Vinyl Prices

[lonesomexloveus]

sorry i'm not down with the 'i'm going to press 500 of these at $10 a pop, but mark them up to $20 because i'll probably only sell 100 of them' business model.

Maybe they aren't looking at it as as a "business model" ::gasp::

if you'd like to get nitpicky, and it would please you more, replace the phrase 'business model' with 'way of thinking'.

[moonbeams]

The only way I can get a new record for it's normal price is through amazon.jp (free same day shipping).

New records go for about twice the value they sell for in the US.

The other option is mail order with costs about $12 shipping for 1 LP.

[wtfomfg666]

Maybe they aren't looking at it as as a "business model" ::gasp::

if you'd like to get nitpicky, and it would please you more, replace the phrase 'business model' with 'way of thinking'.

I think your "way of thinking" is what is off.

Lets say your favorite band only has 100 fans, and those fans wanted that bands music on vinyl. Would the band be exploiting their fans if they sold their vinyl at $19.99 when for whatever reason it cost them that much to print each record? Would you demand them to sell the record at $13 and lose money, or conversely would you demand them to not even release their record if they can't price it at $13?

[sharkie]

if you'd like to get nitpicky, and it would please you more, replace the phrase 'business model' with 'way of thinking'.

I think your "way of thinking" is what is off.

Lets say your favorite band only has 100 fans, and those fans wanted that bands music on vinyl. Would the band be exploiting their fans if they sold their vinyl at $19.99 when for whatever reason it cost them that much to print each record? Would you demand them to sell the record at $13 and lose money, or conversely would you demand them to not even release their record if they can't price it at $13?

band should not be releasing it on vinyl, they should tour and work their asses off till they have enough "fans" to justify a bigger pressing.

[wtfomfg666]

If you'll probably only sell 100, press 100 and then keep your price as low as you can

either way it increase the price per unit. Lets say they only print 100 and it costs them $16 a unit for each record, would they be exploting fans if they sold it at $16-17?

Or you can step back and say to yourself, if only 100 people want this on vinyl maybe it doesn't really need to get pressed in the first place

Why not? If 100 people would like to see a record on vinyl, and are willing to pay a premium to see it happen what is wrong with providing it to them?

[lonesomexloveus]

if you'd like to get nitpicky, and it would please you more, replace the phrase 'business model' with 'way of thinking'.

I think your "way of thinking" is what is off.

Lets say your favorite band only has 100 fans, and those fans wanted that bands music on vinyl. Would the band be exploiting their fans if they sold their vinyl at $19.99 when for whatever reason it cost them that much to print each record? Would you demand them to sell the record at $13 and lose money, or conversely would you demand them to not even release their record if they can't price it at $13?

i don't have a problem with a $20 price tag if that's around how much it cost to print x number of records.

i DO have a problem with your idea of 'it's ok to press 500 records and mark them up a ridiculous amount because you think you're only going to sell 100 of those.'

[lonesomexloveus]

If you'll probably only sell 100, press 100 and then keep your price as low as you can

either way it increase the price per unit. Lets say they only print 100 and it costs them $16 a unit for each record, would they be exploting fans if they sold it at $16-17?

no. this is the whole point.

[wtfomfg666]

I think your "way of thinking" is what is off.

Lets say your favorite band only has 100 fans, and those fans wanted that bands music on vinyl. Would the band be exploiting their fans if they sold their vinyl at $19.99 when for whatever reason it cost them that much to print each record? Would you demand them to sell the record at $13 and lose money, or conversely would you demand them to not even release their record if they can't price it at $13?

band should not be releasing it on vinyl, they should tour and work their asses off till they have enough "fans" to justify a bigger pressing.

who exactly decides when a pressing is "big enough"? Many people would say a pressing of 500 isn't "big enough"

As long as people are willing to pay for it, and are happy with their purchase I don't see anything wrong with releasing a record in small quantities.

[wtfomfg666]

I think your "way of thinking" is what is off.

Lets say your favorite band only has 100 fans, and those fans wanted that bands music on vinyl. Would the band be exploiting their fans if they sold their vinyl at $19.99 when for whatever reason it cost them that much to print each record? Would you demand them to sell the record at $13 and lose money, or conversely would you demand them to not even release their record if they can't price it at $13?

i don't have a problem with a $20 price tag if that's around how much it cost to print x number of records.

i DO have a problem with your idea of 'it's ok to press 500 records and mark them up a ridiculous amount because you think you're only going to sell 100 of those.'

