作者mistylake (那時 所謂的永遠...)
看板WesternMusic
標題[新聞] BB: 99-cent的BTW對Gaga唱片公司的傷害
時間Wed Jun 15 10:55:06 2011
※ [本文轉錄自 LadyGaga 看板 #1D-1vJty ]
Billboard的另外一篇關於Amazon 99-cent銷售的文章
探討Amazon的廉價促銷對Gaga所屬唱片公司所帶來的傷害
論點:
唱片公司鋪貨高達210萬張
如果唱片公司提前得知Amazon的低價促銷的話 他們一定會降低鋪貨量
一般而言 鋪貨量多為首週實體唱片預估銷售數字的兩倍之內
在Gaga這個例子則是達到了4.7比1
由於太多銷售量都被Amazon搶去 實體CD銷量降低
零售商店為了要庫存管理及提高現金 將會有大量退貨的現象
各家唱片公司對於Amazon的做法都感到不滿
Amazon主管
"Gaga專輯的價值當然超過99 cents, 所以當它被以99 cents的價格促銷的時候
大家才會瘋狂搶購-------如果不是這樣, 根本不會有人在意的...."
Let's get one thing straight. The Lady Gaga 99 cent sale for 'Born This Way'
was a great thing for the artist, and for Amazon. On a short-term basis, you
could even make the case that it was great for the industry.
The 99 cent sale was big mainstream-media news, and that certainly benefited
everyone, including other retailers. The album sold 1.1 million
units--662,000 digital, 449,000 physical--in its debut week ending May 29,
according to Nielsen SoundScan.
The story lasted all week in the press. It worked the same way that Target
and Best Buy circulars work: driving traffic to everyone's stores, not just
those two big-box chains, or, in this case, Amazon's site. I'd argue that the
glitch arising when Amazon's overwhelmed servers couldn't satisfy customer
demand was a good thing, too, since it made the sale even bigger news. Given
Amazon's impeccable service reputation, that blip won't hurt it long term.
For the cost of $3.3 million-that is, $8.40 wholesale minus 99 cents retail
times 443,000 scans during the two-day sale-Amazon put itself on the map as a
digital music merchant, in a way that the same amount of money spent on
traditional advertising could never have bought.
But whether the sale helps Interscope remains to be seen. First, Interscope
and Universal Music Group Distribution (UMGD) shipped 2.1 million album units
before street date. If they knew in advance of Amazon's sale, you can bet
they would've cut back on the initial CD allotment.
As is, Interscope has an inventory liability, with some merchants saying they
need to return product. And if some of that talk comes from a few retail
accounts being miffed over the Amazon deal, some is also due to simple math.
The CD album sold 449,000 units of the 2.1 million shipped, for a 21.4
percent sell-through. Second-week sales are at 174,000 units (136,000 CDs),
or 27.8 percent sell-through.
A decade ago, major-label shipment formulas called for shipping three units
for everyone expected to be scanned in the first week. Nowadays, with a more
efficient inventory replenishment, the ratio has dipped under 2-to-1.
But in Lady Gaga's case, UMGD shipped 4.7 units for each first-week scan.
Even another big hit single, which would ensure a sooner sell-through of all
2.1 million units, won't stop merchants now from returning the album to
improve their cash position. Interscope is probably looking at a few hundred
thousand returns, depending on whether the label comes up with a sweetener to
keep inventory in stores.
Competing labels and distributors may be even angrier than merchants about
the sale. "This was a really bad move," the head of an independent
distributor says. "Ninety-nine cents is almost free."
"If this happened in the 1990s, there would have been a big hue and cry from
retail, even bigger than what it was this time," the head of sales at a major
label says.
But these are different times. And in the digital world, "there are going to
be times when music is the toy in the Happy Meal," a UMG executive says.
Another Universal exec adds, "If Amazon tries to turn 99 cent superstar
albums into a regular thing, I would be outraged."
Yet, some suggest that a few label marketers themselves may now start pushing
such a pricing strategy to break an artist, or get an album into the No. 1
spot. Others say that, in the '90s, that inevitably would've followed-but not
in today's market, when profit trumps chart success.
For all the talk about how the industry has evolved, though, former
distribution executive Jim Caparro says, "It is shocking how consistent the
industry is with the past. Today, it is almost parallel to how traditional
music retail acted back then, with big accounts looking to steal market share
by pricing."
But one executive familiar with Amazon's thinking says the Gaga pricing won't
hurt the industry.
"Of course 'Born This Way' is worth more than 99 cents," the executive says.
"That's why it created such retail excitement and buzz, when it was offered
for 99 cents ... If it wasn't actually worth more, no one would have cared."
