George,
Have you seen the Nielsen Soundscan sales
reports lately? Some people at the Pulse
Music Board posted the annual sales of the top 10 selling
albums:
If you follow the numbers, you'll see
that the top 10 albums of 1999 sold an average of nearly 5.469
million, but in 2009, that number was only 2.138 million. That's
a drop of 60.9 percent.. If you consider that the top 10 of 2000
sold an average of 6.042 million (the best in the last 2 decades),
the sales drop from 2000 to 2009 was 64.6%.
That pretty much corroborates reports
I've been reading, on the Web, that over the last decade the
music industry has bled itself by 2/3! Digital sales have not
picked up the slack.
Since most of the top albums of every
year belong to the major recording companies, the massive sales
avalanche applies mostly to them. I imagine the independents
have largely been unaffected, which is to say that the average
independent album that sold 50,000 albums in 1999 sold just as
many in 2009.
Needless to say, the corporate fat cats,
and the major labels (and their affiliates) they belong to, have
no one to blame but themselves. I don't remember buying anything
from a major label since 2002, and if I did, they were USED,
from eBay! The industry has largely abandoned quality for quantity;
and for them these days, quantity means more money, no matter
how shitty the material they put on the record racks, no matter
how quickly some of the artists will be forgotten in 20 years.
If the decline continues on the same
pace throughout this decade, 2019 could be a year when the average
of the top 10 selling albums is only 836,000, with the top album
selling just under 1.4 million, and only 10 albums going gold
(500,000). With any luck, the RIAA will have already been out
of business.
The average fat cat has twisted the average
new artist into believing that, without a major label, he or
she is nothing. On top of that, the average artists who has been
on a major label for a long time (maybe too long) has become
so comfortable with his or her existence on such a label that
they could not possibly imagine either leaving such a label or
getting dropped, and going to an independent label.
What the fat cats still don't want to
understand is that their comfortable lifestyle depends on both
their artists and the fans. At the same token, the artist who
is afraid to go to an indie label when he or she gets dropped
depends on us as well.
Speaking of which, when I entered "artists
dropped" in the search bar, I saw an extraordinarily large
number of familiar names, many of whom were once platinum and
multi-platinum: Jessica Simpson, Brandy, Bow Wow, Annie Lennox,
Ashanti, Solange (Beyoncé's little sister).
Annie Lennox leaving or getting dropped
by Sony is surprising (I didn't know about it until I did the
search), but Jessica's exile is not, because she was in danger
of getting dropped after her last pop album in 2006 flopped (300,000);
then in an effort to save her singing career she went country,
and that album flopped as well.
There are some artists who have no problem
going to an indie label after their efforts on a major label
fall flat or their careers on a major label wind down. But there
are the others who are so full of pride, full of conceit or just
full of themselves, or are simply so embarrassed for their failure,
that they will sit out rather than sign to an indie label. For
these artists, it's either a major label or nothing.
The problem is, the major labels are
dying a slow death. Undaunted or unwilling to believe the obvious,
some artists pass the time by going on reality shows or hosting
other shows, get into acting, or disappear from the scene completely.
The biggest name in danger of getting
dropped, and never being acquired by another major label again,
is Janet Jackson. Her last album of original material, Discipline,
failed to go gold despite debuting at #1 (or was it #2?); and
her greatest hits album, Number Ones, isn't doing that
well, either. She will be 44 this spring, and today's pop market
is not very kind to 40-something females.
Just an example of how bad things will
become for artists who would otherwise be multi-platinum in the
1990s. On the average, an artist who would otherwise have gone
diamond in the 1990s are lucky enough to sell 3.5 million this
year, and an artists capable of double-platinum in the 1990s
are lucky if they can crack gold today.
But do they deserve multi-platinum, especially those who are
very much in league with their corporate masters? In 2019, the
indies will be a lot closer to being on equal footing with what
remains of the majors; and if there are far more indie labels
than what we have now, the majors can forget it.
Then again, I wouldn't be surprised if
the majors in 2019 abandon the music industry entirely, because
they've come to the conclusion that they can no longer count
on making a profit by having a music department. By then, with
any luck, artists will have enough knowledge to use the Web to
promote themselves and, if necessary, distribute their music
themselves.
Sincerely,
Sean B.
Although the Beatles did re-release their
entire catalogue in 2009, the Beatles 1 CD listed as the best
seller of the decade was actually released in 2000. It stands
to reason that it wouldn't be included in the top 10 of 2009
since it likely sold steadily throughout the decade to accumulate
over 11 million in sales. That is also why it wouldn't be the
top selling artist of 2009.
I did appreciate all your other information,
especially the comments by Sean B. Figures can always be massaged
to present whatever message you want. That is not to say you
are doing the same thing as the record labels. Your graph on
Full Album sales is an eye opener to me. It shows the reality
of the situation. No massaging needed.
Tony M. in Mich.
