A question for the record industry folks...

[General Zod]

Why, in this digital age, are release dates staggered by region? For instance, the new Kamelot disc releases on 9/1 in Japan, 9/10 in Europe and 9/14 in the U.S. However, this means that as soon as 9/1 hits, there are guaranteed to be retail quality rips all over the torrent sites. Wouldn't it make more sense for the labels that handle a given band's distribution to coordinate the release dates, to minimize lost sales to piracy? Just curious.

 

[Thorn23TX]

A brilliant observation, Zod. Having spent a fair number of years in music retail in my younger years, I have a guess. My assumption is that the different record labels/distribution in each region try to spread releases out as evenly as possible over the 365 days to manage to a consistent revenue/income level throughout the year. To accomplish this they schedule release dates so that too many major artists don't release on the same date and have the consumer be forced to make a choice at the checkout counter and potentially cannibalize sales from one artist in favor of the other. Obviously there is a fair bit of "science" involved and it's not as simple as throwing a dart at a Tuesday (in the U.S.). They plan releases based on which artists have the biggest sales potential and gear the release dates/marketing strategies to times of year when consumers will have the most disposable income. If they didn't, then you'd see the 4th quarter (Christmas shopping season) heavily weighted with new releases since people are more apt to spend $, and bands would all want a part of that same pie. As it is, one can easily see when most of the big movies, games, CDs, etc. are released - all in time for Christmas.

Case in point: The Star Wars Trilogy video release, and video re-release, and re-re-release, and then DVD release and re-release, and special extended edition release, etc., etc. etc., have all occurred (to my memory) during Q4... A brilliant strategy by Lucasfilm/20th Century Fox which has netted them billions because a large percentage of the population loves Star Wars, and it's an easy thing to pick up and put in your shopping basket when looking for a last-minute gift or trying to pick up something as a gift for someone who is hard to buy for. The Star Wars blu-ray release has not been announced other than it will arrive in 2011, but it's widely speculated that it will be Q4.

 

[jem777az]

Why, in this digital age, are release dates staggered by region? For instance, the new Kamelot disc releases on 9/1 in Japan, 9/10 in Europe and 9/14 in the U.S. However, this means that as soon as 9/1 hits, there are guaranteed to be retail quality rips all over the torrent sites. Wouldn't it make more sense for the labels that handle a given band's distribution to coordinate the release dates, to minimize lost sales to piracy? Just curious.

Excellent question, I'm curious to know the answer myself.

 

[General Zod]

Having spent a fair number of years in music retail in my younger years, I have a guess. My assumption is that the different record labels/distribution in each region try to spread releases out as evenly as possible over the 365 days to manage to a consistent revenue/income level throughout the year. To accomplish this they schedule release dates so that too many major artists don't release on the same date and have the consumer be forced to make a choice at the checkout counter and potentially cannibalize sales from one artist in favor of the other. Obviously there is a fair bit of "science" involved and it's not as simple as throwing a dart at a Tuesday (in the U.S.). They plan releases based on which artists have the biggest sales potential and gear the release dates/marketing strategies to times of year when consumers will have the most disposable income.

I suspect you're 100% right. And I would guess this model developed during a time when illegal downloads didn't exist. However, I'm surprised labels haven't adjusted their business model accordingly. And given that release dates tend to be staggered only by days and weeks, I wouldn't even think this would impact quarterly earnings.

 

[lasercd]

There are multiple reasons:

1. Bands license albums to different labels for different territories. A label in Germany doesn't care what a different label in the US is doing. Same would apply to different territories of the same company ie. Roadrunner, although I would suspect that Roadrunner keeps the release dates structured pretty tightly within their company.
2. Different distributors work with different lead times. For example US distros need release information about 2 1/2 months ahead of street date. European distributors are able to work on a tighter schedule. As an example, we had to bump our planned release date for Creations End to November 6th because we didn't have the materials in time to make the deadline for an October release. I could actually still make it an October release for Europe but I don't want it to come out 6 weeks ahead of the US release date.

When digital distribution is the dominant format this all may change.

 

[MEGALOUD]

What Ken said...

 

[General Zod]

Ken and Lance... thanks for the response.

