New releases for profit

[Soulagogo]

Interesting comment on Deans excellent soul show tonight

by the guest  buy multiple copies of new releases and sell when

they hit discogs  at higher prices ,a bit of an insurance .Is this

what the producers want or everybody to get a chance of limited 

run

[Mark B]

Most now only allow one per person when ordering, 

[Amsterdam Russ]

I've ordered two copies (sometimes three) of most new releases I've bought over the last half a dozen years or more simply to help justify postal charges (postage for two copies is invariably the same as one copy) if they're coming from the States, and from the UK since Brexit.

If I'm buying from within the EU, the price of one copy is usually fine relative to postal costs.

For the handful of releases that subsequently go up in price, probably 90-95% do not. Indeed, many are still in stock. Or, if they have sold out, and there's not been the desperate scramble by people to get copies just because it's become hot, they can typically be bought at or around the original retail price.

I can't say I've ever bought two or three copies of something on the basis it might go up in price. I've got a box full of low-value duplicates to prove that. 

 

 

[Twoshoes]

40 minutes ago, Amsterdam Russ said:

the handful of releases that subsequently go up in price, probably 90-95% do not. Indeed, many are still in stock.

I'd agree with that, there was a discussion on another thread about limiting releases to 300 copies and that not being enough. I have some sympathy for those releasing limited editions, they can't do right for doing wrong, as you say Russ some sell out but plenty don't. 

  The recent issues of Jon Skinner and Kim Tibbs being examples of sell outs that are now being touted at way above original selling price, conversely North Broad St's recent limited release still has around 100 copies for sale.

  Searling's Johnny Baker release which he urged people to be quick or miss out copies of which quickly appeared on Discogs at £90 have now levelled out around £45 and don't appear to be moving on that quickly. That release I'm not proud to say was the only one I've bought with a view to possibly selling on, I'd just started buying again and didn't have a lot of spare cash thinking it would fund future purchases, what was in my head at that point I don't know as I have little experience of selling other than to mates. Still got it and probably always will. It is also the only record I've bought not actually liking the song. 

  Like you I've bought quite a few limited editions, some of which are still avaliable and for less than I paid.Some have gone up in price which is nice but as I'm never going to sell them is of no importance other than a little extra for the kids on my demise. 

  

[Happy Feet]

Can someone please explain why when a new release , say 300 copies sells out, can a re run not be planned if successful ? 

It wouldn't be the first time and would allow the artists etc to make a living , surely music is for sharing not exclusivity.

The Jon Allen & Kim Tibbs both limited but also very good tunes and would surely sell another 300 copies , these are new tunes and not releases that have been issued up to 4 times in the past ,I have Melba Moore , The Magic Touch on 3 labels with 3 different b sides and I wouldn't be surprised if available on more .

Somebody involved with the marketing of these new tunes must surely know the difference between a limited 300 or 500 , confused I am .

[Twoshoes]

10 hours ago, Happy Feet said:

Can someone please explain why when a new release , say 300 copies sells out, can a re run not be planned if successful

Original Gravity's Floyd James release of Green Onions initially a limited 300 run was repressed a couple of months ago with a different b side. On the notification email it said re pressed due to multiple requests from customers which I suppose is another way of saying public demand.

This tme it was limited to 250, there is no indication on the site as to how many are left but it is still avaliable. 

  My point being only those issuing the records the likes of Diggin Deep, Last Bastion, Hit and Run etc know the hard work and stress that goes into the whole process and what the likelihood is of potentially selling x number of records. If it were you and you knew you could sell 300 but might, just might sell and extra 200 which way would you go. 

  Don't get me wrong I'm not defending limited releases nor am I decrying them. I think we should be grateful that there are people out there taking the time and trouble to bring us these tunes. I've missed out on as many if not more than I've managed to get. 

  I don't know any of the people involved in releasing these records but would imagine the rewards financially when all considered are small. Being potentially left with unsold records could I guess wipe out any profit and who sets out intentionally on a project to lose money.

  I know this doesn't answer your question and I fully realise if some limited releases were done in greater numbers they would eventually sell as they got played out. 

