Roll up for La Roux…
Monday, January 25th, 2010Last week I saw the La Roux and Noisettes albums in Sainsbury’s for £3 each. I find this amazing. Really. If anyone doubts the mess the record business is in just think about that for a moment. 3 of your British pounds!
I make no comment about the quality of these artists or their individual merits, but for sure they’ll have had much major label moolah pumped into them, and there they are, in amongst the nappies, coffee and cigarettes, but far cheaper than any of these products.
Once upon at time there lived an executive who decided that the company needed to generate more profit so they could give their ‘music loving’ CEO a bigger bonus, in order for him to get his own suite, on its own floor, whilst the minions below were monitored on mini cameras, cooped up in their chicken coop work spaces. So he made a deal with the supermarket chains, which suited the latter until they discovered DVD and Yakult and Fair trade coffee and…
It’s a disease that major labels have had for a while.
I’m not knocking supermarkets, although I guess I could. They are not in the business of selling a specific product – they’ll sell anything at any price to anybody to generate footfall.
To them:
Music=Product Product=Footfall Footfall=Profit
And ultimately selling music this way devalues it. Probably works wonders for beans though.
It is true that record companies certainly have had an awkward relationship with retailers over the years. Letting them choose release dates, price points and even cover designs. Especially with TV advertised compilations. How barmy is that?
Back in the day, Woolworths had a great deal of influence in this area. They were responsible for sales in excess 30% of the market and could order huge amounts of stock and the labels really needed their support. This now seems like fantasy, but really they were very important.
To get into Woolworths you had to go into the lion’s den that was Entertainment UK. There you would see a buyer who would make decisions based on the relationship with the company or individual, rarely the product. The product would be taken seriously when the company were able to shell out big bucks to get the album / single racked in all the stores. Did you really think these titles were picked on merit?
I’m not for a minute suggesting that this was a corrupt system or that WW should have stocked everything asked, I am simply saying that the record companies should have respected what they had, protected their artists for the long term and developed a better way to sell.
Here’s a true tale, highlighting the tail wagging the dog syndrome. In 1994 BMG were releasing an album that they were trying to get into Woolworths and the buyer at the time didn’t think the title was right. He had a problem understanding the type of music that was on the release.
True…