Well the 500 records was used as an example because in my experience the cost between printing 100 records and 500 records is smaller than most people think. Printing those extra 400 doesn't even double the cost in most cases.

So while someone might predict they will only sell 100 records, they very well might sell 250 records, or maybe even all 500(although very unlikely...or it's possible they will only sell 5 and be out basically out all the money they invested. Small local/indy bands don't have vast marketing data to predict the amount of records they are going to sell.

Will they end up making some extra money in the unlikely case that the record sells all 500 and not the 100 they predicted? Yes...but they still took on that initial risk of capital that no one else was willing to do, and for that I am not going to be upset with them being rewarded. I don't consider that exploitation

Like I said earlier there is a difference between printing Deja Entendu and marking it up 500% knowing damn well that it will sell through every copy...as opposed to printing Joe Schmoes local punk band for a premium while not having a clue as to how many will end up selling.

Now I do agree with you that it is wrong if somehow a band/label knows with absolute certainty that they will only sell 100 records, yet still prints 500 and pass the cost along to the customers. Unfortunately the economics of selling indie records rarely has any certainties.

[youspinmeround]

I would like to know how many people in this thread that are bitching about the cost of a record being 13, 15, 20 bucks bought a cup of coffee at starbucks this week for 6 bucks and drank it in 10 mins

When you put a price tag on a record, something that you can enjoy over and over again and own for your lifetime versus the price of saying watching a band play for an hour, buying coffee, going out to dinner, going to the movies...the argument seems so insane

[wtfomfg666]

I would like to know how many people in this thread that are bitching about the cost of a record being 13, 15, 20 bucks bought a cup of coffee at starbucks this week for 6 bucks and drank it in 10 mins

When you put a price tag on a record, something that you can enjoy over and over again and own for your lifetime versus the price of saying watching a band play for an hour, buying coffee, going out to dinner, going to the movies...the argument seems so insane

QFT

I imagine many of the people complaining about the price point of records are sipping on a starbucks latte that was marked up 1700% as they type away on their $1,500 Mac Book that was marked up 300%

I never understood why people decide to target a random kid throwing down $3,000 of his own money to release a record that could very well only sell 50 copies.

[lonesomexloveus]

I would like to know how many people in this thread that are bitching about the cost of a record being 13, 15, 20 bucks bought a cup of coffee at starbucks this week for 6 bucks and drank it in 10 mins

When you put a price tag on a record, something that you can enjoy over and over again and own for your lifetime versus the price of saying watching a band play for an hour, buying coffee, going out to dinner, going to the movies...the argument seems so insane

i talk about this all the time. i can honestly say that i have never purchased anything at starbucks aside from when someone gave me a gift card there. i hardly ever eat fast food, eat out, or go to the movies (unless someone takes me there on a date or it's a special occasion, etc) because i can't justify just the insane mark-up.

i also think it's a huge waste when dudes buy flowers for a girl on a semi-regular basis. give me a record instead, or something that doesn't last for a week, then die!

[RustyShackelford]

starbucks is so fucking stupid. my girlfriend works there and it makes me sick that she knows almost all of her customers drink orders before they even say it because they come in there so often.

she says a lot of them come in there 2-3 times a day. cmon dude. save yourself 60 bucks a week

[sciencekiller]

You are all awfully concerned about how others spend their money.

[RustyShackelford]

people can spend their money how they want. it just seems a little ridiculous to spend your money on a cup of coffee thats $6. but to each his own, im sure i spend my money in ways others would see ridiculous

[lonesomexloveus]

You are all awfully concerned about how others spend their money.

i am also concerned about how often people urinate. oh, and how many times a year they flip their mattress and change their sheets. AND the number of cheerios they consume in one sitting.

[booyahachieved]

You are all awfully concerned about how others spend their money.

i am also concerned about how often people urinate. oh, and how many times a year they flip their mattress and change their sheets. AND the number of cheerios they consume in one sitting.

Every couple of hours, twice a year, every couple of weeks and 0. Unless they're frosted cheerios... in that case the whole box.

[darknesscomesalive]

so you admit that there are other factors that might drive the price of an LP above your demanded price?

$13 in current dollars would have been worth about $4.50 or so in 1980 dollars. did new records cost $4.50 in 1980? oh, they didn't? they cost roughly twice that? interesting.