[Chalky]

1 hour ago, Twoshoes said:

Original Gravity's Floyd James release of Green Onions initially a limited 300 run was repressed a couple of months ago with a different b side. On the notification email it said re pressed due to multiple requests from customers which I suppose is another way of saying public demand.

This tme it was limited to 250, there is no indication on the site as to how many are left but it is still avaliable. 

  My point being only those issuing the records the likes of Diggin Deep, Last Bastion, Hit and Run etc know the hard work and stress that goes into the whole process and what the likelihood is of potentially selling x number of records. If it were you and you knew you could sell 300 but might, just might sell and extra 200 which way would you go. 

  Don't get me wrong I'm not defending limited releases nor am I decrying them. I think we should be grateful that there are people out there taking the time and trouble to bring us these tunes. I've missed out on as many if not more than I've managed to get. 

  I don't know any of the people involved in releasing these records but would imagine the rewards financially when all considered are small. Being potentially left with unsold records could I guess wipe out any profit and who sets out intentionally on a project to lose money.

  I know this doesn't answer your question and I fully realise if some limited releases were done in greater numbers they would eventually sell as they got played out. 

Diggin’ Deep initially pressed 300 for the initial releases but they increased that amount because they were selling out because of demand, top marks to em too.   Most aimed at our market are selling out, I’m talking the specialist mainly unreleased stuff, not the swathes of reissues from certain companies. They might not sell out straight away, some might take a few years but they sell. Many get a second wind, Soulutions being one, many Kent releases are indemand a few years down the line. 
 

Its quite clear given all the complaints that 300 is for the most cases not enough.  North Broad Street last release mentioned with plenty of copies left but everything else has sold out bar one I think with 7 copies left. Most of the previously unreleased stuff is selling out and there aren’t many turkeys released. 
 

The cost difference between 300 and 500 presses is not that much. 
 

I’ve said before press enough to satisfy demand, stop changing the label colour or vinyl colour with a repress and take the sharks and those exploiting the market off the market. 

[Joesoap]

13 hours ago, Happy Feet said:

The Jon Allen & Kim Tibbs both limited but also very good tunes and would surely sell another 300 copies , these are new tunes and not releases that have been issued up to 4 times in the past ,I have Melba Moore , The Magic Touch on 3 labels with 3 different b sides and I wouldn't be surprised if available on more .

Somebody involved with the marketing of these new tunes must surely know the difference between a limited 300 or 500 , confused I am .

Kim Tibbs has got an album coming out. Guess they want people to buy that?

[Happy Feet]

14 minutes ago, Joesoap said:

Kim Tibbs has got an album coming out. Guess they want people to buy that?

Let's hope they release enough copies , is it cd or vinyl ? 

[Joesoap]

Don't know. Just found something online which says double album, vinyl coming out on Izipho later this summer but nothing on their site and nothing definite on her site or her Bandcamp..

[Chalky]

15 minutes ago, Joesoap said:

Don't know. Just found something online which says double album, vinyl coming out on Izipho later this summer but nothing on their site and nothing definite on her site or her Bandcamp..

I think it's at the pressing plant now?  Out July I think???

[Joesoap]

Yes. Saw that somewhere. Just Googling around though and found other release dates going back to last year. So who knows?

Sounds like an ambitious / expensive project - double album, recorded at Royal Studios in Memphis, full band, strings etc. You'd imagine a major label was behind it but seemingly not...

Edited June 4, 2022 by Joesoap

[Chalky]

35 minutes ago, Joesoap said:

Yes. Saw that somewhere. Just Googling around though and found other release dates going back to last year. So who knows?

Sounds like an ambitious / expensive project - double album, recorded at Royal Studios in Memphis, full band, strings etc. You'd imagine a major label was behind it but seemingly not...

I think Kim financed it all herself

[Soulfusion]

Whilst all records are "limited" by the number produced; nearly all the 12" singles that came out in the late 70s stated they were limited but sold in the 1,000s! These small labels are all being run by guys that appear to have a real passion for the music and the artists. Getting these sounds out to a wider audience seems to be the priority above personal profit. Nevertheless the "limiting" factor for these labels must be finance and the cashflow to maintain operations and, consequently, commitments beyond 300/500 pressings per release must have an effect on the flow of these releases. 

