The good news, I guess, is that Amazon is going to use data collected from its currently existing store (read: find out which discs are selling well used and are relatively easy to license) to make new physical copies available through this CreateSpace thing. The bad news? There aren't really any titles available, and it's currently impossible to find them.

Amazon, Sony BMG, and EMI Music said that they will make hundreds of out-of-print albums available on Amazon's Web site through CreateSpace's Disc on Demand service.

Some of the titles that have been restored to availability include Hatari Soundtrack by Henry Mancini, Earthquake Weather by Joe Strummer, Motorcade of Generosity by Cake, Telepathy by Bill Stewart, Foreign Intrigue by Tony Williams, and Carryin' On by Grant Green.

A few of the recordings being made available through Disc on Demand are new releases rather than reissues, such as the upcoming title in KCRW's Sounds Eclectic series.

The arrival of brand-name, major-label content should enhance the credibility of CreateSpace's media on-demand service, which has yet to shake of the stigma associated with self-publishing. CreateSpace was born last August. It used to be called CustomFlix, which Amazon acquired in July 2005.

If you've been sitting around waiting for the opportunity to purchase the one somewhat tolerable Cake disc, that day has arrived, good sir! Otherwise, best of luck; as Maura found out yesterday, the somewhat unimpressive titles in the press release—all slapped up on Amazon with a $12.98 price tag (in the case of the Strummer disc) a copy—are all that the CreateSpace/Amazon partnership is willing to say that it's offering at the moment.

It's hard to understand what the real revelation is here for the consumer. Amazon makes a big connection with two major labels, and for what? A Henry Mancini soundtrack? Another KCRW comp to clog my shelf? In the age of endless opportunities to find out-of-print albums digitally, adding a plastic case and the (likely lousy) original liner notes isn't much to brag about. Anyone who has tried to work their way through the endless red tape involved in gaining the rights to an out-of-print title realizes the inherent difficulties involved in the process, but one can hope that Amazon, Sony BMG and EMI can get their collective acts together to give people something they might actually want, conveniently and at a decent price. If not, Europe's 50-year limit on copyrights will put quite a bit of stuff in our hands soon enough.

Amazon's CreateSpace Puts Out-Of-Print Music Back On The Market [Information Week]

This sort of thing is hardly new to the music business, as evidenced by every re-release with one or two additional tracks the major labels have thrown into the marketplace the last few years, but has anyone stopped to think that when a fan has to consider purchasing a new (full-priced, natch) version of an album they already bought to get one new track, two covers and a bunch of Web-linked video they might not be thrilled with the industry? Of course, this Atreyu disc is different than all the other stone-milking efforts. The bassist takes you on a video field trip to his favorite comic book store! The singer takes ju-jitsu lessons! Sign me up for two!

New Atreyu CD Packed With Extra Songs, Videos [FMQB]

Clive Davis might be running one of the few music entities anywhere making a profit, but that's not enough for the 76-year-old Rock & Roll Hall of Famer to keep his spot at the top. Like most things these days, his replacement, Zomba head Barry Weiss, features T-Pain.

The announcement surprised many in the music industry, as Mr. Davis, who has survived several executive suite setbacks only to rise again in a career that spans five decades, seemed to be playing a hot hand. This week's No. 1 album is the debut from Leona Lewis, the latest in a long string of divas that Mr. Davis, 76, has signed and shaped.

The latest album from Ms. Keys, who Mr. Davis mentors, has sold 3.4 million copies since its release last year, according to Nielsen SoundScan, and his division operated at a profit.

But the pop hits that Mr. Davis is known for delivering typically require the kind of expensive videos and marketing campaigns that labels are reluctant to finance at a time when music sales have been sliding. Sony BMG's decision to promote Mr. Weiss underscores the idea that hits alone cannot save the industry.

Mr. Weiss, 49, who also personally oversees many of his artists' creative decisions, has enjoyed his share of chart success with acts like Chris Brown and T-Pain. But he also has a reputation for tightly managing expenses, and being savvier about the digital revolution. T-Pain's hits, for example, have had considerable success as ring tones, the kind of high-margin, low-glamour products that are becoming more important to labels' bottom lines.

Clive Davis might have discovered Chicago and Janis Joplin, but those artists sounded lousy coming out of a cell phone's speaker, so it's time to step aside, pal, and let the young guys take over. I've never been a huge fan of Davis and his neverending stream of women with big voices making somewhat overwarmed pop records, but it's a little sad to see one of the old guard shoved aside. Davis will probably try to find a way to avenge this apparent setback, since he's bounced back from this sort of thing twice before. Even so, you have to wonder how long Davis' legendary "ear" would hold out as he approaches his 80s. Weiss' rise to the top means just one thing; we're coming just a step closer to every song released having either an appearance by Chris Brown or T-Pain

Longtime Executive Steps Aside at Sony BMG [NY Times]

No music editors here - the Vibe is simply a place where music fans collectively determine the value of the content. We display the best stuff as determined by the browsing activity of our users — what they watch, save, rate, and more. If something catches fire, it's displayed on the Vibe page for the community to see.

Ah, a world without music editors. What a paradise, right guys? Anyway, so far the site's most popular videos are U2's "Pride (In The Name Of Love)" and Afroman's "Because I Got High," with the U2 video being the only one that's broken the thousand-plays mark so far. Apparently there are more features on the way, although the fact that said features were previewed on the site's official blog with a Jerry Garcia quote makes me wonder just how forward-thinking they could possibly be.

PluggedIn [Official site]
Music-Video Pros Challenge YouTube [WSJ]

Bonneville is flipping the station's format sometime after the station changes hands to a exciting blend of news and talk, which seems to be their pattern when purchasing stations. In 2004, Bonneville traded Chicago's WLUP to the Emmis Corporation for three stations in the Phoenix area, including what was Power 92.3, an Urban Contemporary station, which is now a FM news/talk station featuring the loathsome Glenn Beck program and former House Republican J.D. Hayworth. Looking through the Bonneville station lineup, there's not much that isn't dominated by whiteness, unless you count the occasional spin of Gnarls Barkley's "Crazy" on Phoenix's "we play whatever we want" station The Peak.

The Los Angeles Sentinel's take on the situation references some of the troubling facts appearing in the midst of this seemingly everyday business transaction:

The official final airdate for the station is scheduled for April 11 and this week all of the 60 employees were notified of their fate and severance packages.

One thing that is for certain and that is the new format will not be urban or targeted to the African American populace according to Craig Haslam, Director of Communications for Bonneville International.

