I don't customarily respond to these threads as it's pretty hard to sway any one's opinion especially when the first thing they say is "Yes, this is pretty much a rant." Nothing I say here is 'official' by any stretch but I feel like I might be able to shine a little bit of light on some of your points.
A simple, tidy, non-flashbased website design.
However clunky, working with certain platforms allows for more seamless integration of things that you would come to expect from a music store (ie persistent playback while navigating between pages without popups etc). Flash was also able to ensure that all people who could load the site we're having a similar experience dispite having different operating systems, browsers, etc. Luckily web standards are getting to the point where this is becoming less and less of an issue. At the end of the day we're really just looking to provide the best discovery experience and aren't really married to any platform in particular.
A good search function
Ahh search. What would you type into the search field to find a particular track? If you ask the next guy their response will probably be different. Do you want to be able to search by track name, remixer. producer, label, genre, sub genre, keywords, other songs that sound like this? Sorted by newest or most relevant? It's a lot more involved than most think.
A few months ago Beatport pushed out the "Beta New Search" which works much more like traditional internet searches. Some people love it, some people hate it, some people don't know the difference.
Full previews. Yeah, come on it's not like anybody will not buy a release because you can fully preview it. This is ridiculous and just show's the " off" attitude of most stores.
This has to do with publishing rights, associated fees, and precedents set by the old music world of physical sales and broadcast and is really more confusing than anything else here. We know people aren't going to play out these lower quality samples (at least no one I'd want to see play) so people snagging the previews isn't really the issue here.
reasonable prices. Yeah. 1.50 to 1.70 euros is NOT reasonable for a ing file. This is pretty much a "You gotta pay for piracy" attitude. A file format of your choice at the same price. Yeah WAV/FLAC maybe cost a bit more bandwidth, but did these stores ever hear about something like being "Customer friendly?". Hell yeah I love "supporting the artists" if they get 0.35 out of the 1.40 I paid
Music stores for DJs don't provide the same product as commercial sites. Most niche download site will agree that they're there to provide a valuable services that stretch far beyond providing a link to a file to be downloaded. We have an army of label managers and genre managers to comb the world looking for the next best sound. Sites introduce new artists and labels and constantly reinvest in our community. Can shops do it for cheaper? Possibly, but you probably wouldn't want to shop there. Also if the artist are only seeing .35 they'll want to make sure their label is collecting international sales royalties from ALCS/GEMA/etc.
Flame on!
Brick
quote:
Originally posted by osterzone
Guys...get off this ing vinyl argument. It's completely irrelevant.
So you paid five bucks for each vinyl single back in the day, who gives a ? Times change and so does pricing. Saying that people shouldn't bitch because you paid X amount for a track back then is admitting you're oblivious to modern day pricing.
The music industry standard for any digital track is 99 cents, regardless of length. This includes everything from top 40 artists to coffeehouse indie bands who get as much exposure as your typical supersaw trance producer.
So why then does the EDM market charge a minimum of $1.50 a track? No one else does this. It makes no sense.
Trackitdown and Junodownload have awful pricing. The latter even charges convience fees to process your CC. What the is up with that?
And Beatport is a joke. New tracks cost $2-2.50. I feel bad for all the labels and producers that come on this forum or post on their Facebook fan page that their new track is out and is a Beatport "exclusive" for a couple weeks. Don't any of them ing get it? There are more EDM listeners out there than DJ's browsing places like Beatport...not everyone is willing to bend over and pay whatever amount for your track...I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole if it's going to run me over $2.
If you want to look at where we are, you have to look at where we've been. The history of pricing matters and can explain much more than you'd think. To be frank I believe it is largely the reason why the dance music market today is saturated with (along with ease of entry which is another discussion for another day). DJs don't care about songs like they used to. Today everyone wants the hit of the moment they'll play for a month. DJs have become so concerned about filling their boxes with hits they've put enormous pressure on the industry to lower prices as much as possible. Don't think for a second that $0.99 is the industry standard through economics - Apple made it that way through iTunes and a lot of labels refuse to put their songs on there because the profit margin is so low. How can they get away with it? Easy - VOLUME! Don't forget that EDM is not pop music. A #1 on Beatport is very small compared to a #1 on iTunes and this makes a HUGE difference to the bottom line. We are a niche market, and just like the organic market down the street - you will pay more for it.
In regards to who is paying for tracks? Club DJs. If you're downloading crappy mp3's from a blog people will hear it on a club system, and you will look like an ass. This is why they can charge more - because their PRIMARY target market makes money from using them (admittedly a small profit..). This is also why they can get away with charging more for WAVs - because club DJs will pay extra for the sound quality.
