Forum
Digital vs WalMart - AC/DC Out of Touch?
Take a look at this article about the strength of digital download sales and tell me AC/DC isn't hopelessly out of touch (not to mention totally alienating their fans) by signing an exclusivity deal with WalMart. news.music.yahoo.com At the least, if they're going to sign one of these deals anyways with a soul-sucking corporation, do it somewhere mildly cool, like Starbucks. If Dylan can do it, so can the Brothers Young.
I would not buy a CD from Starbucks because I don't even like their drinks. I've only had their tea few times and never had their coffee. But as for AC/DC being "out of touch," Garth Brooks, who has sold over 100 million albums without the aid of digital downloads. This was a guy who did all this in about 20 years. Also, Back In Black has sold all its copies without the aid of digital. Even though Tower Records did eventually fold, there have been stores that have operated for well over a decade that fold because they just folded. But honestly, I think the artist gets less out of digital sales than they do out of CD sales, which isn't much in itself. Also, The Beatles still haven't been included on iTunes. But ultimately, I'd prefer an album to be exclusive at Wal-Mart rather than Starbucks. A) Wal-Mart does make a whole lot more money than Starbucks. B) Starbucks isn't as big as Wal-Mart.
Travis, Garth Brooks made his sales while cassettes and CDs were still a viable medium. That was the past and really, quite a while now. You may have been just coming out of diapers and during that stretch of time (1989-2001) just hitting puberty and discovering rock and roll. Times change. For instance, AC/DC sold a majority of their '75-79 albums on record before 1983. After 1983, a lot of those sales figures switched over to cassette and by the 90s, cassettes were forgotten and the medium had changed over to CDs. During that period, I came out of diapers, hit puberty and discovered rock and roll, just as you have. Now CDs have basically gone the way of the dodo bird, but because of a record industry which signed a big fat contract with AC/DC almost 10 years ago (the Sony contract), they're forced to negotiate a dumbfuck idea whereby their new album will ONLY be available through Wal-Mart through a rarely used medium. I mean, sure, the odd person still bought cassettes by 1999, but wasn't AC/DC's record company much smarter at the time to ship the majority of the copies of their back catalog in CD format? It's like you're trying to convince me to buy a Model T when there's a Toyota Prius waiting outside my front door. The Model T is a nice decoration, a museum piece, an outmoded piece of technology from a past era, while the Prius is something practical that I can take anywhere and not cause a big stink doing it. The same can be said of CDs vs digital. As for the Beatles not being on iTunes, look at this: http://mashable.com/2008/03/09/itunes-beatles-deal/ Time has moved on. I recommend AC/DC's record company catch up to the present (or to at least 5 years ago, anyways) do the same.
Um, what about The Eagles deal? But AC/DC didn't even have to do this album. They could easily live off residual royalties from reissues and merchandise from the AC/DC online store. But I think that iTunes should have more "album-only" tracks. Allow radio-played singles to be downloaded from the core album tracks by itself (no "iTunes single") and have it where, if an artist requests, that the albums be sold as albums and not individual tracks. That's why artists like AC/DC and Garth Brooks won't use iTunes.
Sorry i had to cut in but..... 1)I don't give a rats ass where they will sell it. 2)We don't have wal mart thing in here so this is my "i don't give a rats ass" no2. 3)By the time it is release we will all have download it an listen to it so one of these days will get it on cd, sure. 4)As many of you know i collect rare ac/dc cd's so i'm more interested in the promos and singles rather than the album itself that i will get it in a store in Greece mmmm....Let me see i have at least 10 different store brands to choose from....What's the cheapest? ;) 5)I said Autumn travis, didn't i? ;)) The Unholly Sapator once again is correctamonto. 6)I've spread rumors that they will come to Greece even before the album was started (2 years again in acdcforums). I also have inside info (call it rumors for now) that they will play OAKA stadium in Greece. It's a huge fu^ker (the Olympics were helded there) and also c$cosuc^ing Maddona is playing in a month there. So Europeans get ready to travel here :) 7)I don't really care for the album, i care for the tour, so they can name it Highway to the bunny island for all i care. Tour time!!
Yeah, you've said Autumn. I think it was ACDC-fans.net about a year or year and a half ago where you theorized from your knowledge as to when they'd release it if it was released in 2007, and you said something then about an Fall release.
PS: Apple is stupid for spending that much on The Beatles. $400 Million so people can buy the same album for like the fifth time in a "new age" format. I for one say screw iTunes if they are willing to give in to deals that easily. Also, Paul McCartney's divorce must have hit him hard or he probably wouldn't have signed that deal. It was only about a week later that Paul would have to pay Heather approx. $48.6 Million (24.3 Million Pounds), that's about half of Paul's split of the the $400 Million. He was in need of quick cash, and CD sales and tickets to concerts weren't getting it to him fast enough. He didn't want to have to lose money to Heather Mills. But wait a minute, I just did a search on iTunes, and this is what came up: The Beatles with only one album titled "In The Beginning" with a one Tony Sheridan. Where's Strawberry Fields? Come Together? Helter Skelter? Huh? Not to mention iTunes only recently upgraded to 256 kbps AAC. I personally hate 128 kbps files.