"We don't even know yet what the format will be," Haslam told the Sentinel this week. "There are three or four that we are thinking about but we will hold those close to the vest for right now."

When asked if the station would continue to be an urban station he emphatically stated, "Most likely not."

There was a subdued mood among the employees who were coming and going from their traditional lunch hours on Tuesday, but none were allowed to make any comment about the impeding change of ownership.

However, one of its own the outspoken and candid [V100 personality Michael] Baisden took difference to yet another Black station being sold to a White owned establishment during his show on Tuesday, but before his listeners could hear his comments he was silenced by music.

According to one published report, Bonneville prefers to have canned shows instead of local talent and is profit driven.

As someone who can't take much talk radio, I'm probably not the prime candidate for most of Bonneville's lineup, but is there some conflict in a wholly church owned conglomerate making these sort of moves in the radio marketplace, replacing what little diversity exists on the traditional radio dial with more "traffic on the 10s"?

Radio One Sells V100 for $137.5 Million [Los Angeles Sentinel]

According to Inside Radio, executives from seven companies will hit the road to meet with advertisers across the country to let them know terrestrial radio is a viable media option in the months to come.

Emmis CEO Jeff Smulyan says they'll deliver the message that radio is still "vibrant" and its reach has declined just 3% in the past decade. A Radio 2020 goal is to get manufacturers to include a radio on every mobile phone, PDA and MP3 player within five years.

Hey, only a 3% decline? If you picked a different sector of the industry, Jeff Smulyan, you'd be up for a big raise. Either way, is there anyone who's asking for a radio in their iPhone 2.0? I can't think of a single moment where I've thought "All this music I've selected for myself from an nearly endless well of online options isn't quite enough for me...I'd really like to listen to the nu-metal revival going on on my local alternative rock station right now." But maybe that's just me.

Radio goes on offense. [Inside Radio]

On the same query over the future for the Sony BMG alliance, Ostrowski chimed in with a handful of scenarios. "We might take over 100%, or sell our 50% to Sony so that they have 100% or we might continue the joint venture," he said. "All three outcomes are possible."

Bertelsmann and Sony's five-year retention period for the joint venture is due to expire in the summer of next year. "However, that doesn't mean that we then have to really do anything. Instead, it has to be decided by a partner. In the meantime, we will continue to develop our business jointly," says Rabe.

"We have good relations with our partner Sony and consensus on the strategy, and we see in our business a significant option value, particularly in the development of new digital business models," Rabe added. ...
The market for physical media showed a 17% decline, which was "only partially offset" by 40% growth in digital formats, the company admits. Digital sales accounted for 17% of total revenues during the period.

Bertelsmann Execs Undecided On Sony BMG Fate [Billboard]

The Raconteurs are happy to announce that in one week's time their second album, entitled Consolers Of The Lonely, will be available EVERYWHERE Tuesday, March 25th.

"Album" meaning: full length vinyl, CD and digital formats; and "everywhere" meaning: local mom and pop Indie retailers, corporate superstores, supermarkets, iTunes, Amazon, the band's own website and any other location that could get the record up and going this quickly (some places couldn't move this fast, so they will join in as soon as they can).

It contains 14 new recordings and is being released globally on Third Man Records in conjunction with our marketing/distribution partners, XL Recordings and Warner Brothers Records.

The album was mastered and completed in the first week of March. It was then taken immediately to a vinyl pressing plant. Then to a CD pressing plant. Then preparations to sell it digitally began. March 25th became the soonest date to have it available in EVERY FORMAT AT ONCE. The band have done no interviews or advertisements for this record before this announcement.

The purpose: to get the album to the fans as soon as possible and as we promised. We wanted to get this record to fans, the press, radio, etc., all at the EXACT SAME TIME so that no one has an upper hand on anyone else regarding it's availability, reception or perception.

With this release, The Raconteurs are forgoing the usual months of lead time for press and radio set up, as well as forgoing the all important "first week sales". We wanted to explore the idea of releasing an album everywhere at once and THEN marketing and promoting it thereafter. The Raconteurs would rather this release not be defined by it's first weeks sales, pre-release promotion, or by someone defining it FOR YOU before you get to hear it.
Another purpose was to also allow people to have their own choice as to exactly which format they would like to hear the album in IMMEDIATELY, rather than having to wait for their favorite format to become available. The band are also not releasing any version of this record that contains bonus tracks. Musically this album will be the same as the band created it no matter what format it is purchased in (The sound quality of each format however, is a different story. The Raconteurs recommend hearing it on vinyl, but the choice is of course up to the listener).

The band also prefer that fans buy the album as a whole instead of breaking up the tracks, but until iTunes and other digital services allows bands to release their albums with the option of NOT breaking it up, it will be sold in that fashion on those particular sites. On the band's website however, the album will be sold in its entirety as an mp3 at 320kb bit rate. Also in Japan, fans will be able to download the record via their mobile phones, as that is how a majority of recorded music is consumed there.

The reason we are announcing this release one week ahead of time is because of retail pre-ordering and stocking, information about this album's imminent release was bound to come to light and could be confusing to fans. Also in the event that the record leaks, we didn't want this method of release to be seen as a REACTION to such a leak. It's not. The actual worst thing about a leak is the usual poor sound quality, akin to watching a movie on a wristwatch instead of in a theater. Which for the album's creators is a bit of a letdown, but again, it is completely up to the listener.

There will be a video up on the internet for the first single, "Salute Your Solution", on the 25th as well, provided it gets edited in time. We just filmed it the other day!

We hope not to confuse anyone with too many options, or deny them the formats that they like best. The Raconteurs feel very strongly that music has worth and should be treated as such. Thank you to all those who respect music in this fashion, and thank you to our label partners for working with us to get this album to fans in as many formats as possible all at once.

So . . . whose move is it next? TV on the Radio? D'Angelo? Neutral Milk Hotel? The 1910 Fruitgum Company? Tell us what you think.

Among their requests from the FCC: the other half of the satellite spectrum being made available for a competitor, that the merged company be banned from broadcasting local material or receiving local ad money, and that decency standards be extended to the satellite realm. The decency standards requirement seems to be the most offensive request, since one would imagine that paying for content would eliminate any sort of obscenity clause. Clear Channel contends that "One of the primary potential dangers to free, over-the-air radio posed by this merger is siphoning popular, including 'edgy' content, with consequent loss of advertising revenue." I start to see their point now, because if satellite radio takes away the bit on the KISS morning show here where they pretend to offer roses for cheating spouses to send to their lovers, the media world as a whole would fall apart. You can't pull that sort of stuff off via satellite.

