In Reply to: What exactly constitutes "success" for a hi-rez format? (long) posted by Bayside Bomber on October 1, 2004 at 20:41:32:
I cannot argue with your definition of 'success' - well I could, but I won't :-)However, the Chicago fine dining market does not have the same cost-benefit ratio's of major corporations like Sony and Philips. Nor does it have the characteristics of a high volume/low margin market. I would say that we do have a stake in whether 'bezillions' buy into the format because it drives costs down and it determines whether large corporations deem it interesting enough to stay in the game. Not only do they depend on license fees, but the disc manufacturers business model is based on high volume as well. Not on low volume/high margin models. That suggests that SACD could still fail if, say, the original prediction of the DVD-A audio camp prevails, meaning that the installed base of DVD players provides the better market condition to sell music on physical media.
I would say that whether Groovenote or Telarc or High Note can deliver a profitable run of 5000 SACD's does not mean anything for the format as such I means something for these companies for sure. And for us. But this is a high volume/low margin game in my estimation. And in the end that will decide what gives. Enter non-physical distribution of music...and now the entire ball game has changed again.
Best regards,
Jw
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- What they don't teach you in business school... - Joel_Waterman 22:09:30 10/01/04 (4)
- you should have gone to school - xxyyzz 10:24:32 10/02/04 (1)
- I think the record biz has changed business models - Joel_Waterman 11:16:20 10/02/04 (0)
- Drive costs down???????????? - JCS 03:06:44 10/02/04 (1)
- Good point, but... - Joel_Waterman 11:13:05 10/02/04 (0)