HD Tracks Price Increase

sleepysurf · « **Reply #20 on:** 20 Sep 2009, 03:53 pm »

Besides venting here, I suggest we all contact HDTracks, and share our opinions regarding their 12.5% price hike. I just emailed them, suggesting they reconsider the price hike, and wait to see the impact on sales with the forthcoming Squeezebox Touch. Their contact link is...
http://www.hdtracks.com/index.php?file=contact

jsaliga · « **Reply #21 on:** 20 Sep 2009, 04:10 pm »

Great suggestion. I did that after placing my last order.

--Jerome

ted_b · « **Reply #22 on:** 20 Sep 2009, 04:17 pm »

Quote from: sleepysurf on 20 Sep 2009, 03:53 pm

Besides venting here, I suggest we all contact HDTracks, and share our opinions regarding their 12.5% price hike. I just emailed them, suggesting they reconsider the price hike, and wait to see the impact on sales with the forthcoming Squeezebox Touch. Their contact link is...
http://www.hdtracks.com/index.php?file=contact

+1. Done. Great idea.

P.S. if anyone is attending RMAF he/she may see Mr Chesky there (he's been spotted at previous, and I sat behind him at CES TAD/Berkeley demo in January then got a chance to meet him). Let him know your thoughts on HDTracks pricing.

sleepysurf · « **Reply #23 on:** 20 Sep 2009, 04:30 pm »

In fact, if Chesky/HDTracks is really smart, they'll offer all Squeezebox Touch buyers a discount on their first (or more) hi-rez downloads. Just as Pandora partnered with Slimdevices/Logitech when they first got started, HDTracks ought to do the same. Look at Pandora now! THAT'S how you grow a business!

Jon L · « **Reply #24 on:** 21 Sep 2009, 08:22 pm »

Quote from: ted_b on 20 Sep 2009, 04:17 pm

Quote from: sleepysurf on 20 Sep 2009, 03:53 pm
Besides venting here, I suggest we all contact HDTracks, and share our opinions regarding their 12.5% price hike. I just emailed them, suggesting they reconsider the price hike, and wait to see the impact on sales with the forthcoming Squeezebox Touch. Their contact link is...
http://www.hdtracks.com/index.php?file=contact

+1. Done. Great idea.

+2, and hopefully counting.

jsaliga · « **Reply #25 on:** 21 Sep 2009, 10:47 pm »

I received an email reply from Norman Chesky today. Basically he said the price increase is needed to attract the larger labels and bring more content to HDtracks. I can understand his position and am genuinely sympathetic...but I don't think that really changes anything for me. If the higher value content ends up on HDtracks then sure, I will give it due consideration just like any other purchase. But as I look over the content that is presently on the site, there really isn't anything else for me there that I could justify paying $17.95 for a 24/96 download.

I sent him a link to this thread.

--Jerome

sleepysurf · « **Reply #26 on:** 21 Sep 2009, 11:01 pm »

I received the same email. It does offer a perspective I hadn't considered. At least Norman Chesky was kind enough to address the issue, so I'm willing to give him the benefit of doubt, and see how it all pans out (e.g. if Telarc, and other larger labels jump on board).

Philistine · « **Reply #27 on:** 21 Sep 2009, 11:44 pm »

Quote from: jsaliga on 21 Sep 2009, 10:47 pm

I received an email reply from Norman Chesky today. Basically he said the price increase is needed to attract the larger labels and bring more content to HDtracks. I can understand his position and am genuinely sympathetic...but I don't think that really changes anything for me. If the higher value content ends up on HDtracks then sure, I will give it due consideration just like any other purchase. But as I look over the content that is presently on the site, there really isn't anything else for me there that I could justify paying $17.95 for a 24/96 download.

I sent him a link to this thread.

--Jerome

I consider HD Tracks have done a great job in making high quality recordings available to us, and this is a significant factor in why I'm disappointed with the increase. I do understand that new labels need to be attracted but don't buy the logic that a price increase has to be applied to recordings/labels already attracted

I take two approaches to this:

If it's an existing high profile recording (Beatles, Floyd etc...) then I've already paid the copyright on LP, Cassette, CD... and I'm not going to pay a premium yet again to obtain a further copy that also has lower distribution costs and most other costs recovered many times over. However, I will pay a fair price to obtain a higher quality copy. Raising Sand was a good example of a 'fair' price for me to buy the download.

If it's a unusual/unheard of recording then I'm not going to invest a premium in acquiring it, but again would pay a reasonable sum to explore new music.