I can appreciate that there are competing interests at play, among distributors and labels. However, I would have thought that they'd recognize that they're hurting each other and try to coalesce their efforts. However, it doesn't sound like that's the case.

The other component of this is the band. I would suspect, the longer a person has an illegal download, the less likely that person is to purchase the real McCoy. That said, I would think it would be in the band's best interests, to ensure that the regional release date of their CD is aligned. I know when I spoke to Thomas of Kamelot, he spoke about how long and detailed their negotiations were for their new deal. I wonder if this is even something the band or their management thought to push for.

 

[skyrefuge]

However, I would have thought that they'd recognize that they're hurting each other and try to coalesce their efforts.

You're assuming that territorial release-skewing has a significant impact on total sales. Perhaps the fact that the labels haven't done anything to eliminate the skew indicates that, despite how much they scold about it, illegal downloading due to skewed releases doesn't have significant impact on sales. Or, at the least, the labels haven't found a way to measure that impact, and thus don't know if it would be useful to close that skew.

I haven't paid too much attention to the state of album leakages lately, but in my past experience, almost all albums were leaked before the release date in *any* territory. The only time skew would matter is if the release is kept completely under wraps until that first official release. Does that ever happen? And even if it did, you have to be a pretty hardcore fan of a band to keep an eye out for leak that appears between official releases. How many potential buyers are both that dedicated, but also feel fine about ripping off the band/label that they're that dedicated to?

Now, one thing that IS really stupid is that electronic distribution is still shackled by the physical distribution chains. For example, the new Blind Guardian just became available from US download stores this week, even though it was released forever ago (physically and electronically) in Europe. I guess the reason for this is that physical distributors don't want to be undercut in their own territories, so I imagine skew won't even disappear in the electronic world until physical distribution completely disappears.

Neil

 

[Angrafan]

From all the albuns I released, only ONE was coordinated to have the same world-wide release date: Agua de Annique's Air.
It was a nice strategy... And there was no hard-copy promos, only streaming on a website (with password)...

It worked pretty well in preventing leaks. The album was leaked about 2 days before the official release, when a Russian dude leaked it. But it was a positive experience overall.

 

[Jibrille]

I also wouldn't be surprised if the fact that Japan's CD prices are outrageous has anything to do with the distributor there trying to get it out a week in advance. What we bitch about paying $15 for, they usually pay double, which is why they always get those bonus tracks.
Anyone who wouldn't buy the CD because it's available to get a retail quality download illegally a week before it gets released in their territory was never going to buy the CD in the first place.

Preordered mine on Amazon two days ago.

 

[Cheiron]

Because the music industry moves slower than the technology and fans. Not that the people in the industry aren't smart, but they want to make a living doing this, and a better model very possibly mean less companies having a slice of the pie.

 

[nailz]

However, I'm surprised labels haven't adjusted their business model accordingly.

Really? You're really surprised an archaic industry that hates technology and spends billions of wasteful dollars fighting it at every turn instead of embracing it has not adjusted their business model based on that same technology? It took over a decade for them to even consider mp3 sales, and even that is just recently evolving past one medium (iTunes).

 

[skyrefuge]

It took over a decade for them to even consider mp3 sales, and even that is just recently evolving past one medium (iTunes).

While I tend to agree with your general premise that the record industry has been slow to adapt, I have to correct some of your history.

mp3s didn't appear until 1995, and significant numbers of people only began caring about electronic music distribution around 1996-1997 or so. eMusic began selling mp3s in 1998. Sure, that didn't include the major labels, but that's not the "music industry" that Zod is talking about in this thread either. Then, the major labels came on board with the iTunes Music Store in 2003. So, much less than a decade.

Neil

 

[Jasonic]

For some bands, it seems like release dates coincide with touring schedules as well.

This seems to be the case for many Euro power bands, where the Euro release might be a month or two prior to the US release.

Though as someone said above, many releases are licensed to different labels in different regions, so it has to fit in with their release schedule too.

Overall though Zod - it puts the label who is last to release at a major disadvantage, since once it is physically available in one region, isn't it available for legal download? Therefore, this would have to further cut into physical sales for that region.