Yes i remember the fall release. I was a year off of course ;) But i remember saying "IF" they release it in 2007. Anyway i said from back then that they will be playing Greece for the first time ever. My sources still say that so, will see...October is not long now...
Yep, October is only like, almost 4 months (it's only 4 days into July, it still counts for me) away. But ultimately, all the "news" will be either confirmed or denied whenever the bridge is crossed and the album drops. Wait, I think ONE AC/DC track is on iTunes. Big Gun as part of Last Action Hero's soundtrack.
Travis, I wasn't arguing that AC/DC wouldn't sell a lot of records through a Wal-Mart only deal; I was arguing that they are caving to record company pressure to sell a 99% dead medium through a soul-sucking big-box outlet. It is still the same thing as trying to sell cassettes in 1998 to an audience which has moved on to CDs. Yes, The Eagles did sell many, many copies of their last album in the Wal-Mart deal. But who did they sell to? Aging baby boomers who had bought MP3 players for their kids and grandkids, but were still using their old CD players. No doubt there are many AC/DC fans who exactly fit that demographic, but that also excludes the much younger potential fans who have moved on to digital or only think in terms of digital. Think of all the extra sales they could make through the digital medium. Of course, if they don't want to think about that - no matter. The 12-18 year olds of today will just borrow the CD from their parents and rip it to MP3 format, anyways, with no extra profits going to the band. Either that, or they will wait until someone has posted it to BitTorrents and download it six weeks before its official release date. Speaking of official release dates, I was disappointed when I read in one article linked to on this site that AC/DC were possibly going to release the album in August and then a more recent article said they were going with the traditional October release. Why don't they break the mold for a change and actually go with an August release? Given that the album will quite literally show up on BitTorrents somewhere around six weeks before its "official" release date of October, it would only make sense to get the record out there sooner rather than later to prevent too many downloads.
Well, I for one actually bought that Eagles album after hearing a few tracks from it. But wait, albums showing up in BitTorrent around six weeks before release date sounds promising to GNR fans, seeing as I found a "leak of Chinese Democracy" that is supposedly the final version. But they still have to sell to their older fans (i.e., fans who were around before mp3s). I think they feel that if they go all-digital it'll alienate their older fans. I for one hate my mp3 player because it's sound quality sucks, and when I had an iPod, it wasn't much better IMO. Once again, I don't even think AC/DC needed to do another album, they are at the point where if something happens, it's because they either want it, or it makes the most sense to their fans. Most of AC/DC's fans probably don't even use iTunes. AC/DC aren't looking to necessarily gain new fans with this album, if they wanted to do that, they'd have it at many stores. They are just looking to get an album into the hands of their fans. Same thing with Plug Me In, not looking to gain fans, just looking to treat current fans to something new.
You are right on a few points: 1. AC/DC should not go exclusively digital. For maximum profit, they should have both a digital and a CD release. 2. They do not need to release another album. I am of the opinion that all of the great bands out there do not need to release any more full-length albums anymore as they will only be a disappointment compared to when they were young, hungry and had an edge. Really, bands should just limit themselves to releasing 2 or 3 really great songs whenever they feel like it rather than an album with those 2 or 3 great songs and a bunch of filler. AC/DC could have saved themselves a lot of bad reviews over the past 25 years by doing this, since they implicitly acknowledge that most of their albums post-Bon are filler anyways by playing only 3-4 of them live per tour. As for your MP3 player complaints: 1) If you're using something non-iPod (especially a cheap one you can get at circuit city or so on), upgrade. 2) Once you have your better mp3 player, get yourself some decent headphones. No matter what mp3 player you buy, you're going to get the same $5 earphone from the same factory in Asia. This goes doubly so for iPod earphones - they charge $50 to buy a new pair of Apple earphones, but they're the same cheap set you buy in Circuit City but with a bit of branding attached. If you're that concerned with sound quality, plug your mp3 player into some decent headphones (but you will drop a lot of coin on them). 3) Code your MP3s at a high bit rate - 160 kbps minimum, but for CD quality, at least 320 kbps. If you notice a difference at that high bit rate, consider getting yourself a job as a sound engineer at a recording studio. Re: Guns'N'Roses. WTF? I'm not sure what you're trying to get at with that. What does it have to do with anything else you're talking about in the above post?
Um, I use 192 kbps MP3. But iTunes (used to) use 128 kbps AAC, iTunes+ uses 256 kbps AAC. But you mentioned torrents, I found a torrent of leaks from Chinese Democracy last month, and it's rumored that Chinese Democracy has been finished recording and been given to Geffen for release.