If HD Tracks were able to provide more popular recordings, at a reasonable price, I believe the total revenue would increase exponentially. A major label needs to work with HD Tracks in order to carry out a marketing trial with great recordings at a reasonable price. They have nothing to lose.

jsaliga · « **Reply #28 on:** 22 Sep 2009, 12:16 am »

Quote from: Philistine on 21 Sep 2009, 11:44 pm

I do understand that new labels need to be attracted but don't buy the logic that a price increase has to be applied to recordings/labels already attracted

Well, if I may play devil's advocate for a moment. Let's say HDtracks tries to do as you suggest. So new content gets priced at $17.95 and everything already there stays at $15.95. If I am an exec at one of the "already attracted" labels and see new stuff coming in at $17.95 then I pick up the phone and call Mr. Chesky and the conversation goes something like this: "Norman, I was one of the few labels who supported you with 24/96 content when you tried to build those offerings into a viable service. Now you are proposing to give other labels who were not there at the beginning an extra $2.00 per title incentive. Is this how you reward loyalty? Perhaps I should just pack up all my content and go home." I don't think he can stab the labels that helped him build that business in the back. If he did then that would effectively kill high resolution downloads at HDtracks.

--Jerome

Philistine · « **Reply #29 on:** 22 Sep 2009, 12:43 am »

Quote from: jsaliga on 22 Sep 2009, 12:16 am

Quote from: Philistine on 21 Sep 2009, 11:44 pm
I do understand that new labels need to be attracted but don't buy the logic that a price increase has to be applied to recordings/labels already attracted

Well, if I may play devil's advocate for a moment. Let's say HDtracks tries to do as you suggest. So new content gets priced at $17.95 and everything already there stays at $15.95. If I am an exec at one of the "already attracted" labels and see new stuff coming in at $17.95 then I pick up the phone and call Mr. Chesky and the conversation goes something like this: "Norman, I was one of the few labels who supported you with 24/96 content when you tried to build those offerings into a viable service. Now you are proposing to give other labels who were not there at the beginning an extra $2.00 per title incentive. Is this how you reward loyalty? Perhaps I should just pack up all my content and go home." I don't think he can stab the labels that helped him build that business in the back. If he did then that would effectively kill high resolution downloads at HDtracks.

--Jerome

That's a reasonable point Jerome - but where's the new material that the price increase is attracting? If an overall price increase was announced at the same time new material was being introduced then that's fair enough. But an increase on material already on the site, and nothing new, doesn't sell the rationale for the increase to me. So for me it's not an issue of a dual pricing strategy but one of a poorly implemented and argued increase.

mdconnelly · « **Reply #30 on:** 22 Sep 2009, 12:52 am »

The price increase is unfortunate and I can't quite see how this is going to benefit them. I bought a number of albums on impulse that I had not heard before when HDTracks first started and they were offering 20% discounts. But at $18 each, that's just not going to happen. They need to increase the number of customers and volume of sales to make it a viable business I would think. Unless somehow the royalties per hi-res album have increased by $2 each, this seems like it's only going to hurt sales.

jsaliga · « **Reply #31 on:** 22 Sep 2009, 01:03 am »

Quote from: Philistine on 22 Sep 2009, 12:43 am

That's a reasonable point Jerome - but where's the new material that the price increase is attracting? If an overall price increase was announced at the same time new material was being introduced then that's fair enough. But an increase on material already on the site, and nothing new, doesn't sell the rationale for the increase to me. So for me it's not an issue of a dual pricing strategy but one of a poorly implemented and argued increase.

I don't want to come off sounding like I am in favor of the price increase because I am not. But I do understand it. I suspect HDtracks has to get the price to $17.95 before other labels will opt in with content. Mr. Chesky's email did say he felt confident that we would be pleased with the labels and titles that the price increase will attract. Of course, that remains to be seen. Still, I don't think it's a stretch to believe that other labels would need to make some sort of commitment to HDtracks in exchange for the new pricing structure. I doubt HDtracks would risk a customer backlash over pricing on a thin hope that it might be enough to persuade other labels to add their 24/96 content to the mix. If it were me I would want an agreement in ink before making a pricing move. Otherwise, you could end up with egg all over your face: the customers revolt and the other labels chicken out. The only thing left to do in that case would be to hang a for sale sign on the door of the building you work out of.

--Jerome

jsaliga · « **Reply #32 on:** 22 Sep 2009, 01:26 am »

Quote from: mdconnelly on 22 Sep 2009, 12:52 am

The price increase is unfortunate and I can't quite see how this is going to benefit them. I bought a number of albums on impulse that I had not heard before when HDTracks first started and they were offering 20% discounts. But at $18 each, that's just not going to happen. They need to increase the number of customers and volume of sales to make it a viable business I would think. Unless somehow the royalties per hi-res album have increased by $2 each, this seems like it's only going to hurt sales.

That strikes me as a Catch-22. You can't have more customers without the desirable content, but the labels with the desirable content won't throw their hat in until there is guaranteed pricing and volume. I agree that discounts can help ease customers into the new the pricing model...but it won't eliminate the pain completely. We don't yet know what new labels and content they will be adding. There are certain artists and titles that I would gladly throw down $17.95 for a 24/96 download and feel like I was getting a bargain. But I can't judge that until the content is there. So I will have to wait and see. What I do know is that I don't think there is anything else presently listed on the site that is worth $17.95 to me personally. So I'll be looking to see what new content is offered when the price change takes hold.

