I always really like the NYTimes graphics. They do a good job displaying info, and (not applicable to this one) their flash graphs are always more helpful than annoying.
I agree. Edward Tufte would approve.
Music Sales
11–20 of 43 posts
Re: Music Sales
#12Unfortunately, no doubt these numbers do not count non-label/unsigned record sales as "thedark" mentioned. This is due to the fact that according to major labels and the FCC, these numbers don't count, simply because they don't receive a cut of those sales.
Once we develop a legitimate platform for unsigned musicians to use and compete with the major labels, their artists, and the money they make. Then we will begin to see some numbers that include unsigned artists. Because once they begin to make competitive noise, the labels and FCC will certainly try to begin to get involved and want to regulate as they always do. But as long as the independent artist stays technically "unsigned", there's nothing the regulators can do to control the music, or get a piece of the earnings.
Once we see this happen, those downloaded album and singles sales numbers rise dramatically. Force the RIAA to count you. Record and be heard.
Re: Music Sales
#13Looks to me like CD sales were a bubble, and there's no reason to expect the music industry's success to continue as it has for the prior decade.
It's not a bubble, the product just became obsolete with newer technology and demand for industry slacked with internet marketing. CDs were (and still are to some extent) a fantastic media for storing music, but mp3 has huge advantages.
The late 90s was also the end of the pre-internet era, where the dominant way to market music was radio, TV, and print. In 1995 you had to try hard to discover music outside the mainstream. In 2005 you could go to MySpace and listen to an hour of music without ever hearing a top 40 song.
Re: Music Sales
#14Looks to me like CD sales were a bubble, and there's no reason to expect the music industry's success to continue as it has for the prior decade.
It's not a bubble, the product just became obsolete with newer technology and demand for industry slacked with internet marketing. CDs were (and still are to some extent) a fantastic media for storing music, but mp3 has huge advantages. The late 90s was also the end of the pre-internet era, where the dominant way to market music was radio, TV, and print. In 1995 you had to try hard to discover music outside the mains…
Well, there was a period when CD's were the cool new thing and everybody was buying all their record collection on CD again.
So, not only the labels were selling music by new artists at their usual pre-Internet levels, but there was also a big demand for old music in CD format. I suspect many older people that would not usually buy new music ended up buying many of their old albums again.
Re: Music Sales
#15Gross sales is irrelevant. A download costs virtually nothing. No CD to make, no shipping, no store front, not cover printing. The RIAA is misleading people with these types of numbers, no doubt they have lost money, but really, it isn't as bad as they pretend.
Re: Music Sales
#16What are the sources of this numbers? What digital distributers are counted? Are they all? Are these the numbers from only sources directly represented by the RIAA? Does this count non-label record sales? Does this count revenue from sales of records like Radiohead's "In Rainbows" release? There is more that can be asked. I am not sure what I can conclude or deduce from this graph; when there is a small nagging glare…
There's a box around download album sales reading $0.60 - what's that? 60c albums only? A lot of the value for units shipped comprises of the cost of the physical value of the media and its transportation. Is the comparison legitimate if it compares the value of CDs shipped VS download sales?
Too bad the gravy train has ended for the RIAA - recouping losses by suing file-sharers is like a kid throwing a violent tantrum when their toy broke.
Re: Music Sales
#17What are the sources of this numbers? What digital distributers are counted? Are they all? Are these the numbers from only sources directly represented by the RIAA? Does this count non-label record sales? Does this count revenue from sales of records like Radiohead's "In Rainbows" release? There is more that can be asked. I am not sure what I can conclude or deduce from this graph; when there is a small nagging glare…
There's a box around download album sales reading $0.60 - what's that? 60c albums only? A lot of the value for units shipped comprises of the cost of the physical value of the media and its transportation. Is the comparison legitimate if it compares the value of CDs shipped VS download sales? Too bad the gravy train has ended for the RIAA - recouping losses by suing file-sharers is like a kid throwing a violent tantr…
> There's a box around download album sales reading $0.60 - what's that?
I think that's in millions (or billions) of dollars. Notice that there is also '1978: $8.1' next to LP/EP and '1988: $6.1' next to Cassette. I think they are trying to label the peak of sales (those black bordered sections) with the volume of revenue.
{edit} It says 'billions' at the top {/edit}
Re: Music Sales
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
The question they must be asking themselves is how to repeat the bubble. The last one came from instituting a new technology which (in the popular imagination) rendered the old technology obsolete, and triggered a lot of repurchases. What kind of disruptive force, if any, could trigger this again?
I know! I know! Passing a bill to force the entire population of the U.S. to join BMG. Obviously the answer was MP3s, but I think they might have missed the boat there...
> Obviously the answer was MP3s, but I think they might have missed the boat there...
The problem was that it was too close to their current bubble at the time. These are the kind of things that large businesses try to artificially separate out so that they can maximize profit. Why bring in a new technology now when I can wait until later and make more money in the interim?
Re: Music Sales
#19I always really like the NYTimes graphics. They do a good job displaying info, and (not applicable to this one) their flash graphs are always more helpful than annoying.
NYT does a great job of pushing the limits in infovis, but they don't always hit the mark. This vis seems to show an approximate fixed scale on the y-axis, which is good. It means the differences in heights between the blobs are relevant. The fact that they layout multiple charts along the y-axis seems acceptable, in fact it allows for quick comparison between graphs. However, the x-axis is unlabeled and unclear. It seems to roughly represent time, but has no origin. One can sort of deduce approximate time but without a clear label I can't dive deeper into the information. This seems to be the failing of many info visualizations I come across these days. They either optimize for the "quick glace" or the "in-depth analysis" when you can get a happy medium by usually just tweaking one or two aspects of the display (in this case I would argue a labeled x-axis).
Re: Music Sales
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a box around download album sales reading $0.60 - what's that? 60c albums only? A lot of the value for units shipped comprises of the cost of the physical value of the media and its transportation. Is the comparison legitimate if it compares the value of CDs shipped VS download sales? Too bad the gravy train has ended for the RIAA - recouping losses by suing file-sharers is like a kid throwing a violent tantr…
> There's a box around download album sales reading $0.60 - what's that? I think that's in millions (or billions) of dollars. Notice that there is also '1978: $8.1' next to LP/EP and '1988: $6.1' next to Cassette. I think they are trying to label the peak of sales (those black bordered sections) with the volume of revenue. {edit} It says 'billions' at the top {/edit}
ok, well iTunes sales were $3.34 Billion in 2008. That's over double the combined RIAA figure of album and singles sales. http://tr.im/yZ7K I remember reading that Apple doesn't take a large cut of that amount if that even mattered here, so sounds like these figures are wrong, especially when other online music retailers are taken into account.