CDs - New vs. Used vs. Illegal Downloads

Back in the early 1990's Garth Brooks was chastised for his efforts to speak out about the sale of used CDs. He received quite a bit of criticism on the issue. I remember seeing the lines waiting to purchase his album on release day. It was quite an event.

I will have to say, I have kind of always agreed with him. I think he was on to something and to this day I still feel he was right.

Of course there are issues with each of these types of music acquisition.

New - Customer pays too high a price to for the CD. Label makes money. Retailer makes money. Artist makes some money.

Used - Customer gets a better price. Label gets nothing. Retailer makes money. Artist makes nothing.

Illegal Downloads - Well, it's illegal (that is for another time), Customer (if you call it that) gets product for free, Label gets nothing. Retailer gets nothing. Artist gets nothing.

I will concede that CDs were overpriced for a long time. Twenty dollars to buy an album you might only like a song or two, that's a little pricey. However, this really comes down to used vs illegal.

I never liked the used CD sale (I am not talking about deleted, unavailable, or bootleg concerts). I am talking your average available CD. Lets use an above average CD, Garth Brooks, No Fences.

I will agree, the man has made a lot of money. But that seemed to be the biggest argument. This is America. He made a product/service people wanted and people bought it. That is not a reason to make Used CDs OK, just because one might feel he has made enough money.

When a store stocks an album 15 years old they are bound to have multiple used copies available at varying ranges of condition. You pick the one you want. If the store even stocks a new one, we will say it is $14.99. Let's say the used one is $7.99, in good condition. The customer is likely to purchase the used one for $7.99. So not only has Mr. Brooks missed out on a sale and made zero dollars for selling a CD, he has nothing to recognize he sold a CD.

That is the part I think Mr. Brooks was probably more concerned about. At the very least, it should be recorded that he sold a CD. I was not excited when they started talking that Garth Brooks was going to outsell the Beatles, but hey, the Beatles could have kept on going if the wanted.

My other point is, once someone has a used CD in good condition, they are unlikely to purchase a new one if they like it. There is about a zero chance the fan will say, hey, I like this Garth Brooks character. I'm going to buy the new CD since I like this used one so swell.

I think this can be put in perspective better if you consider a band or artist that did not reach the level of success that someone like Garth Brooks has reached. They might rely on whatever sales they can make. Don't they deserve to make money when one of their CDs sells? Don't they deserve to be recognized when they make a sale?

Just thinkin'

Charlie275