--
所謂真相
其實都只是表相...
http://friend.top1069.com/user/mistylake
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 69.140.81.243
1F:→ mistylake:我覺得文章中沒有提到因為99 cent所帶來的銷售量增加 06/15 10:55
※ 編輯: mistylake 來自: 69.140.81.243 (06/15 10:57)
2F:推 ronytw:我比較好奇文中提到的總數位銷量662,000,Amazon佔了多少 06/15 13:24
3F:推 loveyourself:唱片公司舖210萬張是代表原本他們就預估不算阿馬爽 06/15 14:16
4F:→ loveyourself:促銷也能破百萬張?似乎有點高估.. 06/15 14:17
5F:→ mistylake:可能覺得她上張專輯賣很好 期待度很高吧... 06/15 18:12
6F:推 IAmFreeAndU:若用首天預測的80萬來計算 210萬的鋪貨量是接近2:1的 06/15 18:13
7F:→ IAmFreeAndU:而原PO文中的4.7:1 是果 不是因吧?撰文者有點倒果為因 06/15 18:14
8F:→ IAmFreeAndU:能推敲的只有一點 本來要買15.99的人流到0.99的還不少 06/15 18:16
9F:推 Lovemei:Amazon約佔44萬張~ 06/15 18:45
10F:→ mistylake:恩 撰文者的意思是 鋪貨鋪這麼多是因為沒有預期Amazon會 06/15 19:10
11F:→ mistylake:賤價出售 如果唱片公司早知道的話就不會鋪貨鋪到4.7:1 06/15 19:11
12F:→ mistylake:這種離譜的比例 06/15 19:11
13F:推 IAmFreeAndU:我覺得文中第四段頗玩味的 XDD 哈哈 XDD 06/15 19:23
14F:→ kissahping:之前陰謀論成那樣,這篇新聞一出來現在顯得格外愚蠢。 06/15 22:13
15F:推 IAmFreeAndU:請問樓上看的懂嗎? 我想你所謂的陰謀論指的是我的文章 06/15 22:18
16F:→ IAmFreeAndU:跟我所言的"陰謀論"之臨時 並無矛盾之處耶... 06/15 22:19
17F:→ kissahping:沒有自知之明當然不產生矛盾。但也不奇怪,要是有自知 06/15 22:20
18F:→ kissahping:之明,也不會抓著沒有根據的論點一直回文了。 06/15 22:21
19F:→ kissahping:一路看下來,無論產業新聞或娛樂新聞都在打陰謀論者的 06/15 22:22
20F:→ IAmFreeAndU:那請你說說你的高見吧? :) 06/15 22:22
21F:→ kissahping:臉,可笑非常。 06/15 22:22
22F:→ HAKUNA0502:又開始了...唉 06/15 22:23
23F:→ kissahping:我的高見和billloung很類似,但我想你就是看不懂啊。XD 06/15 22:23
24F:→ kissahping:因為這一切一定都是唱片公司和Amazon合力搞出來的,絕 06/15 22:24
25F:→ kissahping:對不是Amazon破壞行情的行銷手法喔~一切都是唱片公司 06/15 22:24
26F:→ kissahping:的陰謀。→結果沒幾天就被BB打臉。XDDD 06/15 22:25
27F:→ kissahping:以台灣人的性格,無法了解這種行銷手法也是自然。:) 06/15 22:26
28F:→ IAmFreeAndU:你心平氣和後去翻翻舊文吧 沒人這樣搞行銷的 :) 06/15 22:28
29F:→ IAmFreeAndU:本文第四段都說 你還在堅持什麼? 06/15 22:29
30F:→ IAmFreeAndU:你數日前的諷刺推文 我就當眼不見為淨了 06/15 22:29
31F:→ kissahping:當然,我相信台灣人是絕對不會懂這種行銷手法。:) 06/15 22:30
32F:→ IAmFreeAndU:懂不懂是你的事 但你今天的酸 讓人感到無奈啊 哈哈 06/15 22:30
33F:→ kissahping:你也不用假裝看不見,因為我是真心這樣看你。 06/15 22:31
34F:→ IAmFreeAndU:連商業互利原則都不理解的論點 要成立 很難說服啊... 06/15 22:32
35F:→ kissahping:第四段只說了傳統廣告不會花這樣的錢,但這次很顯然並 06/15 22:32
36F:→ kissahping:不是傳統廣告...XDDD 06/15 22:32
37F:→ IAmFreeAndU:都說了 沒人這樣搞 你要認為這是"非傳統"也行啦... 06/15 22:35
38F:推 kissahping:夏蟲不可語冰,真是浪費時間。不過這些新聞陸續出來, 06/15 22:37
39F:→ kissahping:對比前後態度,真是格外諷刺。XD 06/15 22:37
40F:→ IAmFreeAndU:彼此 彼此 :) 06/15 22:42
41F:→ c98518:IAmFreeAndU真的不膩喔?到現在還在吵這個...=___=" 06/17 10:19