Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2010 13:54:41 GMT -5
News to everyone who posts here I'm sure :o
Chart Watch Extra: Album Sales Hit New Low Posted Thu Aug 19, 2010 11:13am PDT by Paul Grein in Chart Watch
Despite the best efforts of such hot acts as Eminem and Arcade Fire, overall album sales hit a new low this week.
Nielsen/SoundScan reports that 4,950,000 albums were sold in the week ending Aug. 15, 2010, the lowest weekly total since the company began tracking music sales in 1991. This is the fifth time so far this year that weekly album sales have hit a new Nielsen/SoundScan-era low. It happened most recently 11 weeks ago, when weekly sales dipped below 5 million units for the first time under Nielsen/SoundScan's watch.
It wasn't always like this. Weekly album sales never once dipped below 8 million units from Jan. 9, 1994 (the oldest date that this historical information is available on the Nielsen/SoundScan site) through April 22, 2007. Weekly album sales reached their all-time peak in the week ending Dec. 24, 2000, when fans bought 45,372,000 albums. The biggest seller that week: the Beatles' compilation 1, which sold 1,259,000 copies.
But things started to slip after 2000 and especially after 2004. On April 29, 2007, weekly album sales dropped below 8 million for the first time. On Jan. 20, 2008, sales dropped below 7 million for the first time. On Jan. 18, 2009, sales dropped below 6 million for the first time. As noted above, on May 30, 2010, sales dropped below 5 million for the first time.
Will weekly album sales drop below 4 million at some point in the near future? One would like to say no, but the trend line speaks for itself. It probably won't happen this year. Sales traditionally pick up as we head into the holidays. The week before Christmas (or in some cases the week that contains Christmas) is always the busiest sales week of the year for album sales.
But even here the numbers are falling off. Weekly album sales in the run-up to Christmas topped 30 million units in every year from 1994 through 2006. In the week before Christmas 2007, they fell to 25,570,000 (despite the success of Josh Groban's smash album Noel, which was #1 that week). In the week before Christmas 2008, they fell to 17,164,000. In Christmas week 2009, they dipped just slightly to 17,142,000.
There's another way of documenting declining album sales. Four of this week's top 10 albums sold fewer than 30,000 copies. Two weeks ago, a record five of the top 10 sold fewer than 30K. This also marks a change from historical patterns. From the start of the Nielsen/SoundScan era through Sept. 2, 2007, no albums made the top 10 with weekly sales of fewer than 30,000 copies. That unhappy milestone was reached on Sept. 9, 2007, when Linkin Park's Minutes To Midnight made the top 10 with sales of just 28,000.
On June 6 of this year, Ke$ha's Animal made the top 10 with sales of just 20,000, an all-time low for the Nielsen/SoundScan era.
Overall sales will probably pick up next week. Three albums are expected to debut with sales between 60,000 and 75,000. They are Kem's Intimacy, Iron Maiden's The Final Frontier and Ray LaMontagne's God Willin' & the Creek Don't Rise. By contrast, this week's top debut, the soundtrack to the Disney Channel's upcoming Camp Rock 3, sold a so-so 41,000 copies.
|
|
Honeymoon
3x Platinum Member
Joined: November 2006
Posts: 3,256
|
Post by Honeymoon on Aug 20, 2010 14:05:11 GMT -5
It's an interesting article. Now that the economy is looking up a bit, hopefully that will help holiday sales 2010.
|
|
Cerbius
3x Platinum Member
Joined: April 2010
Posts: 3,703
|
Post by Cerbius on Aug 20, 2010 18:43:24 GMT -5
Such a depressing article. :(
Album sales will probably drop below 4 million some time in 2012.
|
|
|
Post by dbt88 on Aug 20, 2010 18:50:17 GMT -5
Weekly album sales reached their all-time peak in the week ending Dec. 24, 2000, when fans bought 45,372,000 albums 2000 was such a good year for sales. Sad, sad, sad. Well, it won't be long 'til they're gone but imo cds will never go away. As long as there are cars, dvd players, computers, there will still be albums made. Hopefully Britney can resurrect these sales
|
|
lugus15
Gold Member
Joined: April 2009
Posts: 790
|
Post by lugus15 on Aug 20, 2010 21:47:17 GMT -5
Actually P2P (which I don't consider to be piracy btw) has much to do with this all.