See Threat, Minor - Out of Step 12" EP.

PPD price in 1983: $3.50

Back in the analog age when I was a teenager (the 1980s) LPs were between 6-8 dollars each. Some stores would charge 9 or 10 for certain releases but that was rare unless it was a double LP which was usually 10 dollars. I believe Husker Du - Zen Arcade cost me a whopping 9 bucks when I bought it new when it came out. 7" cost 2.50 - 3.00 on average. It was rare that one would set you back 4 bucks. 12" EP's were usually 5 dollars.

By the late 1980s, the average price for an LP at the store was 8 dollars. Then those silver coasters came out and labels realized they could gouge the shit out of the consumer and make bank on the things. They'd be paying about 2 bucks or so per disc (including full packaging) and retail them for 15 or 16 dollars. Chain stores would charge 17 - 20 dollars for most of the things and it was the independent stores that actually had the better prices on CDs. Then a store called Best Buy came along and went national and decided that they would undercut everyone on the price of CDs, even taking a loss on them in an effort to get people into their stores where they'd inevitably spend more money on their other products. This helped kill off a lot of mom/pop stores which sucked but the upside was it also forced out places like Coconuts and Suncoast who had the highest prices anywhere. Prices on CD's got a little more down to earth for awhile after that and 12 bucks was becoming a lot more common.

Personally I wish LPs were still 8 bucks, but inflation happens. 20 dollars is too steep for a single LP. $15 is tolerable especially if it comes with a digital download as well. $13 seems more fair for a single LP. Honestly I think every single piece of vinyl should come with a digital download and when you have a label like Hydrahead charging 20 dollars for a 4 song 12" there is absolutely no excuse for them not coming with a download, especially when you think of the profit margin they have. If Dischord can charge me 11 dollars for a colored vinyl LP and have it come with a download, then no one can justify not including one for a 20 dollar, similarly packaged record.

Ultimately bitching about it on a message board isn't going to make labels change their pricing schemes. Speak with your wallets. While I love a lot of the music Hydrahead puts out, I won't buy their records anymore because their prices are insulting and they don't even try to soften the blow by including a download with my record. The last thing I bought on that label was the last Torche record and only because I bought it from the band for cheaper than it would have cost me to buy it from the label.

There is so much about this post I love.

[oterecords]

i also think it's a huge waste when dudes buy flowers for a girl on a semi-regular basis. give me a record instead, or something that doesn't last for a week, then die!

there should be more women out there with this mentality.

[RustyShackelford]

so glad i have a girlfriend who collects and hates flowers

[youspinmeround]

"And in between

Sips of Coke

He told me that

He thought

We were sellin' out,

Layin' down,

Suckin' up

To the man.

Well now I've got some

Advice for you, little buddy.

Before you point your finger

You should know that

I'm the man,

And if I'm the man,

Then you're the man, and

He's the man as well so you can

Point that fuckin' finger up your ass.

All you know about me is what I've sold you,

Dumb fuck.

I sold out long before you ever even heard my name.

I sold my soul to make a record,

Dip shit,

And then you bought one"

[Guest]

#firstworldproblems

[RustyShackelford]

[trifornais]

If you're talking about how the minimum wage in America is lower than it is in other places, then fair enough.

But if you're talking about dollar for dollar conversion, I think you're missing something. $1USD = $0.97AUD at the moment. So if a 12" costs $10 in America it should cost $9.70 in Australia right? But our 12"s are at least $20. That's $20.64USD. Unless the average Australian record collector is earning twice the amount of the average American record collector, the average American record collector is going to get the better deal.

Yeah Europe will be a little different to Australia, but I just felt like doing some simple math.

Why are Australian records so damn expensive? I want that Australian version of the new Samiam LP but $22 plus shipping to the US i looking at almost $40 ppd. If thats what its like for you guys there I don't know how you do it.

I'm led to believe there's only 1 or 2 pressing plants in Australia so most of it is done overseas. Take into account currency conversion and bulk shipping costs then you'll understand. It sucks but it pretty much never works out cheaper to get things overseas because shipping puts prices right back up ($16 for one LP usually).

[hobbledehoy]

yep, only two australian plants and they're both much more expensive than us or european plants. jacket printing is expensive here too.

it's always cheaper to go offshore, but then you need to factor in about $700-1000 for shipping, then additionally $400-500 on customs charges on a 500x LP pressing. it's no wonder a lot of LP's are $25-30 here.