record
> on the mailing list for being anti-Napster :)
>
> Dirk van den Heuvel (dirkv@groovedis.com)
> Groove Distribution
> http://www.groovedis.com
> Your Guide To The Underground
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: chad downbeat [mailto:thedownbeat@thedownbeat.org]
> Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 6:01 PM
> To: Dirk van den Heuvel
> Subject: RE: Labels
>
>
> dirk,
>
> one question about the following....
>
> "If labels were to sell to you direct with no middlemen needed the cost
> could come down to $7-8 tomorrow..."
>
> tell me then why when i buy direct from a label that i still pay the same
> price as at the retail store? i realize the cost of the
> system/medium/website/whatever in place, and it's maintenance, to connect
> with the buyer is money. however that doesnt really explain the same
costs
> after the system is in place (and payed for).
>
> i guess im just trying to say i realize everyone wants to make a bit more
> money. i dont fault any label, distributor, middleman, businessman, or
> person on the street for that. i do however find it insulting that it
> cannot be spoken for what it is, and that is that it will -never- be
> $7-8/cd. unless you are a label that has no other options or are in it
for
> the excitement of being a label, you are going to use capitalism to it's
> advantage.
>
> i do think capitalism has been used, by far, to it's advantage in the
music
> industry. it's only a matter of time before it deflates. that is all
from
> my point of view of course, and i will be the first to point out im a
> simpleton when it comes to the industries system that is in place. but i
> see aol on the rise with time warner communications/time warner music.
how
> long will it be before we pay a flat rate for music, as we do video.
>
> i also just wanted to say thanks for your insight dirk. it has on several
> occasions, after reading your emails, opened my eyes to some of the
reasons
> why.
>
>
> cheers folks (it's friday),
>
> chad
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dirk van den Heuvel [mailto:dirkv@groovedis.com]
> Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 1:20 PM
> To: Elson Trinidad; angedella isafella
> Cc: acid-jazz@ucsd.edu
> Subject: RE: Labels
>
>
> Elson,
> That's just a little too simplistic. The production costs of a CD are
maybe
> $1.35 but that doesn't take into account artist royalties (and therefore
> advances), recording costs (not including mastering which can is part of
> $1.35 or so), mechanical royalties, promotion & marketing, label overhead
> and admin costs and many other little assorted bills. And keep in mind the
> usual cost of a CD to a distributor (in other words what the label
charges)
> is between $6.50 on the low end and about $8.00 on the very high end. The
> money between that and what you at the store goes to distributors (and
their
> costs) and a much bigger slice to the retailer (and their costs). If
labels
> were to sell to you direct with no middlemen needed the cost could come
down
> to $7-8 tomorrow...
>
> FYI: I am not pro label, pro artist, pro major, or pro indie (I may be pro
> distributor, but that's because I like being able to eat and pay my rent
> :). I'm just pro good music. Period.
>
>
> Dirk van den Heuvel (dirkv@groovedis.com)
> Groove Distribution
> http://www.groovedis.com
> Your Guide To The Underground
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Elson Trinidad [mailto:elson@westworld.com]
> Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 11:51 AM
> To: angedella isafella
> Cc: acid-jazz@ucsd.edu
> Subject: Re: Labels
>
>
>
>
> angedella isafella wrote:
> >
> > Dear list: I heard that labels rarely ever lose on a cd.
>
> Oh obviously. It costs like, what, $1.35 to produce a CD at cost, and they
> sell
> for $13-$18 retail?
>
> Plus, record companies who had albums pay for themselves many times over
as
> LPs
> (i.e. any Beatles album, Pink Floyd's "Dark Side of the Moon," "Eagles'
> Gretest
> Hits" etc get even more profit as releasing them as CDs (and even more
when
> they
> put out "limited edition digitally remastered" versions).
>
>
>
> - 30 -
>
> :. elson trinidad, los angeles, california, usa
> :. elson@westworld.com
> :. www.westworld.com/~elson
>
> [ the futurethnic beats of e:trinity - www.e-trinity.org ]
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jun 17 2000 - 02:24:44 MET DST