Clear Channel Lists Satellite Merger Demands [HITS Daily Double]

The new idea on the table: Internet service providers would tack a small fee ($5 for example) onto monthly bills for broadband connections. The money would then go to the music industry to help compensate labels, performers, song-writers and other artists for music shared online.

It is aimed at the people who illegally download free songs through peer-to-peer file-sharing services, like BitTorrent and Kazaa. Similar ideas have been floating around for a couple of years now, but it seems the music industry may be starting to see it as a viable option.

I don't think anyone actually associated with the "music industry" thinks this is likely, no matter how far down the sales totals for discs sink. Why on earth would Edgar Bronfman or Doug Morris trade in the possibility of selling music at full list price or even 99 cents a track in exchange for a paltry sixty bucks a year? For that matter, would the RIAA give up the potential lawsuit earnings from anyone who would purchase this imaginary download license created from pixie dust? It's certainly a great idea for the consumer...like a Sizzler for music, minus the potential for food poisoning or civil trials. However, there's no upside for anyone else. Internet service providers would be hit by the surge in torrent traffic, artists would be forced to bicker over who gets what share of the new limited revenue stream, and labels would have little to no incentive to actually release music. This entire scenario assumes that people would even pay the five bucks. With the entire recorded history of music closer to being available via Rapidshare everyday, it's a difficult proposition to convince someone that $5 is a better deal than free.

But, hey, what's more fun that discussing solutions to the industry's problems that lack any viability whatsoever, right?

Would You Pay a Fee for Legal Music File Sharing? [Washington Post]

Others suggest that Starbucks has expanded and altered its mix of music too quickly under Mr. [Ken] Lombard [head of Starbucks' entertainment division]. Before he took charge, the stores offered 5 to 20 CDs over the course of a year, according to the company. Now, Starbucks displays as many as 20 CDs at a time, adding six to eight new ones each month or so.

"They've lost that 'event' thing," a senior executive at one of the industry's biggest labels said, requesting anonymity because the label continues to market music there. "It would be like Oprah's Book Club having 15 books a week."

Starbucks says it still has the power to move record sales, including for its own label, which released Paul McCartney's "Memory Almost Full" last year. Though it shifts titles regularly, its sales of a CD over, say, six weeks typically accounts for 5 to 10 percent of the album's overall sales, according to music executives who do business with the company.

Mr. Lombard said that since taking a broader approach in the shops, "we have done nothing but continue to add value to the credibility that we've been able to build around the Starbucks voice."

Anyone who expects Starbucks (or any other corporation) to stock and sell fewer discs for the love of the music is a fool, but there was certainly a discernible shift when Lombard took over from Don MacKinnon, who originated the Hear Music line, and ran a mail order music catalog prior to the big gig. MacKinnon brought in the Ray Charles project which vaulted Starbucks into the music biz full time, but was shuffled aside when the potential profits became too difficult to ignore. A sad story, if somewhat predictable. That being said, anyone who has spent a minute or two managing a music store would be impressed by the deals Lombard has pulled from the record labels.

But last year, Starbucks began pushing for another discount on its purchase of new releases, lowering its price to $8 from $8.25, even while seeking the right to return up to 20 percent of its orders, according to people briefed on the company's negotiations. Those terms can equate to $2 or $3 a CD less than the price paid by other retailers, these people said.
And for emerging talent, it has raised the price of entry. When Starbucks merely stocks an album by an emerging artist on an outside label, it routinely seeks up to 50 percent of the total profit, including sales at retailers.
"What they were asking was not commensurate with what they were giving," said Gary Borman, the longtime talent manager behind acts like Faith Hill and Keith Urban, who has discussed deals with the chain. "We just walked away," Mr. Borman said.

To think, the stores I worked at asked for a few cleans and concert tickets to promote acts. It honestly never occurred to me to try to grab a percentage of the total profit. I should have dreamed bigger.

Does This Latte Have a Funny Mainstream Taste to You? [NY Times]

"While it's true that growth was centered on gaming last year, core gamers—those who played video games daily or several times each week—still spent most of their entertainment budgets on non-gaming entertainment," the NPD Group states. "These consumers remain more likely to buy a DVD or CD than they are to purchase a new video game. In fact, 58 percent had purchased a new DVD in the past six months, 46 percent bought a CD, and 43 percent purchased a game for a console...

"It's easy to lose sight of the fact that all of these entertainment categories are interlaced with one another, and they are all separately vying for a larger share of consumers' leisure time and wallet share," said Russ Crupnick, entertainment industry analyst for NPD. "New technologies, new devices, and digital-content delivery are changing the entertainment landscape in such a way that companies must keep tabs on the latest trends in competitive categories—not just on their own entertainment sectors..."

"We have this perception of hard-core gamers glued to their consoles, and immersed in virtual worlds, when in fact, they are still spending a lot of time with, and money on, music, movies, and other pastimes," Crupnick continues. "To be a winner in the entertainment wars, companies need to make sure they lead at every consumer touch point—from traditional retail to digital to wireless. In doing so, they stand a better chance of increasing their share of the time and money consumers choose to spend on their products."

Nostalgia for physical formats/record company digit-intractability aside, downloads might still be the way to go for any future music/game industry reacharounds, because if I could somehow get music to a video game console that also played DVDs I might not bother leaving the house for the two hours a day that I bother venturing into the sunlight as it is. Also are we ever gonna get a Mega Man game for the Wii or what?

Gamers Still Hot And Heavy For CDs, DVDs [Ars Technica]

Many in the music business are having the last laugh over the current prostitution scandal involving N.Y. Governor Eliot Spitzer, a stern reformer who caused no end of problems for the industry when he took action against the labels' alleged use of payola and bribes to influence radio airplay. Spitzer socked the four major record groups for a total of almost $31 million in penalties and the four major radio chains for another $12.5 million. For $4,300 a pop, that hires an awful lot of high-class hookers.

If only the guys from the majors knew that was Spitzer's weakness, they might have hooked him up with one of their connections to make that whole "payola" mess disappear, but it's a little late for that now.

Rumor Mill [Hits Daily Double]

It is rumored that Amy Winehouse's debut on the Billboard Top 10 album charts couldn't have happened without his help — he dedicated more than 30 posts to her talents in the months leading up to her CD's release.