 

[TribunalRecords]

Overall though Zod - it puts the label who is last to release at a major disadvantage, since once it is physically available in one region, isn't it available for legal download? Therefore, this would have to further cut into physical sales for that region.

it would but not sure if you have ever tried to buy from itunes in another territory. you can't. they are very region specific which helps cut down.

but overall, ken pretty much summed it up for all us labels. lead times, touring, etc etc all factor in.

 

[Jasonic]

MAtt - Well, I suppose that's the question I have.

Let's say Nuc Blast releases the new ACCEPT in Europe prior to the US (Which I am sure is the case, right?)

Will I be able to download it from ITUNES or even the Nuc Blast site before it is physically available in the US?

 

[nailz]

mp3s didn't appear until 1995, and significant numbers of people only began caring about electronic music distribution around 1996-1997 or so. eMusic began selling mp3s in 1998. Sure, that didn't include the major labels, but that's not the "music industry" that Zod is talking about in this thread either. Then, the major labels came on board with the iTunes Music Store in 2003. So, much less than a decade.

Mp3's actually appeared back in 1994. I remember this because I was in my first year of high school when I started downloading through AOL private chatrooms. Fine, I'll give you it wasn't a major deal until around 1999 when baseband internet became available and all of the sudden everyone was like "ZOMG SPEED", but 9 years is not really 'much less' and it still shouldn't have taken that long to fix a model they found to be broken in 2000. 3 years? That's a glacial pace, and the amount of money they spent prosecuting grandmothers for downloading was just silly. If a company or an industry sees a new way a product is being consumed by their target, they should always adapt their business model accordingly.

Also DRM was only dropped just recently but that's another argument.

 

[Jibrille]

MAtt - Well, I suppose that's the question I have.

Let's say Nuc Blast releases the new ACCEPT in Europe prior to the US (Which I am sure is the case, right?)

Will I be able to download it from ITUNES or even the Nuc Blast site before it is physically available in the US?

iTunes will not sell the mp3s to a US based account until it's released in the US or whatever date the US label gives them if they do some special iTunes release. And it's impossible to make non-US accounts w/o a credit card and mailing address from that country. Nuclear Blast doesn't sell mp3s through their own store as far as I know. They'll send you to iTunes or Amazon, which also will not allow you to purchase the mp3s until the US release.

 

[General Zod]

You're assuming that territorial release-skewing has a significant impact on total sales.

I believe it has an impact. How significant, I obviously couldn't say.

Perhaps the fact that the labels haven't done anything to eliminate the skew indicates that, despite how much they scold about it, illegal downloading due to skewed releases doesn't have significant impact on sales.

This seems unlikely.

Or, at the least, the labels haven't found a way to measure that impact, and thus don't know if it would be useful to close that skew.

I would suspect this is true.

I haven't paid too much attention to the state of album leakages lately, but in my past experience, almost all albums were leaked before the release date in *any* territory. The only time skew would matter is if the release is kept completely under wraps until that first official release. Does that ever happen?

It does. For instance, the new Kamelot has not leaked. However, I fully expect to see it available on the torrent sites on the day of the Japanese release. And I suspect some people will listen to the illegal download, get jazzed by it, look to buy it, only to find it's not yet available in their territory. Two weeks later, when it becomes available in their territory, perhaps the listener has already grown tired of it or that initial excitement has worn off. Granted, this may represent a small percentage. However, in a world of diminished music sales, it seems unfortunate to lose any sales simply because of a lack of supply chain coordination.

And even if it did, you have to be a pretty hardcore fan of a band to keep an eye out for leak that appears between official releases.

It has nothing to do with the release dates or the dedication of the fans to a given band. Most people who download torrents, probably check the torrent sites daily. It only takes a second or two to see if anything has been posted. They don't have to be looking for any one band, just looking in general.

 

[General Zod]

Really? You're really surprised an archaic industry that hates technology and spends billions of wasteful dollars fighting it at every turn instead of embracing it has not adjusted their business model based on that same technology? It took over a decade for them to even consider mp3 sales, and even that is just recently evolving past one medium (iTunes).

Neil is correct. I was really speaking more about our niche market. These labels tend to be much more in touch, because many of them are run by fans or musicians, and have their finger on the pulse of the fan base they market to.