Sergio Reissues?
- Thread starter Michael Hagerty
- Start date
- Status
I don't want to start an argument here, but "greed" on the part of the consumer (wanting something for nothing) and technology run rampant is what got the record business in the condition it's in. All the record companies do is put out a product that has a price clearly marked, and many consumers for some reason think that's too much, but instead of voting with their wallets, they just steal it.
The bottom line is though, it is entirely possible that somebody at Sergio's management set that higher price on EQUINOX, and the record co. might be contractually obligated to it.
Another possibility is that some flunky goes through the catalog now and then and lowers prices on low-selling older titles, and this title has just slipped under the radar for some reason. (The list of reasons could be very lengthy.)
Yet another possibility is that this title really WAS supposed to be discontinued in 2005 and thus dropped out of the company's catalog listings, but is still in stock at many warehouses. And since they paid the full wholesale price for it, it's still listed at the same price.
Still another possibility is it's selling just fine, and they see no reason to lower the price. When I searched up the title, Sergio's EQUINOX was listed as the second best selling record by that title -- the best seller being another A&M product, Styx's EQUINOX.
The bottom line is though, it is entirely possible that somebody at Sergio's management set that higher price on EQUINOX, and the record co. might be contractually obligated to it.
Another possibility is that some flunky goes through the catalog now and then and lowers prices on low-selling older titles, and this title has just slipped under the radar for some reason. (The list of reasons could be very lengthy.)
Yet another possibility is that this title really WAS supposed to be discontinued in 2005 and thus dropped out of the company's catalog listings, but is still in stock at many warehouses. And since they paid the full wholesale price for it, it's still listed at the same price.
Still another possibility is it's selling just fine, and they see no reason to lower the price. When I searched up the title, Sergio's EQUINOX was listed as the second best selling record by that title -- the best seller being another A&M product, Styx's EQUINOX.
Mike: No one is more anti-piracy than I am. I buy my CDs. But let's face it. The cost of manufacturing CDs is lower than the cost of manufacturing LPs. But the price went up, not down. $18.98 for an album that was originally $4.98 on vinyl...for which the bulk of the expenses were paid years ago...that's greed.
seashorepiano
Active Member
What I said is hardly suggestive of a conspiracy theory. It is as much a valid point as are the others you later brought up. Verve and its parent companies have been around for years and can get a good idea of how well certain albums will sell.
My point was this. If Verve affixes a sticker to its CD reissues stating a limited release date, then continues to sell afterward at a different (read: lower) price, then that is deceptive. Greed isn't even worth arguing over; it exists in all big business.
seashorepiano
Active Member
Wow! I usually see these sort of arguments in the political forums I frequent! 
Actually, there's a calculator for that on the web....and, actually, we're getting a deal. Adjusted for inflation, $4.98 in 1967 is.....$28.35 in today's money.
In fact, Look Around at $11.98 in today's money is like paying $2.11 for it in 1967.
I'll stop whining now, and apologize to the recording industry for the unfounded greed accusation.
---Michael Hagerty
In fact, Look Around at $11.98 in today's money is like paying $2.11 for it in 1967.
I'll stop whining now, and apologize to the recording industry for the unfounded greed accusation.
---Michael Hagerty
I was gone for the weekend and couldn't particiapte in this thread for a couple of days (probably a good thing.)
I was about to say that there is a LOT more money in an album of today than there was in 1967. You have much better recording quality; higher quality packaging; usually a longer running time (although not on a reissue); and everything costs more today from manufacturing to advertising to the cost of musical instruments and the production. So the old dusty argument of what a CD costs to "manufacture" is really pretty invalid. With a reissue like Sergio's, there's the cost of remastering. And we still don't know WHO is responsible for that list price....Sergio's management, some wonk at Universal, or warehouses which paid full price for the disk.
There is a LOT more to the equation than the manufacturing cost.
I was about to say that there is a LOT more money in an album of today than there was in 1967. You have much better recording quality; higher quality packaging; usually a longer running time (although not on a reissue); and everything costs more today from manufacturing to advertising to the cost of musical instruments and the production. So the old dusty argument of what a CD costs to "manufacture" is really pretty invalid. With a reissue like Sergio's, there's the cost of remastering. And we still don't know WHO is responsible for that list price....Sergio's management, some wonk at Universal, or warehouses which paid full price for the disk.
There is a LOT more to the equation than the manufacturing cost.
- Status
Similar discussions