An unfortunate by product is that a resale market is created and some benefit by making a quick buck on a £10 - £15 single but if people buying multiple copies help Sean, Kitch, Colin, Mark & Des et all continue to bring more historic and lost recordings to our ears (and assist the artists and their families) then it is of small concern to me.    

[Twoshoes]

On 04/06/2022 at 10:34, Chalky said:

Diggin’ Deep initially pressed 300 for the initial releases but they increased that amount because they were selling out because of demand, top marks to em

That's interesting Karl, do you have any idea as to the numbers involved. Looking on Discogs which I'm aware isn't always accurate they released several other Ltd tunes the last two being limited. Any idea of the numbers released on a normal issue if they upped the limited and to what they upped it to? 

  As you say fair play to them catering for the demand. 

[Mark R]

It's all bollocks......half the people ain't interested in the Kim Tibbs tunes of this world until they're on a 45.

Rare soul/vinyl/45 only mentalities are fucking up new releases for good folk who just want the (one copy of a!) record at a normal price.

I wish the new release scene wasn't permeated with all this......boils my piss!

As a footnote, it's amusing to the likes of me when these 45 Kings pop up with their chests pumped, saying I played it here, I played it there, when we were playing it two months before from a download or CD.  What about Sir Wick, Elaine Stepter, Rance Allen?  Talk about being out of touch through "vinyl blindness"!!

 

Cheers,

Mark R

Edited June 7, 2022 by Mark R

[Happy Feet]

8 minutes ago, Mark R said:

It's all bollocks......half the people ain't interested in the Kim Tibbs tunes of this world until they're on a 45.

Rare soul/vinyl/45 only mentalities are fucking up new releases for good folk who just want the (one copy of a!) record at a normal price.

I wish the new release scene wasn't permeated with all this......boils my piss!

As a footnote, it's amusing to the likes of me when these 45 Kings pop up with their chests pumped, saying I played it here, I played it there, when we were playing it two months before from a download or CD.  What about Sir Wick, Elaine Stepter, Rance Allen?  Talk about being out of touch through "vinyl blindness"!!

 

Cheers,

Mark R

It may have something to do with the Soul Police , the recent Lou Pride version of I'm Comin Home has been available on cd album for the best part of 20 yrs , and a hell of a lot of tracks on Kent for instance cd only , a change of mentality which will never happen and is a completely and understandable reason when some DJ has spent a months wages on one OVO, but as you say with new releases in a modern age a lot of tunes are ignored , 

In the old days loads of tunes played on EMI disc made to look like Acetates at most venues and big named djs got away with it .

Good news though check out the sales section re the Kim Tibbs , regarding downloads can't see the Soul Police going for that one , more for the MP3 player if still in fashion lol .

[Chalky]

8 hours ago, Mark R said:

It's all bollocks......half the people ain't interested in the Kim Tibbs tunes of this world until they're on a 45.

Rare soul/vinyl/45 only mentalities are fucking up new releases for good folk who just want the (one copy of a!) record at a normal price.

I wish the new release scene wasn't permeated with all this......boils my piss!

As a footnote, it's amusing to the likes of me when these 45 Kings pop up with their chests pumped, saying I played it here, I played it there, when we were playing it two months before from a download or CD.  What about Sir Wick, Elaine Stepter, Rance Allen?  Talk about being out of touch through "vinyl blindness"!!

 

Cheers,

Mark R

Spot on Mark.  It seems to be about creating an instant rarity and as soon that happens it is no longer about the music.  As you say music is supposed to be for sharing yet lots missing out, genuine buyers too.  People buying these 45s not interested in the track, just something to sell on when it fetched three figures.

Like you Kim Tibbs, had the download as soon as it came out, same for a few others.  I am favouring the download over the 45 in some cases.  As for the CD tracks getting a vinyl release, the CD can be had cheaper than the 45 in some cases, madness and do not really see the point.  