But they can still make $$$$ if they evolved. I'm no marketing or tech experts but it's really not rocket science to know that if they offered torrents with advertisements, they could stand to make a lot of $$$$.
|
|
Bob
7x Platinum Member
I can show you all my thoughts and where my demons play
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 7,341
|
Post by Bob on Aug 22, 2010 13:23:45 GMT -5
i don't see it as sad at all, unless from a nostalgic point of view... things like this change, always have always will.
|
|
Honeymoon
3x Platinum Member
Joined: November 2006
Posts: 3,256
|
Post by Honeymoon on Aug 22, 2010 14:24:42 GMT -5
Album sales will go up again, the music industry goes up and down like any other major industry.
|
|
CookyMonzta
Platinum Member
Joined: March 2006
Posts: 1,362
|
Post by CookyMonzta on Aug 22, 2010 18:40:55 GMT -5
Album sales will go up again, the music industry goes up and down like any other major industry. Fat chance. The pop world is fast becoming a singles-only market. Bet your horse money that weekly sales will drop below the 4-milllion mark by next summer. If the rate of decline continues, by 2019 we will see a market where the average of the top 10 selling albums of the year is less than 900,000, and they will be the only 10 albums going gold.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2010 18:45:23 GMT -5
itunes flips the switch to 'album only' then album sales will jump and singles will fall. They may someday have to (label pressure would demand it a some point)
That would be all that it will take
|
|
Cerbius
3x Platinum Member
Joined: April 2010
Posts: 3,703
|
Post by Cerbius on Aug 22, 2010 19:05:32 GMT -5
itunes flips the switch to 'album only' then album sales will jump and singles will fall. They may someday have to (label pressure would demand it a some point) That would be all that it will take If that were to occur, most iTunes buyers will either switch to another online music store that still sell individual singles or resort to piracy. Buying habits have changed and something like that isn't going to stop the majority of music buyers.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2010 19:12:03 GMT -5
the music market has switched back and forth between being albums dominant and singles dominant before - meaning buying habits have historically changed before and could again
|
|
Cerbius
3x Platinum Member
Joined: April 2010
Posts: 3,703
|
Post by Cerbius on Aug 22, 2010 19:18:31 GMT -5
the music market has switched back and forth between being albums dominant and singles dominant before - meaning buying habits have historically changed before and could again When was the last time the music market was singles dominant?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2010 19:25:00 GMT -5
I would think the 50's and 60's were pretty singles driven
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2010 19:29:16 GMT -5
Regarding buying habits, that can be driven by what is available. In the 90s singles were virtually eliminated which meant the only way to get your favorite song was to buy the album
If (hypothetically) , itunes were to sell only albums and singles as they were released to radio (The pre-90's business model), then albums would jump.
Itunes being the largest retailer would kind of drive the marketplace. Amazon and other outlets would follow suit. If labels were to pressure itunes to sell albums only and win, then this would happen to smaller outlets too.
Again this is a hypothetical situation, but a realistically possible one.
The current business model where everything is a single is the way the market is now but, that doesn't mean it will be that way forever.