--Jerome

mdconnelly · « **Reply #33 on:** 22 Sep 2009, 02:31 am »

I must have missed something in the thread... do we know for a fact that something other than a price increase for 24/96 downloads is coming? If HDtracks will dramatically expand their catalog of hi-res downloads, it sure seems like they put the cart before the horse by announcing a price increase first. It just doesn't seem to make a whole lot of marketing sense, but I suspect time will tell.

Personally, I'm a big fan of what HDTracks has been trying to do and wish them the best of luck in doing it.

jsaliga · « **Reply #34 on:** 22 Sep 2009, 05:12 pm »

Quote from: mdconnelly on 22 Sep 2009, 02:31 am

I must have missed something in the thread... do we know for a fact that something other than a price increase for 24/96 downloads is coming?

Norman Chesky indicated in the email he sent to me that new 24/96 content, while not yet publicly announced, is coming to HDtracks. Whether it is the sort of content that will please audiophiles as Mr. Chesky suggests remains to be seen. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and will evaluate that content when it's available on the site.

--Jerome

normanchesky · « **Reply #35 on:** 22 Sep 2009, 07:04 pm »

To the AudioCircle Forum Members:

We appreciate all of your comments and interest in our site.

HDtracks has been working diligently to attract more high resolution content from record labels, but many labels, especially the larger ones, have been resistant, taking the position that their high resolution content is worth a much higher premium compared to the standard, 44.1/16. Consequently, if HDtracks did not implement a price increase, we would have no chance of attracting the kind of content we believe is necessary to satisfy our customers. At the end of the day, the majority of the price increase benefits the record labels, not HDtracks.

As a co-founder of HDtracks, I want our customers to know that the last thing that we wanted to do was raise the price of our high-resolution content. Ultimately, our goal is to make the most extensive selection available to our customers, so we made the difficult decision to augment our prices. Though our coming additions have not been made public yet, we think you are going to be extremely happy with the new labels and titles we will be offering before the end of the year.

We hope you can understand our position, and we thank you for your continued patronage.

Norman Chesky.
HDtracks

normanchesky · « **Reply #36 on:** 22 Sep 2009, 08:33 pm »

Quote from: jsaliga on 22 Sep 2009, 12:16 am

Quote from: Philistine on 21 Sep 2009, 11:44 pm
I do understand that new labels need to be attracted but don't buy the logic that a price increase has to be applied to recordings/labels already attracted

Well, if I may play devil's advocate for a moment. Let's say HDtracks tries to do as you suggest. So new content gets priced at $17.95 and everything already there stays at $15.95. If I am an exec at one of the "already attracted" labels and see new stuff coming in at $17.95 then I pick up the phone and call Mr. Chesky and the conversation goes something like this: "Norman, I was one of the few labels who supported you with 24/96 content when you tried to build those offerings into a viable service. Now you are proposing to give other labels who were not there at the beginning an extra $2.00 per title incentive. Is this how you reward loyalty? Perhaps I should just pack up all my content and go home." I don't think he can stab the labels that helped him build that business in the back. If he did then that would effectively kill high resolution downloads at HDtracks.

--Jerome

Well said, Jerome. It's important that every label benefits from the price increase, not just the newer ones coming to the table. For this to work, "ALL SHIPS MUST RISE WITH THE TIDE." Norman.

jsaliga · « **Reply #37 on:** 22 Sep 2009, 09:47 pm »

Hi Norman. I think for a lot of us the problem is that we have to get over the disapointment that high resolution downloads are going to cost us more. Even if there are going to be some nice long-term benefits of a price increase for music fans, I can't imagine anyone going, "Yay!! My downloads are going to cost more." When the content is actually available on the site will be a time when customers can fairly judge the efficacy of your strategy. As I said in my note I'm hoping it all works to everyone's benefit.

I know I'll be watching HDtracks with great interest in the coming months.

--Jerome

ted_b · « **Reply #38 on:** 22 Sep 2009, 10:07 pm »

Norman,
Welcome to the HiRez Circle! We very much appreciate it when the manufacturer/business owner partakes in the discussion, and is open to feedback and constructive criticism. Just your being on here has raised the HDTracks already-high in my mind.

All of us would love to pay less for hirez downloads, and the assumption is that this method of delivery should, in many ways, be more efficient and profitable for the artists and labels due to a more direct distribution.....whether that is true or not is beyond our scope I guess.

Thanks, and we look forward to the addition of new exciting labels.

Philistine · « **Reply #39 on:** 22 Sep 2009, 10:16 pm »

Thanks for joining the discussion Norman, as you can see may of us are keen to access more high resolution sources and you've been a leader in this area. Hence the healthy debate.

Do you have a projected/approximate timeline for the availability of the new additions?