So OK, this is like Idolator taking credit for American Idol's ratings, not to mention the fact that Back To Black sold all of 50,000 units in its first week. But since Perez is the media equivalent of the caricature that makes you realize you have a big nose, this proclamation also points out a flaw in the biz itself.

Who cares if you're responsible for Amy Winehouse's album selling 50k? If you're an A&R guy or a marketing guy or a promo guy actually working in the biz, it's crucial—your job depends on it. But who outside the industry gives two wet plops? Maybe once, but no more. The music biz has always made a fetish of power, and arguably their entire model revolves around it. How are you going to get interns to work for months or even years for little or no pay without conveying the sense that they have access to power's inner sanctum? How are you going to justify spending absurd amounts of money unless that's seen as a way of exercising your influence? How are you going to get artists to sign to abusive contracts unless they think this is the only route to success—that only the music biz understands the magic formula for selling records?

One day, soon, the music biz is going to have to come to terms with the fact that they're not like movies or TV—that significant portions of our economy do not depend on their performance. They're not oil tycoons anymore. They're just another vendor, trying to sell their wares to a public that uses it for instrumental purposes. Music has become, roughly, toothpaste: something most people buy when they need it and use it to make themselves look or feel better. And you don't see toothpaste vendors swinging their dicks around trying to convince people that they're important. If the industry could finally come to terms with this fact, if it could stop trying to mount elaborate (and exorbitant) tributes to its own importance, it might be able to settle down and get some business done. As long as people like Perez are still around, though, I'm not holding my breath.

Perez Hilton's One Night in Austin Presented by 5(TM) Gum [Yahoo!]

The approach has come in the past week and was described as "preliminary". It follows similar moves by MySpace, the leading social network site, which is discussing a MySpace Music joint venture with the four largest record companies - Universal Music, Sony BMG, Warner Music and EMI.

The record companies, all of whom declined to comment, view the recent talks as evidence of the importance of music to social networking sites as they vie for young audiences.

They are hoping that the sites, which have mostly served as promotional platforms for artists, will become sources of revenue at a time when their sales of physical albums are in decline. They are also eager to encourage a counterweight to Apple's dominant iTunes store.

Facebook, which declined to comment, has been working in recent months to bolster its music offerings.

In November, it introduced a way for bands to create their own home pages similar to those found on MySpace. It also has links to iTunes and offers applications from several internet music companies, including iLike, Last.FM and Pandora.

So, what's the brilliant idea that Facebook has? Free, advertising-supported streams—and paid downloads. I can barely contain my excitement either. You get the feeling that companies like Facebook have figured they've milked all they can from their current business model and are salivating greedily over what they see as a new revenue stream, but they lack any particular reason for iTunes' or Amazon's current customer base to really switch allegiances. The record labels see the massive number of hits these sites receive and see a customer base that has largely left them behind. It seems like a win/win situation on the corporate level, but what will the consumer get? More of the same? It certainly seems like it.

Facebook asks labels about music service [Financial Times]

Wal-Mart's rapidly shrinking music section might see an extreme makeover, pricing-wise, if Bentonville has its way. Welcome to the era of the $5 catalog piece!

According to sources, the Wal-Mart proposal would allow for a promotional program that could comprise the top 15 to 20 hottest titles, each at $10. The rest of the pricing structure, according to several music executives who spoke with Billboard, would have hits and current titles retailing for $12, top catalog at $9, midline catalog at $7 and budget product at $5. The move would also shift the store's pricing from its $9.88 and $13.88 model to rounder sales prices.

Executives at the Bentonville, Arkansas-based discounting giant wouldn't comment on the specifics of their promotion, but Wal-Mart divisional merchandise manager for home entertainment Jeff Maas acknowledged the proposal. "When you look at sales declines with physical product, and you have a category declining like it is, you have to make decisions about what the future looks like," he said. "If you have a business that is declining and you want to turn it around, it really takes looking at it from all angles."

Maas referenced the DVD business as a model for tiered pricing. "(It) has been around for years and has worked very well," he said.

While it seems that Wal-Mart's proposal might be D.O.A. at the majors, the threat always looms overhead that the superretailer will take their shelf space and go home, since that would free up more retail area for ten-gallon jars of pickles. These sort of threats are nothing new; during my brief stay at a major music distributor, then-top dog Best Buy demanded an entire year to pay back their music invoices, essentially making the discs a consignment product that could be returned well before payment was due. The majors said no, and Best Buy slipped down the marketshare list before they could pull off their attempt to not have to pay for anything ever. With iTunes on the rise, will this sort of threat be frightening enough to create a new price structure across the industry? Unlikely, but I do like the idea of filling out my nearly complete Alabama discography at a vastly lower price per disc.

Wal-Mart stirs CD pricing pot with multi-tiered plan [Reuters]

And once the majors do come calling, the payouts that they demand may be too much of a strain on the companies' resources—once again, let's point to imeem, which entered into an agreement with Universal that cost them a lot of money up front, and even more with each stream. Digital Music News talked to a few executives who say that the labels' demands for payouts are strangling their business.

Majors frequently demand massive upfront costs for the rights to their catalogs, as well as lopsided percentage payouts. "There's too much squeeze up front, and companies can't survive five, seven years," explained David Del Beccaro, president and founder of Music Choice. "This is a ten-year transition."

Indeed, promising startups are frequently forced into economic turmoil, thanks in part to immense licensing overhead. Ted Cohen, founder of digital consultancy TAG Strategic, jokingly noted that labels are squeezing "the money parents donated to a startup," though downtrodden entrepreneurs can sadly relate.

Then again, no one is forcing startups to sign the dotted line, or enter the treacherous digital music business in the first place. "It's not unreasonable for us to want to get paid for our content," said a less sympathetic Ted Mico, head of digital at Interscope Geffen A&M.

One might say that there's a difference between "getting paid for content" and "imposing terms that make the relationship between labels and their licensees seem like one between a payday loaner and the guy down the block who will never, ever get current on his 99%-APR loan," but I didn't study business so I might just be showing my naivete slip. (And given that this post is illustrated with a decidedly unauthorized version of that Judas Priest clip that's been up for months now, is the game of whack-a-mole/loansharking that the majors are tirelessly engaging in really worth all the trouble, not to mention the lawyers' billable hours?)

Is Breaking The Law the Secret to Success in Digital Music? [Post I.T.]
Entrepreneurs Lash Out Against Lopsided Major Label Deals [Digital Music News]

Leading the pack of candidates to pick up the job is Universal Music Group, Disney's current distributor in the US.