|
|
Cerbius
3x Platinum Member
Joined: April 2010
Posts: 3,703
|
Post by Cerbius on Aug 22, 2010 19:41:57 GMT -5
Regarding buying habits, that can be driven by what is available. In the 90s singles were virtually eliminated which meant the only way to get your favorite song was to buy the album If (hypothetically) , itunes were to sell only albums and singles as they were released to radio (The pre-90's business model), then albums would jump. Itunes being the largest retailer would kind of drive the marketplace. Amazon and other outlets would follow suit. If labels were to pressure itunes to sell albums only and win, then this would happen to smaller outlets too. Again this is a hypothetical situation, but a realistically possible one. The current business model where everything is a single is the way the market is now but, that doesn't mean it will be that way forever. The problem is that in the digital age, buyers have much more freedom as to how they obtain their music. If that model is actually put into place in the future, then buyers have many other means to obtain what want. Buyers did not have that kind of freedom in the 90's.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2010 19:45:20 GMT -5
There is a finite number of outlets that legally sell digital singles. They do this through contracts with lables and artists. If they were to come in and say, it is either albums or nothing then that would change the legal market dramatically
Now the freedoms you are likely referring to are file sharing networks. Yes those exist and will continue to exist but they are higher risk (viruses and such) and likely less quality.
|
|
Cerbius
3x Platinum Member
Joined: April 2010
Posts: 3,703
|
Post by Cerbius on Aug 22, 2010 20:00:06 GMT -5
There is a finite number of outlets that legally sell digital singles. They do this through contracts with lables and artists. If they were to come in and say, it is either albums or nothing then that would change the legal market dramatically Now the freedoms you are likely referring to are file sharing networks. Yes those exist and will continue to exist but they are higher risk (viruses and such) and likely less quality. Such a move would not have much of a positive impact on the music industry, though. The consequence of such drastic actions is that the legal outlets face further alienation from a customer base that has already dwindled dramatically over the past decade. If people are unable to obtain what they want from legal means, then they most likely will resort to illegal means.
|
|
Honeymoon
3x Platinum Member
Joined: November 2006
Posts: 3,256
|
Post by Honeymoon on Aug 22, 2010 20:01:48 GMT -5
Album sales will go up again, the music industry goes up and down like any other major industry. Fat chance. The pop world is fast becoming a singles-only market. Bet your horse money that weekly sales will drop below the 4-milllion mark by next summer. If the rate of decline continues, by 2019 we will see a market where the average of the top 10 selling albums of the year is less than 900,000, and they will be the only 10 albums going gold. Albums weren't selling very well in the early 80s either, but single were doing well. And then the 90s/early 2000s had the strongest album sales the industry has ever seen but the weakest single sales by the early 2000s. Now it's the opposite again. I'm not saying this will be fixed by next Summer but I think things will eventually turn around in a few years, something new always comes along. I'm sure most people doubted how revolutionized the singles market would become when the CD single format was close to being totally dead and the market didn't yet crossover to paid digital downloads being prevalent.
|
|
Honeymoon
3x Platinum Member
Joined: November 2006
Posts: 3,256
|
Post by Honeymoon on Aug 22, 2010 20:03:51 GMT -5
An across-the-board price cut for albums (ie. all albums being sold for 10$ or under) would increase sales. Easier said than done obviously though
|
|
Cerbius
3x Platinum Member
Joined: April 2010
Posts: 3,703
|
Post by Cerbius on Aug 22, 2010 20:12:46 GMT -5
An across-the-board price cut for albums (ie. all albums being sold for 10$ or under) would increase sales. Easier said than done obviously though Agreed. I think they should experiment with lower pricing. Who know, perhaps sales might increase to a point where there is higher overall revenue in spite of lower pricing.
|
|
carrieidol1
Diamond Member
Joined: August 2007
Posts: 12,575
|
Post by carrieidol1 on Aug 22, 2010 21:14:32 GMT -5
it's so unfortunate.... artists today can never be compared to artists from when sales were good because they contrast is just so different..... it's truly just a shame...