Edited June 8, 2022 by Chalky

[Soulagogo]

Mark  R  You’ve answered my original question ( buying for profit)

You have been championing these newer sounds for years , mainly on CD

which do not fetch a big audience on the sellers market,But  when they come on vinyl  It changes and I feel that some not all are just buying multiple

to make a profit rather than to enjoy the sound  .that’s not what our great music should be about , 

Richard 
 

 

 

 

 

 

[Daved]

10 hours ago, Mark R said:

It's all bollocks......half the people ain't interested in the Kim Tibbs tunes of this world until they're on a 45.

Rare soul/vinyl/45 only mentalities are fucking up new releases for good folk who just want the (one copy of a!) record at a normal price.

I wish the new release scene wasn't permeated with all this......boils my piss!

As a footnote, it's amusing to the likes of me when these 45 Kings pop up with their chests pumped, saying I played it here, I played it there, when we were playing it two months before from a download or CD.  What about Sir Wick, Elaine Stepter, Rance Allen?  Talk about being out of touch through "vinyl blindness"!!

 

Cheers,

Mark R

Case in point is that Kim Tibbs came out four years ago to little acclaim.

[Steviehay]

kim re released on red vinyl

[Chalky]

What makes a mockery of all this is once up on a time, repress was never considered a no no.  It was issue, reissue etc.  Repress isn't a reissue so should not be an issue at all....no pun intended.

[Andybellwood]

28 minutes ago, Steviehay said:

kim re released on red vinyl

Is this a limited edition  in red vinyl as a follow up to the sold out black vinyl press ? 

Edited June 8, 2022 by Andybellwood

[Chalky]

32 minutes ago, Andybellwood said:

Is this a limited edition  in red vinyl as a follow up to the sold out black vinyl press ? 

obviously

[John Reed]

On 04/06/2022 at 12:02, Happy Feet said:

Let's hope they release enough copies , is it cd or vinyl ? 

Its going to be both and yes, its nearly ready.  With regards to the number of items pressed, its an estimation game for the label owners.  They have an expectation, but no-one really knows if there will be demand for a particular vinyl release or not.  Although the cost difference is minimal between the pressing of 300 - 500 units, if you've got 5 or 6 releases on the cards the cumulative difference in cost can add up, especially for a small independent label and no record company wants deadstock sitting on their shelves unsold.  My view on represses is that if they're using the original stampers and not pressed retrospectively, irrespective if they're on different coloured vinyl or have apple stamps on them, they're still originals.

Over the last year or so, i've actually started thinking, why am I buying a record on vinyl when i've had the CD for years and that's made me more picky on what vinyl releases I buy.

Edited June 8, 2022 by John Reed

[Chalky]

29 minutes ago, John Reed said:

Its going to be both and yes, its nearly ready.  With regards to the number of items pressed, its an estimation game for the label owners.  They have an expectation, but no-one really knows if there will be demand for a particular vinyl release or not.  Although the cost difference is minimal between the pressing of 300 - 500 units, if you've got 5 or 6 releases on the cards the cumulative difference in cost can add up, especially for a small independent label and no record company wants deadstock sitting on their shelves unsold.  My view on represses is that if they're using the original stampers and not pressed retrospectively, irrespective if they're on different coloured vinyl or have apple stamps on them, they're still originals.

Over the last year or so, i've actually started thinking, why am I buying a record on vinyl when i've had the CD for years and that's made me more picky on what vinyl releases I buy.

Do you think 300 is enough?  I don't and it would appear many other don't given the many topics and comments about records selling out not just here but all over social media.  As a dealer in anything you should expect stock on the shelves and surely no one thinks a record is going to sell in days do they?  They should be prepared for record not selling out for maybe two or three years.  

There are plenty of labels that press 500, quite happy to have some stock, make no comment about how many they press (other than what I've been told personally) or how many they have left.  They are. quite happy to take some time to sell out.

Is a label owner happy enough to come on here and break down the costs?  There must be money in it as many have come to market and more to come.

Like you I'm beginning to think more and more about what I buy especially presses of material that has been on CD for years.  There are too may releases as it stands.