While no decisions have been finalized, the situation highlights the challenges that EMI faces as it tries to keep its artists, managers and the other labels it distributes happy at the same time it attempts to dramatically transform itself under new private-equity owner Terra Firma.



Disney's international distribution pact with EMI expires in a year, and with EMI in flux, a source close to Disney said the company is keeping its options open in deciding whether to renew or go elsewhere.



Multiple sources said Disney also is trying to determine if the sale of EMI to Terra Firma gives the company an immediate out under a change-of-ownership clause in its deal.



Some industry watchers have suggested that if the Jonas Brothers album is distributed through Universal, it will serve as a test case for Disney eventually moving its entire business over to the music giant.

This seems like a pretty drastic move, but can you blame Disney for wanting to make sure every tween girl in Europe will be able to get her hands on that sweet J-Bro. nectar? Those boys are the geese that lay the golden eggs. Plus, Disney's got other gems in its stable that deserve only the best in international distribution:

To be sure, Disney's business is valuable to whoever distributes the catalog. Hits like the soundtracks to "High School Musical" have become global smashes. The soundtrack to last year's "High School Musical 2," distributed by EMI, sold 3.5 million copies outside the US, and Disney has a crop of budding stars to export around the world, including "Hannah Montana" star Miley Cyrus, and Grammy-nominated rockers Plain White T's.

Not the Plain White T's! Is no corner of the globe safe from the reach of "Hey There Delilah"?

Musical Mouse Games [New York Post]

According the insiders Bernstein interviewed, the superstar producers driving the urban market at the moment are also likely to be its downfall. Artists like Rihanna are seen as interchangeable, but the payments made to those producers are astounding in an era of rampant music business belt-tightening: they're often paid $50,000 or more up front, and then receive radio and ringtone residuals, as well as chunks of the money garnered by selling songs to television or film. In contrast to the standard label practice of paying money up front for a song, then owning nearly all of its backend, producers like The-Dream and his partner retain the publishing rights, withholding what can often be the most lucrative long-term source of revenue. Bernstein details the benefits of that arrangement for The-Dream, which include a nearly endless stream of $100,000+-priced vehicles that he paid for in cash. ("I'm going to have, like, 10 cars by the time I'm done," he tells Bernstein, "and I'll pay for all of them up front. Credit just gets you f—-ed up.")

Of course, when the music industry perceives that someone's getting rich before they are, there's likely to be grumbling.

While hit-makers have been cashing massive checks since the Motown era and earlier, it's hard to think of a time when the music business has been this strapped for cash. In the most recent fiscal quarter, both Sony/BMG and Warner Music reported losses, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. And the economics of "urban" music are frequently cited by industry players as being the worst in the business today, with leading rappers and producers demanding far more money than they can guarantee delivering.

"Because of these producers and the massive fees for guest appearances by rappers, the risk-reward ratio in urban music is upside-down," says Tommy Silverman, the head of Tommy Boy Records, which launched the careers of De La Soul and Queen Latifah. "The cost no longer justifies the investment."

Another former label head, speaking on the condition of anonymity, says, "All of these labels are spending a fortune, hoping to sell like it's 1995. It just doesn't happen. How do you spend $250,000 on one song? It's crazy."
And being hot one minute doesn't guarantee success the next. In 2005, producer [Scott] Storch seemed to be on fire, with massive hits for 50 Cent, Chris Brown and Lil' Kim. In 2006, the labels paid him millions of dollars to produce records for more than 30 artists, among them Jessica Simpson, Nas, The Game and Paris Hilton. Not one of his songs even reached the top 10....

Recently, there's been some evidence that a correction is coming. Going forward, some are predicting that the labels will begin to move away from the high stakes poker game of manufacturing big stars and invest more resources in developing artists who write and produce their own music. This would likely leave fewer blockbuster acts, but would lead to more constant returns and lower overhead, they say. Even Nash says his own attempt to go solo is partially a way to generate another revenue stream without introducing the high costs associated with building pop stars. "With my projects, it's not really about me," he says. "It's us saying we can deliver this type of product at a lower cost. We're going to write 300 f—-ing songs a year anyway. So don't give me front end. I don't need any money. But give me ownership, and I can make money from record one, when it sells the first copy."

It's probably wise for The-Dream to develop as many revenue streams as possible, because the story told there should be a wake-up call for any producer looking for a six-digit payday. While having Timbaland on a track can even turn what sounds like a third-rate Fray song into a hit, Storch's recent dry run and the (for now) fading Neptunes have to put some fear into executives who are desperate for the immediate financial gratification of digital sales and ringtone purchases. With Soulja Boy and the like creating hits on their own that can be picked up by labels without the development costs normally associated with the cultivation of hits, why bother paying up front—and through the nose—for a hit when someone might just make one in their bedroom that can be had for half the price?

Don't Stop 'Til You Get Enough [WWD]

One has to wonder who is setting these expectations in the first place, and if they should consider medication for their delusions, but it's a little late now.

Trans World Entertainment Corporation (Nasdaq: TWMC) today reported a comparable store sales decrease of 12% for the nine-week period ended January 5, 2008. For the five-week period ended January 5, 2008, comparable store sales decreased 13%. Total sales for the nine-week period were $378 million compared to $469 million for the same period last year, a decrease of 19%. Total sales for the five-week period decreased 24% to $264 million compared to $348 million for the same period last year. The Company operated 14% fewer stores, on average, during the nine-week period as compared to last year.

"Sales for the holiday season were well below our expectations," commented Robert J. Higgins, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Trans World Entertainment. "As a result, we expect to report a net loss for fiscal 2007 in a range of $15 to $20 million."

For the eleven-month period ended January 5, 2008, comparable store sales decreased 9%. Total sales for the period decreased 12% to $1.192 billion compared to $1.353 billion during the same period last year.

At very least, Barnes & Noble had the Harry Potter book to prop up "disappointing music sales"; what did FYE have to offer? An excellent selection of High School Musical 2 posters? The question isn't really how Trans World will react, but possibly whether next Christmas you'll be able to purchase list price discs from one of the company's retailers at all.

Trans World Entertainment Reports a 12% Decline in Comparable Store Sales for the 2007 Holiday Season [PR Newswire]
Music Sales Weak at Barnes & Noble [Wall Street Journal]

If you can believe it (and I have a hard time believing it myself), XM decided they didn't want to make millions of dollars in payments to Starbucks for the next two years.