|
|
Cerbius
3x Platinum Member
Joined: April 2010
Posts: 3,703
|
Post by Cerbius on Aug 22, 2010 21:17:26 GMT -5
it's so unfortunate.... artists today can never be compared to artists from when sales were good because they contrast is just so different..... it's truly just a shame... "Some Hearts" would've gone Diamond. :'(
|
|
CookyMonzta
Platinum Member
Joined: March 2006
Posts: 1,362
|
Post by CookyMonzta on Aug 22, 2010 21:57:41 GMT -5
Fat chance. The pop world is fast becoming a singles-only market. Bet your horse money that weekly sales will drop below the 4-milllion mark by next summer. If the rate of decline continues, by 2019 we will see a market where the average of the top 10 selling albums of the year is less than 900,000, and they will be the only 10 albums going gold. Albums weren't selling very well in the early 80s either, but single were doing well. And then the 90s/early 2000s had the strongest album sales the industry has ever seen but the weakest single sales by the early 2000s. Now it's the opposite again. I'm not saying this will be fixed by next Summer but I think things will eventually turn around in a few years, something new always comes along. I'm sure most people doubted how revolutionized the singles market would become when the CD single format was close to being totally dead and the market didn't yet crossover to paid digital downloads being prevalent. The singles market was artificially destroyed in 1999-2000 by the record companies in an effort to force consumers to buy more albums. It backfired because at the time singles were still in great demand (case in point, Cher's "Believe" went double-platinum in 1999, and Madonna's "Music" went platinum in 2000). When the industry tried to empty the singles racks, the public revolted and headed for the Web (via MP3). And as I recall, albums were doing quite well throughout the 1980s. It was 7 years before a single would officially go double-platinum again, with Daniel Powter's "Bad Day" in 2006 being the first download to do so. Meanwhile, album sales were dropping. Why is that? As far as the public is concerned, the quality of the top albums' contents has gone to the dogs fast. And that is exemplified by the fact that digital album sales have not even come close to keeping pace with digital singles sales. We now have quintuple-platinum singles on record, courtesy of the MP3 format. In 2000, there were 202 gold, 88 platinum and 32 double-platinum albums. Last year, only 62 went gold, 22 platinum and a measly 5 double-platinum. If the album sales decline keeps pace, we will have fewer than 20 gold albums in 2019 (I still think it could be as few as 10), because digital album sales are nowhere close to picking up the slack. The fat cats who run the music industry have absolutely nothing and no one to blame but themselves. No one wants to pay $18.99 for an album that costs less than a dollar to make, when the chances are likely that one or 2 songs are worth the money but the rest of the album is $#!+.
|
|
CookyMonzta
Platinum Member
Joined: March 2006
Posts: 1,362
|
Post by CookyMonzta on Aug 22, 2010 22:07:43 GMT -5
In 2000, there were 202 gold, 88 platinum and 32 double-platinum albums. Last year, only 62 went gold, 22 platinum and a measly 5 double-platinum. Let me rephrase that: In 2000, 202 albums sold 500,000 copies. If you check the charts, you'll find that quite a few of them had already gone gold before 2000. Same goes for 2009, where several of Michael Jackson's multi-platinum albums each sold at least another 500,000. You take them out of the equation, you'll have fewer albums going gold. This is particularly detrimental to the album releases in 2009, because so few new releases that year went gold.
|
|
Janhova's Witness
8x Platinum Member
Multi Pulse Award Winner
Joined: March 2009
Posts: 8,134
Pronouns: padam/padam
|
Post by Janhova's Witness on Aug 22, 2010 22:42:57 GMT -5
|
|
legend1982
New Member
Joined: July 2006
Posts: 346
|
Post by legend1982 on Aug 22, 2010 22:59:30 GMT -5
Fat chance. The pop world is fast becoming a singles-only market. Bet your horse money that weekly sales will drop below the 4-milllion mark by next summer. If the rate of decline continues, by 2019 we will see a market where the average of the top 10 selling albums of the year is less than 900,000, and they will be the only 10 albums going gold. Albums weren't selling very well in the early 80s either, but single were doing well. And then the 90s/early 2000s had the strongest album sales the industry has ever seen but the weakest single sales by the early 2000s. Now it's the opposite again. I'm not saying this will be fixed by next Summer but I think things will eventually turn around in a few years, something new always comes along. I'm sure most people doubted how revolutionized the singles market would become when the CD single format was close to being