[Mickey Finn]

4 hours ago, Chalky said:

Spot on Mark.  It seems to be about creating an instant rarity and as soon that happens it is no longer about the music.  As you say music is supposed to be for sharing yet lots missing out, genuine buyers too.  People buying these 45s not interested in the track, just something to sell on when it fetched three figures.

Like you Kim Tibbs, had the download as soon as it came out, same for a few others.  I am favouring the download over the 45 in some cases.  As for the CD tracks getting a vinyl release, the CD can be had cheaper than the 45 in some cases, madness and do not really see the point.  

Overpriced vinyl has been used to cross-subsidise break-even or even lossmaking other formats by some labels. Buying stuff in anticipation of future rarity and profit might not be cricket, but since this is now a widely recognised (corrupt) practice the record/reissue label people might try to justify exploiting it if it means that more music makes it into the public domain and on a decent format because they have the finance to make it happen.

[Mark R]

On 02/06/2022 at 21:45, Soulagogo said:

Interesting comment on Deans excellent soul show tonight

by the guest  buy multiple copies of new releases and sell when

they hit discogs  at higher prices ,a bit of an insurance .Is this

what the producers want or everybody to get a chance of limited 

run

Out of interest, are you saying that this practice was effectively being promoted?  What was the context?

 

Cheers,

Mark R

[Mark R]

On 04/06/2022 at 11:44, Joesoap said:

Kim Tibbs has got an album coming out. Guess they want people to buy that?

Kim Tibbs has a SECOND album coming out you mean.................but of course the first was CD only so didn't count!

 

Cheers,

Mark R

[Mark R]

On 07/06/2022 at 12:54, Soulfusion said:

An unfortunate by product is that a resale market is created and some benefit by making a quick buck on a £10 - £15 single but if people buying multiple copies help Sean, Kitch, Colin, Mark & Des et all continue to bring more historic and lost recordings to our ears (and assist the artists and their families) then it is of small concern to me.    

That's all well and good, and if the "rare soul scene" wants to operate like that, fine.................but it impinges on releases of new material on vinyl too.........and that pisses me off as some folk won't touch the same new track unless it's on vinyl, and they can be affecting someone like me getting a new release at a sensible price!

 

Cheers,

Mark R

[John Reed]

3 hours ago, Daved said:

Case in point is that Kim Tibbs came out four years ago to little acclaim.

Are you talking about the Expansion CD from 2017.  The first release of the current track was initially available as a download via Bandcamp in March this year as its a completely new song from her forthcoming double LP.

Edited June 8, 2022 by John Reed

[Mark R]

4 hours ago, Soulagogo said:

You have been championing these newer sounds for years , mainly on CD.............

Richard 
 

Yes, and it's not just me Richard many of us did/do, this isn't a point scoring thing, and actually there's an argument to be had that the likes of Fish, Dean (RIP) et al, who get these things in fresh off the boat and track them, alerting us to these gems, are the ones that deserve the real credit.

Doesn't make sense to me, basing your purchases on format.

Anyway, here's an extract from my Soul Up North column from 2002, look at the first entry.  How many on here would ignore that as it's not vinyl?.............  

Cheers,

Mark R

 

3 hours ago, Daved said:

Case in point is that Kim Tibbs came out four years ago to little acclaim.

Just to be clear for everybody Dave, you're not referring to this new track mate, but Miss Tibbs first appearance on the scene.  But yes, I played "Soul!" lots off that first album.

 

Cheers,

Mark

[Mark R]

4 minutes ago, John Reed said:

Are you talking about the Expansion CD from 2017.  The first release of the current track was initially available as a download via Bandcamp in March this year and is a completely new song.

Sorry, didn't see this post so it would appear I've repeated what you say John.

 

Cheers,

Mark R

[Daved]

3 hours ago, Mark R said:

Yes, and it's not just me Richard many of us did/do, this isn't a point scoring thing, and actually there's an argument to be had that the likes of Fish, Dean (RIP) et al, who get these things in fresh off the boat and track them, alerting us to these gems, are the ones that deserve the real credit.

Doesn't make sense to me, basing your purchases on format.

Anyway, here's an extract from my Soul Up North column from 2002, look at the first entry.  How many on here would ignore that as it's not vinyl?.............  