Things seemed to be going so well. Starbucks has Hear Music, its own commercial-free music station on XM, where it pumps out the same artfully jazzy tunes that fill the air in its java hubs. The companies also have spent the past few years cross-promoting CDs.

And even though Starbucks itself has been a shareowner disaster lately — it shed 42% of its value last year—it's a growing force in music. Paul McCartney's latest studio CD, which Starbucks released, was a runaway success.

But even though the relationship seemed symbiotic, XM was making payments to Starbucks as a partner. Now that XM has grown at a quicker pace than Starbucks — and since rival Sirius has grown even more quickly than both companies in that time — paying $22 million now is apparently a better business decision than to keep sending money to Starbucks until the original termination date in 2009.

It's hard to conceive of any segment of the music industry that's considered to be growing, but XM has found a way to pull it off, albeit not as successfully as Sirius. Regardless, it's somewhat difficult to see what XM was getting for their money, since Starbucks seemed to pull little effort into plugging the radio station, instead focusing on the connection with iTunes and their own label, and the radio station did even less to return the favor, with the Paul McCartney and Joni Mitchell discs receiving only a few spins last year. At some point, the power of Feist prevailed and made the XM Cafe station powerful enough even without the Starbucks endorsement.

XM Spits Out Coffee [Motley Fool]

To see the awkward position music labels are in, look no further than Amazon's own CD listings. Amazon's customers are increasingly turning to used CDs. Third-party sales by merchants across all Amazon products, much of those for used goods, now account for 32% of all the site's transactions. That's up from 19% in 2003. Just one example: On the Amazon page for Mary J. Blige's album Growing Pains, released Dec. 18, a new version sells for $7.99, but directly below it is a used version going for $6.45.
That steams the record labels, which don't make any money on sales of used CDs. The music industry can ill afford to have anything else pinch its faltering CD business. Album sales dropped another 15% last year, according to the most recent sales figures released by Nielsen SoundScan. That follows years of CD sales declines, which forced big retailers like Tower Records into bankruptcy and prompted other large chain stores to reduce the shelf space devoted to CDs.
Record executives decline to comment publicly about Amazon's new- and used-CD sales practices for fear of alienating their new partner for online sales. They say in private that Amazon should be extending a good-faith effort to the record labels by altering their policy to sell used and new together. "Nobody is happy about this but it's a little touchy right now with the new download store," says one executive. "You will begin to see a lot of pressure exerted on Amazon going forward," says another executive.

Amazon, on the other hand, sez it's totally lovey-dovey with the majors and that they shouldn't be getting salty over any ports in a sales storm at this point, especially a retailer where "sales of new CDs increased after the used business began to take off a few years ago." It does make you wonder what kind of "pressure" could even be exerted on Amazon at this point given the lack of other outlets Amazon's size and Steve Jobs' general intractability on pricing, which Amazon has knowingly played on to make it seem (not entirely incorrectly) like a haven for the beleagured big boys, a "grand experiment" (as BusinessWeek puts it) that at least provides labels an Apple alternative without doing the work of setting up their own online retail environments.

Slouching Towards Digital [BusinessWeek]

The interview holds precisely zero surprises: people are curious how uninspired Madonna can make her last record for Warner Brothers (I'm reading between the lines to what he was assuredly really thinking on that one), U2's new record apparently sounds like The Joshua Tree, Mariah Carey's sticking with the Jermaine Dupri produced tracks that saved her career. But what's odd is that the entire piece skips over the actually interesting lede to discuss whether Usher can sell nine million discs again:

Doug Krizner: The music business has been in a funk, as sales continue to drop. In 2007, the top-selling album was a Christmas project, second-best was a soundtrack to a teen-themed Disney movie.
Well, there's a wealth of highly anticipated releases in the new year. Let's get a preview now from Bill Werde of the trade magazine Billboard....
Krizner: How much is at stake for the recording industry this year?
Werde: Well, you know, the sales of recorded music continue to decline, and digital growth is not offsetting that. So I think what happens is for major labels, there's more and more pressure for their blockbuster releases to really connect. Usher's sales are now over 9 million copies on the last album, and you know, we haven't had an album like that in the music business since then.

So, anyone want to place bets on whether Usher's repeatedly delayed album will hit those sort of numbers again? Anyone? What would have been vastly more interesting than the revelation that The Joshua Tree was "a really popular album for U2", is what an executive editor at Billboard thinks is in store for an industry whose top-selling albums were "a Christmas project" and "a soundtrack to a teen-themed Disney movie." Is it worth getting excited for albums of new material by existing superstars when its inevitable that a new Disney created pre-teen star or some other novelty record aimed at those purchasing precisely one disc a year jamming the racks at Target will assuredly trump whatever the majors throw out there?

Labels anticipate year's big hitters [Marketplace]

Peter Strickland, senior vice president of sales and marketing for Warner Brothers Nashville, doesn't think that artists of Brooks' caliber ever completely withdraw from the pop mainstream, not as long as their music remains commercially viable.

"There's always an opportunity to engage the marketplace without making it a full-time job, especially for people who have reached a certain stage in their career," Strickland said. "We've seen many artists do that, from Fleetwood Mac to Rush. It's only when you actually say you've retired that it becomes a marketing angle."

Marketing ploy or not, Mike McGee, executive vice president of North American operations for Ticketmaster, believes it would be great both for Brooks' fans and for the beleaguered music industry if his official return to performing came sooner rather than later.

"Garth Brooks has intangibles that most acts don't," McGee explained. "Garth has a unique ability to relate to his fan base. He's genuine and you can't fake that. He's also never lost sight of the fact that the fans are the people who put him where he is. I was in Kansas City on opening night, and it was unbelievable. It was like a Mitch Miller singalong. Everybody knew every word of his songs. He sold out nine shows in less than two hours. Few acts of any stature or ability have that kind of drawing power."

Ticketmaster's McGee sees Brooks' commitment to affordable record and ticket prices as an expression of loyalty to his fans. "In these days of $100 to $200 ticket prices, he's keeping his prices down in the $25 to $30 range," he said, referring to the face value of tickets for Brooks' shows in Kansas City.

"Garth thinks that where he has his tickets priced is fair to his fans," he added. "Before they went on sale we had a bridge call, and he got on the phone and said, 'Where are we, boys? What do you think?'

"He's hands-on, but not meddlesome hands-on," McGee said. "He's knowledgeable hands-on, and he can articulate that knowledge without being condescending. He's a genuine guy, and the marketing of that sincerity will transcend a lot of things that have changed in the marketplace."