In response to exclusives please don't make me explain simple business.. Of course they're going to try and secure exclusives to drive in new customers. Labels love it because they get a bigger slice of the profit margin, stores love it because it brings in new blood, and of course you're going to buy it because you can't get it anywhere else :) Don't think for a minute they're on your side - THEY'RE A BUSINESS, they're out to make money. Everyone in EDM fails to see this concept for some reason. Why do you think Armin is making a video game? Why do you think clubs book commercial DJs over indie producers? They're out to maximize profit - that's rule #1 for any business.
Now if you don't want to pay $2.50 it's very very easy - just wait two months until the price drops. Prices on Beatport drop by $.50 every month to $1.50 which is their standard price. To me that's more than fair, and if you can't afford $1.50 get a job. A good DJ should not be buying so many tracks that $1.50 is too much for them, and if they are, I would hate to hear one of their sets.
I'll leave it there though.. Not saying I love everything about every digital store - but someone's gotta play devil's advocate!
KrisA
quote:
Originally posted by a98
if every track would cost 0,99 cents I think A LOT more people would start paying for stuff.
Isn't this what the mainstream stores such as iTunes and 7digital are charging per track currently?
Woonyxoxo
quote:
Originally posted by Trancefxs
I have no idea how many of them pay, you are never going to get an honest answer about this, but I am pretty sure that the percentage of djs that pay for music is higher than the percentage of casual fans/listeners that do it as well, obviously in relative terms. This means that the beatport exclusive is just a way to try ripoff the casual/small djs that pay for the music they spin.
The whole "new tracks are more expensive" thing is just there to rip off the countless amateur DJs. A DJ can't wait 2 months until the prices drop so they gotta pay.
quote:
Originally posted by KrisA
Isn't this what the mainstream stores such as iTunes and 7digital are charging per track currently?
Yes. And Itunes has a LOT of of the newer edm releases. I can find almost all the new Dubstep releases I want on Itunes. On Itunes I pay 0.99 on Beatport 1.70. You can guess where I prefer to buy.
Trancefxs
quote:
Originally posted by Brick
Labels love it because they get a bigger slice of the profit margin
If labels love it why not every label is doing so? My impression, have no numbers to back this up though, is that the number of labels that do temporary exclusive releases have diminished in the last year.
Also what about the labels that release back-catalogue already available digitally as "exclusive new releases" and price accordingly? Obviously selling music is a business for them, but if you have to reduce yourself to cheat the casual fans/djs that don't check whether a track was already released in the past it is really sad.
osterzone
quote:
Originally posted by Brick
Don't think for a second that $0.99 is the industry standard through economics - Apple made it that way through iTunes and a lot of labels refuse to put their songs on there because the profit margin is so low. How can they get away with it? Easy - VOLUME! Don't forget that EDM is not pop music. A #1 on Beatport is very small compared to a #1 on iTunes and this makes a HUGE difference to the bottom line. We are a niche market, and just like the organic market down the street - you will pay more for it.
Bull.
Any bedroom singer/songwriter, rapper, band, etc. will release their stuff for only a dollar a track on iTunes. And all of them do it because it's the store with the biggest audience.
There are artists that are less popular than some producers, and their tracks cost less on iTunes. Volume means nothing when you take that into consideration.
quote:
In regards to who is paying for tracks? Club DJs. If you're downloading crappy mp3's from a blog people will hear it on a club system, and you will look like an ass. This is why they can charge more - because their PRIMARY target market makes money from using them (admittedly a small profit..). This is also why they can get away with charging more for WAVs - because club DJs will pay extra for the sound quality.
And what about the hundreds of thousands of people who aren't club DJ's? They have to take it up the ass?
quote:
In response to exclusives please don't make me explain simple business.. Of course they're going to try and secure exclusives to drive in new customers. Labels love it because they get a bigger slice of the profit margin, stores love it because it brings in new blood, and of course you're going to buy it because you can't get it anywhere else :) Don't think for a minute they're on your side - THEY'RE A BUSINESS, they're out to make money. Everyone in EDM fails to see this concept for some reason. Why do you think Armin is making a video game? Why do you think clubs book commercial DJs over indie producers? They're out to maximize profit - that's rule #1 for any business.