totally dead and the market didn't yet crossover to paid digital downloads being prevalent. I think the music business is just naturally a singles-based industry. It started that way and will finish that way. Since the Beatles "discovered" the album, the industry has been enamored with it, but I don't think it's natural. People like individual songs. Why pay for tons of material that you don't really like? The reason albums were successful in the 70s is because it was a new artform. The Beatles started a trend that lasted until the late 70s. But, even with those albums that were hugely successful (Rumors, Led Zeppelin IV, Dark Side of the Moon) they play like a singles collection - a lot of well known songs. Disco - a singles based artform - almost killed the album. And, yes, Saturday Night Fever was successful - but, once again, it plays like a singles collection. Wait, it is a singles collection. By the early 80s, people were over the album. But, MJ showed the industry how to sell an album: blatantly put a bunch of hits on it. Thus, album sales go back up. If you look at all of the albums post-Thriller that sold 5 million or more in the 80s, they all had at least 3 big singles released (an uncommon practice pre-Thriller). Other than greed, I can't understand why record companies decided to kill the single. When you have albums selling like Music Box and Let's Talk About Love, why do you need to sell more? That greed created Napster. If they would've left the singles market alone, we probably wouldn't have jumped aboard the illegal download train so quickly. And, who knows if iTunes would even exist yet. We've all gotten used to buying downloads and there's no way to stop this train. Case in point, me: I was a hardcore CD collector. I received my first CD for my 8th birthday in 1990 and amassed a collection of over 1200 CDs by the time I left for college in 2000. During my four years in school, I only bought two CDs (Music and All For You), but I downloaded more than 10,000 songs (illegally). The album was a trend. It is officially dead. And, might I add, there's nothing wrong with that.
|
|
cking33
Gold Member
Joined: July 2010
Posts: 958
|
Post by cking33 on Aug 22, 2010 23:38:54 GMT -5
There is a finite number of outlets that legally sell digital singles. They do this through contracts with lables and artists. If they were to come in and say, it is either albums or nothing then that would change the legal market dramatically Now the freedoms you are likely referring to are file sharing networks. Yes those exist and will continue to exist but they are higher risk (viruses and such) and likely less quality. But that hasn't stopped people from turning to them for the past 10 years anyway. If you make iTunes, Amazon, et al sell only albums, most people will go back to file sharing in a heartbeat. The only way to sell albums is to slash the price under $10, say $6.99 or so. You have to make it worth the consumers money to buy an album. Hypothetically, if you're a consumer, and you're sitting there thinking, hm... I can either buy this single for $1.29, or I can buy the album for only $5.70 more, and then wouldn't have to pay $1.29 for any future singles. You won't make up the sales revenue, but maybe you could make up a bit.
|
|
Honeymoon
3x Platinum Member
Joined: November 2006
Posts: 3,256
|
Post by Honeymoon on Aug 23, 2010 8:38:49 GMT -5
In this article he mentions how record labels got greedy in the early 2000s when sales were still at an all-time-high and they shot up the prices of their albums to collect even more revenue which perhaps caused the backlash eventually. Not everyone can realistically dish out $15 (which is what a lot of stores sell for an album, some even price them for $18-20) for every album they want so naturally they are going to take the more convenient route eventually (ie. illegally downloading).
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2010 9:40:31 GMT -5
Believe it or not, not everyone downloads illegally as the exclusive means of obtaining music. Sales would be at zero now if that were true. Places like Limewire may be free but they also come with quality issues and viruses depending on what you download.
As said above, people are used to downloading digitally. I agree.
If, for some reason, the market mandated that only albums are available and that track by track purchasing is no longer available then album sales would go up and single sales would go down. Yes, illegal downloading would continue but those who are used to PURCHASING music would shift to albums.
|
|
pnobelysk
Diamond Member
Joined: November 2009
Posts: 10,116
|
Post by pnobelysk on Aug 23, 2010 15:35:56 GMT -5
price cuts is the way to go. ive bought tons of songs. ive bought fewer than 15 albums. i only purchase albums when 1. Its an artisit i obssess (like kelly or cascada) or 2. if its on sale for under 8 dollars
|
|