Thom Schuyler, a senior executive at RCA's country division from 1992 to 1998, had this to say when he addressed a gathering of the group Leadership Music in Nashville recently: "There is much spoken and written about Garth Brooks' remarkable achievements, but our opinions of him, positive or otherwise, are irrelevant. The people have voted. He has reached them. He did it with shrewd, global marketing [and] with an astonishingly exciting live show.

While Brooks' new single for Ultimate Hits isn't exactly tearing up country radio at the moment, the spins on Garth's catalog make him the tenth most played artist in the genre so far this year, ahead of Carrie Underwood, so the desperate pleas for his return have the numbers to back up the dreams of floating RIAA plaques and increased revenue. Although it's difficult to think of any artist that could provide a jumpstart to the flailing music industry at this point, the odd take from these fawning execs is that one of those quoted manages to excuse Brooks' refusal to join the digital music game: "He will not allow his songs to be cherry-picked and downloaded. If you want to get his music you have to buy the whole album, not just your favorite tracks. Not many people could pull that off." Which seems strange considering those precious albums have been repackaged and diced up into various greatest hits collections over the last few years. While thinking of the guy who sang "The Thunder Rolls" as the potential savior of the pre-digital way of selling records might be unsavory to some, he might be one of only choices left.

Brooks Still Has The World On His Strings [LA Times]

"Consumers are getting leery," says Geoff Mayfield, Billboard's director of charts. "If there's an expectation that a high-profile artist will relaunch an album later, you've given them a reason to think twice" before they buy.

Early in the trend's cycle, deluxe editions were issued alongside the original. Some artists, including KT Tunstall, Avril Lavigne and Fall Out Boy^*, adopted that model this year.

"Consumers would rather have the choice up front," Mayfield says. "In the early '90s, the enhanced package came out the same day. Then someone got the idea to wait and goose sales later in the album's trajectory. It does give a second life to an album. But artists need to be careful. Consumers can feel played."

There are exceptions. Mayfield expected an outcry when Beyoncé's B'Day resurfaced in deluxe form last April, seven months after its initial release. Instead, many owners of the first edition ponied up for the second's wealth of extras. Sales rose to 126,000 copies the week the deluxe version came out, up 903% from the previous week, according to Nielsen SoundScan.

"The added tracks almost doubled the content, which kind of makes the first one obsolete," Mayfield says.

Given that the relationship between the industry and its consumers has been frayed at best, "deluxe versions" like these just seem like the crassest kind of cash-in, meant to squeeze money out of the diehards while shoving aside space in big-box stores that could be used for things like deep catalog. (Especially since among the albums being reissued by labels for a quick cash-in is the recent release by Boys Like Girls; and to build on the "simultaneous deluxe edition" examples floated above, there's another version of Fall Out Boy's Infinity On High coming out in time for the holidays, too, with a bonus CD. ) Obviously reissues are part of the music industry's lifeblood—hello, ad for Led Zeppelin's Mothership playing on my TV right now—but these new versions of albums that are, in some cases, less than a year old aren't only just giving people more reason to download illegally or buy music by the dreaded track-by-track format, they're completely depleting the reserves of "bonuses" for 20th-anniversary editions of these albums. Or is this yet another example of the music industry planning for its inevitable obsolescence at the earliest possible date?

Will fans buy Timberlake's 'FutureSex'/deluxe edition, too? [USA Today]

^*

"It must not have been selling well, plain and simple," said legendary former concert promoter Barry Fey. "They must have been sure it was going to bomb, and now they just want to recover whatever they can. That, and the act doesn't want to be embarrassed."

Peter Ore, regional vice president of booking for Live Nation, declined to comment.

Moving Maroon 5 to the Fillmore makes sense for Live Nation, which owns the venue outright. At the Pepsi Center, Live Nation would have needed to rent the space from owners Kroenke Sports, and would not have shared in coveted receipts from food and alcohol sales.

"The difference is night and day," said Square Peg's Steinberg. "It's very cost-effective. I'm sure that Live Nation was aggressive about the deal that moved the show down, and obviously the band doesn't want to play an empty room.

"You see a band playing an empty room and there's definitely a vibe that it's over, and nobody wants that. Everybody wants to play a packed room."

As the Post notes, Denver is the major destination for concerts in the Rocky Mountain region; it has the largest potential draw of any city between Chicago and Phoenix. But that may have the unfortunate result of too many promoters trying to horn in on the area's ticket-buying power, which then drives up prices.

"Denver's always been unique because people go to shows, but there are too many promoters overtaxing it," said Steinberg, who formerly worked in Denver but is now based in Seattle. "Everybody's looking for volume. It's attractive to agents and managers, but it creates bidding wars. It's one of the harder markets in the country not only to get the talent, but to sell it."

All promoters contacted for this story blamed high ticket prices for fans' general disinterest. Competition for the consumer dollar normally drives down price, but in the concert business, promoters scramble to offer artists the highest guarantee to snag them for their company.

"What's killing our business is these high ticket prices," said Fey. "The competition for the groups is so torrid that you pay them more than they're ever worth. The only way to recoup that is to raise ticket prices."

Fey pointed to the example of the Rolling Stones, a band he booked in 1972 for $6.50 per ticket. Adjusted for inflation the ticket would cost about $30 today, but the Stones now charge some fans hundreds of dollars to attend their shows.

"Acts think a certain level of hotness demands a certain guarantee, and you have ticket prices that go along with that," said Outback's Jason Zink. "If those aren't matching what the public wants to buy, it just doesn't sell."

This is similar to the note of alarm Philadelphia concert promoter Sean Agnew sounded earlier this month, when he started a message board thread about this fall being a bad season for many of the venues and promoters in his area simply because more artists are trying to rely on touring for too much of their revenue, resulting in a glut of too many bands touring too often and demanding too much money. (The whole thread should be eye-opening reading for anyone who thinks indie bands will—or should—make the money they lose from lost CD sales on the road; lots of artists chime in as well.) Together, these two stories puncturing holes in the "road = best way to make money" myth makes me wonder if we should expect to see another slew of stories like this from the merch side, about oversupply of stuff resulting in the slow contraction of that industry, in six months or so.

Concert promoters get reality check [Denver Post via TDS]

When an unanswered question about your new line of music players is whether you can use it to play MP3's, it might be time to go back to the drawing board, but Morris and his blind rage towards Jobs and his music marketplace must prevail! Irving Azoff says so!