Axl Rose should just pay somebody to build him a website and release Chinese Democracy himself. As it is, many variations of it (depending on what musicians Axl hired and fired that week) have been leaked over the last 10 years anyways, including what is rumored to be the most present version, so it seems kind of absurd to release it on CD. Not only that, but it will be the most anti-climactic release ever and no matter how good the songwriting (and it doesn't sound too bad from what I've heard), Axl minus the Guns'n'Roses band (now known as Velvet Revolver) is just a washed up has-been who couldn't generate enough record sales to even begin to pay back the money he spent on studio time and hair extensions. If he has any respect for the greatness which once was, he will release this record as an Axl Rose solo project and leave the GNR name alone until the inevitable reunion following this flop and Scott Weiland's release from the VR project. We all know, of course, that he doesn't, so this will be one monster GNR flop and then there will be the inevitable GNR reunion.
Idont care if they sell it out of the trunk of their car please just hurry and release the CD. NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That's what I'm saying. Release a CD. I was watching a video on YouTube with a guy talking about recording an album and wanting to get it up on iTunes. Since when is iTunes the "God of music stores"? That title would have to go Tower Records, which still exists, only not in the US. Thank you iTunes, thank you for killing Tower Records in the States. Although you CAN buy stuff from Tower.com here in the States. Also, years later when iTunes is just a memory, you can have copies of the CD to hand out to people. Hell, a band I have on my MySpace is breaking up (I don't know the reason) and at their last show, they are gonna be giving away the last copies of their EP. In closing on my rants...iTunes is the "God of digital media stores" not "music stores."
I understand people being upset.The Stones have a DVD you can only get at BestBuy the Eagles theire new cd isonly at Wally World.I saw on VH1 where its sold over 3 million copies.Now the point Im trying tomake is if their music was sold everywhere instead of one place would they both have sold more than they did.Your leaving out a lot of people in between. small record shops Target and such.
A) I hardly ever go to Target. B) I agree with you on the record shop deal, but many times, record shops can cause more confusion on CDs than it's worth. Also, FYE sales used CDs for about half of what they sell a brand new CD for. A used CD does nothing for sells seeing as it's just a resell.
What Iam saying is sell the cd were ever a cd is sold peirod. forget the idea of just walmart.
The Walmart deal is allegedly only applying to the USA. The Eagles last effort was released that way, and went triple platinum in the states. AC/DC fans don't care where the album is going to be sold, they're going to buy it- wal mart or otherwise. I'm also fairly certain that the album will be available for purchase online as well, like with everything else these days. I would be very surprised that the new AC/DC album does not debut at #1 on billboard when it's released. Considering Motley Crue's new album sold 99,000 copies in the first week and debuted at #4... AC/DC are bound for a #1 album this year. By the way, AC/DC do have digital deals with both Verizon and MSN... Good for them that they stayed away from Apple. Speaking of soul sucking corporations! ;)
Unfortunately Sony is, if not no1, in the top 5 of soul sucking corporations. When the guys moved to Sony it (sony) released they discography again (digital remastered again?) and again (Mini Lp's) and Plug me in was released with 3 singles (a dvd with 3cd singles?!!!) and 3 promos (2dvd , 1 cd),oh and the 3pl-2bl DVD's. So me, as the collector asshole that i am, had to get them all :), all except their discography again (1 have 3-4 albums and 1-2 promos) and they mini LP's (i have 3-4 promos). Talk about robbery. Also i saw first time in my life an AC/DC commercial on Greek TV!! What i'm saying is they Sony is juicing out AC/DC's name. It may be good it may be bad. Good or bad, the fact is that Sony is a Soul sucking company.
Digital usually maximizes profit. Same price for the album as if you would buy it at the record store, except they don't have to pay to stamp the CD, ship the CD, print the booklet, or pay any of the workers that produce them. Factories, trucks. Nothing. Just click and download.
Sorry for double posting (what happened to the edit button??), but the Chinese Democracy songs out there are demos...merely demos. Albums generally take 2 months to get from the band handing it over to the record company, then onto store shelves. With the announcement of a new song being on Rock Band 2, it would suggest an album is very close. sorry, back to AC/DC!
Personally, I take offense to the idea that the new ACDC album will be sold at walmart AT ALL! Walmart has a thing for only carrying the toned down versions of dvd's or cd's. I purchased the movie "SPUN" at walmart. It was the edited version, Down to a rated R. Every other location worth its weight in spit was selling the UN-RATED Version of the movie. Its not just with DVD's either. I have seen CD's available only at walmart. They contain the "Radio Edited" version of a song, while everywhere else (including the radio) offers the un-edited version of the song. I personally feel sold out, thinking that ACDC is writing songs that conform to walmarts standards of decency. Fuck walmart. I will NEVER buy the new acdc album from there.