Why would anyone be attracted to a place that charges more than anyone else for music?
quote:
Now if you don't want to pay $2.50 it's very very easy - just wait two months until the price drops. Prices on Beatport drop by $.50 every month to $1.50 which is their standard price. To me that's more than fair, and if you can't afford $1.50 get a job. A good DJ should not be buying so many tracks that $1.50 is too much for them, and if they are, I would hate to hear one of their sets.
YAWN...
I've heard that argument so many times before and it's a joke...because I think something is expensive I should stop bitching and get a job? Please.
What if a cup of coffee cost $1,000. Hmm...you think that is too much? Get a job then :rolleyes:
osterzone
More labels should just host their own artists' releases and charge a buck a track.
That way they get more of the profit and keep the prices cheap for the fans. Avoid going through a third party like Beatport that hoses everyone across the board...
osterzone
quote:
Originally posted by Woonyxoxo
Yes. And Itunes has a LOT of of the newer edm releases. I can find almost all the new Dubstep releases I want on Itunes. On Itunes I pay 0.99 on Beatport 1.70. You can guess where I prefer to buy.
I do the same for AmazonMP3.
You can get off buying a track from there for 89 or 99 cents as opposed to Beatport's $1.49-$1.99 prices.
Brick
Oster you're missing a key part here - Beatport's target market is indeed DJs, not the average consumer. This is who they cater to with an emphasis on selection and sound quality. I, along with many others are willing to pay a higher price for both of these. Beatport knows it can't compete for the average consumer against iTunes and Amazon, so it chooses to make these two things it's primary selling point - not the price. If the price matters more to you than these things than go shop at Amazon or iTunes, it's really that simple.
Regarding iTunes - labels will indeed put their songs on it to sell additional units but that doesn't mean it's the most profitable. This is why so many of them put exclusives on Beatport and not iTunes, because they know their target market is not the average consumer and they can get a better profit margin there. More on this point below..
Trancefxs, obviously I can't speak for specific labels, but I think it depends again on target market. Take SHM's One or Eric Prydz recent releases - they know their target market are again initially DJs (who shop more frequently at Beatport for reasons stated above), so I've seen these two take advantage of the exclusive offers than labels that have more mainstream appeal on iTunes etc.. Keep in mind a BIG slice of that $2.50 goes to labels, which they definitely want. One of the biggest things people often forget is that maximizing profit is not the same as maximizing sales numbers. Why don't they just make every release a nickel and sell 10,000 more copies? Because the profits would be much much lower in the end. Beatport and the labels will always look for the equilibrium that maximizes profit, and what people are willing (not necessarily wanting) to pay at any given point in time. Because people want that new release so badly, they're willing to pay more for it meaning there is a different equlibrium price point than with older releases.
There is a reason for all of this madness, I only wish that people would try to understand it from the opposite point of view. If you've ever owned or worked for a label, you know what I'm talking about!
noikeee
quote:
Originally posted by Brick
Oster you're missing a key part here - Beatport's target market is indeed DJs, not the average consumer. This is who they cater to with an emphasis on selection and sound quality. I, along with many others are willing to pay a higher price for both of these. Beatport knows it can't compete for the average consumer against iTunes and Amazon, so it chooses to make these two things it's primary selling point - not the price. If the price matters more to you than these things than go shop at Amazon or iTunes, it's really that simple.
Fine, but then Beatport's own popularity is making it evolve to the point that not only DJs shop on it anymore. I've seen mates at work looking at it, surely it's becoming the place to be for the random guy that likes a little of dance music? I bet their target market is changing...
I think there's a few good points raised by the thread starter, however unfortunately Beatport find themselves in an absolutely dominant share of the market, and in this situation there's little motivation for them to offer a better/cheaper product to the customers. Not until a good rival emerges - and with Beatport trying to defend their position, further establishing their monopoly by offering exclusivity deals, it's not happening anytime soon.
Brick
quote:
Originally posted by noikeee
Fine, but then Beatport's own popularity is making it evolve to the point that not only DJs shop on it anymore. I've seen mates at work looking at it, surely it's becoming the place to be for the random guy that likes a little of dance music? I bet their target market is changing...
I think there's a few good points raised by the thread starter, however unfortunately Beatport find themselves in an absolutely dominant share of the market, and in this situation there's little motivation for them to offer a better/cheaper product to the customers. Not until a good rival emerges - and with Beatport trying to defend their position, further establishing their monopoly by offering exclusivity deals, it's not happening anytime soon.
Good point and I agree. Think you pretty much hit the nail on the head for the main issue behind the debate here! Should be interesting to see if they will try to cater more to both sides since it ain't easy.