While the details are in flux, insiders say Morris & Co. have an intriguing business model: get hardware makers or cell carriers to absorb the cost of a roughly $5-per-month subscription fee so consumers get a device with all-you-can-eat music that's essentially free. Music companies would collect the subscription fee, while hardware makers theoretically would move many more players. "Doug is doing the right thing taking on Steve Jobs," says ex-MCA Records Chairman Irving Azoff, whose Azoff Music Management Group represents the Eagles, Journey, Christina Aguilera, and others. "The artists are behind him."
Morris and Jobs were once the best of allies. When Jobs began pushing his idea for a simple-to-use download store in 2003, Morris backed him. Industry insiders say Jobs felt that Morris, unlike many other music executives, understood that they had to adapt or die. And in the years that followed, Apple and Universal moved in near lockstep.
But before long, Morris realized he and his fellow music executives had ceded too much control to Jobs. "We got rolled like a bunch of puppies," he said during a recent meeting, according to people who were there. And though Morris hasn't publicly blasted Jobs, his boss at Universal parent Vivendi is not nearly so hesitant. The split with record labels—Apple takes 29 cents of the 99 cents—"is indecent," Vivendi CEO Jean-Bernard Levy told reporters in September. "Our contracts give too good a share to Apple."...
With the Total Music service, Morris and his allies are trying to hit reset on how digital music is consumed. In essence, Morris & Co. are telling consumers that music is a utility to which they are entitled, like water or gas. Buy one of the Total Music devices, and you've got it all. Ironically, the plan takes Jobs' basic strategy— getting people to pay a few hundred bucks for a music player but a measly 99 cents for the music that gives it value—and pushes it to its extreme. After all, the Total Music subscriber pays only for the device—and never shells out a penny for the music. "You know that it's there, and it costs something," says one tech company executive who has seen Morris' presentation. "But you never write a check for it."

It seems to be a common theme with music companies that any amount of money that isn't flowing directly into their coffers is heading the wrong direction, but it seems somewhat ridiculous to bite the hand that feeds with Apple, especially to go in the direction of furthering the perception that the music itself has no value. As wonderful as the collected catalogs of the biggest three music distributors are, a player that only works with their music is going to be worthless to most consumers when they realize that "This Is Why I'm Hot," "Walk It Out," or "We Fly High" aren't available. As important as the feelings of the artists might be to Doug Morris and Irving Azoff, it's hard to imagine any device that shorts the consumer so throughly getting off the ground.

Universal Music Takes on iTunes [Business Week]

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the cutout bin of history, the "vinyl disc".

CD sales are falling. Vinyl sales are rising but not for a mass market. So the music industry has come up with a new format in the fight against dwindling revenues.
Rock band Fightstar is releasing its next single on a disc that is vinyl on one side and a CD on the other. Its record company Gut admits the vinyl-disc is a gimmick but hopes it will capture fans' imagination...
The two-in-one disc, which can hold around three minutes of music on the vinyl side and 70 minutes on the CD side, was created by Germany's Optimal Media Production.
Mr Holmes - who is credited with revitalising Tom Jones's career, discovering Right Said Fred and popularising Crazy Frog - says that if the format proves popular his company could use it for other bands. "The music business desperately, desperately needs to invent new formats; the CD is an antique, it's 20 years old."
Gut plans to put all its singles out on memory sticks (USBs) from next year as it joins other record labels in developing new ways to release both singles and albums.

While its admirable that Fightstar is thinking outside of the box, one might wonder why their record label doesn't just take their money and throw it directly in the trashbin, or whatever those Brits call the garbage can. The problem with the music business wasn't ever primarily about the format in which the music was presented (although that's certainly part of it), but that music consumers were sick of having garbage like the new band from a former member of Busted shoved down their throats. You could put their music on a disc made of gold (has someone tried that yet?) and hand it out with porn and candy, and people would still feel cheated. Why? Because the music on the crazy new gimmick of a format was made by a former member of Busted, and released on a label owned by the guy who discovered Right Said Fred. Bands have certainly tried the all-digital release before, but the reason that anyone cared about last week's "new media" event was because it involved a band people actually like.

Then again, you do you trust at the end of the day: some temp blogger, or the guy who invented Crazy Frog?

Is this the future of music? [the Guardian]

And with the 25-and-older demographic expanding, Cantone remains confident that casino bookings will reflect their tastes. "It used to be where an older market went to have their entertainment fix. But now the twentysomethings are going. If you're young, want to go out and play poker or blackjack, then catch a cool concert, where else can you go?"

Good question. A better question might be: "What kind of acts are they going to have to book to bring 'cool twentysomethings' into a casino?" Because right now, the booking seems stuck in the old model—b-list musicians playing to distracted gamblers—unless Phil Lesh at Jimmy Buffett's Margaritaville is supposed to excite fans of blog band du jour. The Arcade Fire and the never-ending shrimp cocktail...now we're talking.

Music Business Hits Jackpot At Casinos [Yahoo]

Assume that the retailer cutbacks come in the lower side, say, 25%. Assume that those sales drops are somewhat mitigated by digital sales and by die-hard CD buyers who seek out discs at other outlets, like Amazon—and call it a 20% sales drop. The U.S. is a third of global music market, and the retail cutback won't affect the rest of the world, so the decline there shouldn't be as steep — say, 10%. That's still a 14% drop industrywide (that number would vary depending on how much exposure a big label has to the U.S.)

But a retail cutback could be much more damaging than any single year revenue decline. In a worst-case scenario, and one we think is quite likely, a cutback sets off a self-fulfilling prophecy: Retailers stock less music, so consumers have less to choose from, and then buy even less, causing retailers to stock even less. Repeat.

The only good news for the big labels: They see it coming, and are scrambling as fast as they can to adapt. The bad news: There's little they can do.

The only consolation? The big-box stores are pulling back the floor space they devote to DVDs, too. OK, that probably doesn't make the music industry feel better. But the plan as outlined by SAI—and the likely scenario of less choice resulting in fewer purchases, thus helping that predicted decline along—makes me wonder how much more important jockeying for those few spaces in big-box stores' aisles will become. Will artists' and labels' rush to offer exclusive extras and special editions for big-box shoppers, which has angered some people in the past, will finally peter out, or will "special editions" turn into the only way that labels can assure space for their wares on those stores' shelves?

Music Decline to Accelerate in 2008 With Retailer Cutbacks [Silicon Alley Insider]
[Photo: Soc