Cheers,

Mark R

 

Just to be clear for everybody Dave, you're not referring to this new track mate, but Miss Tibbs first appearance on the scene.  But yes, I played "Soul!" lots off that first album.

 

Cheers,

Mark

According to iTunes and Spotify, Where Would I Be Without You came out in 2018 or is that a mistake?

Even if it is, the point remains for Sir Wick and Elaine Stepter who's only had some recent interest as they've come out on a 45

 

[Mark R]

3 hours ago, Daved said:

According to iTunes and Spotify, Where Would I Be Without You came out in 2018 or is that a mistake?

Even if it is, the point remains for Sir Wick and Elaine Stepter who's only had some recent interest as they've come out on a 45

 

As far as I'm aware it's a new track Dave, though I don't use those platforms a great deal in truth.

I doubt this would have been totally missed 4 years back mate.

 

Cheers,

Mark R

[Joesoap]

On 08/06/2022 at 13:01, Mark R said:

Kim Tibbs has a SECOND album coming out you mean.................but of course the first was CD only so didn't count!

 

Cheers,

Mark R

Odd reply. Yes I know it's her second album. And where did I say the rest of this? 

[Chalky]

On 08/06/2022 at 17:08, Daved said:

According to iTunes and Spotify, Where Would I Be Without You came out in 2018 or is that a mistake?

Even if it is, the point remains for Sir Wick and Elaine Stepter who's only had some recent interest as they've come out on a 45

 

Its a mistake as far as I am aware.  Her first Lp was 2017 on Expansion and like Mark says I doubt this track would have been missed by everybody. 

[Shinehead]

Nothing to add to the thread about Vinyl releases but just a comment about the not buying sounds on different formats .

If I had not embraced CDs in the 90s I would have missed out on some great soul music.

And still true today with downloads , it's about the music to me I will take it on any format after all it is to listen to . 

[Chalky]

14 minutes ago, Shinehead said:

Nothing to add to the thread about Vinyl releases but just a comment about the not buying sounds on different formats .

If I had not embraced CDs in the 90s I would have missed out on some great soul music.

And still true today with downloads , it's about the music to me I will take it on any format after all it is to listen to . 

The northern scene with  its blinkered outlook to format is depriving itself of some outstanding music. Just look at what has come from the vaults and now on cd. 

[Shinehead]

1 minute ago, Chalky said:

The northern scene with  its blinkered outlook to format is depriving itself of some outstanding music. Just look at what has come from the vaults and now on cd. 

Dinosaurs, and doing the music we love no favours.

 

 

 

[Mark R]

1 hour ago, Joesoap said:

Odd reply. Yes I know it's her second album. And where did I say the rest of this? 

Should have made it clear that the sarcasm was in NO WAY directed at you............more the scenario of vinyl only in general.

 

Cheers,

Mark R

1 hour ago, Shinehead said:

Nothing to add to the thread about Vinyl releases but just a comment about the not buying sounds on different formats .

If I had not embraced CDs in the 90s I would have missed out on some great soul music.

And still true today with downloads , it's about the music to me I will take it on any format after all it is to listen to . 

Exactly 100%!!! 

[Mark R]

49 minutes ago, Shinehead said:

Dinosaurs, and doing the music we love no favours.

 

 

 

It was always going to be thus with the introduction of the "oldies all niter" 

 

Cheers,

Mark R

[Happy Feet]

Just had a notification,Kim Tibbs Where Would I Be etc Red Vinyl  for sale £75.45 on discogs really ?

[Harrogatesoul]

40 minutes ago, Happy Feet said:

Just had a notification,Kim Tibbs Where Would I Be etc Red Vinyl  for sale £75.45 on discogs really ?

That seller also has a copy of Winfield Parker @ nearly £800... Some of his prices are a joke. An unfunny one if folk buy at their/those prices. But as they say there's always one.... 

Edit. Correction there certainly is one who bought Kim Tibbs red vinyl @75 quid. I'd love the idea of the purchaser coming on here and explaining why they thought it was a good idea to buy a single for £75 which is readily available from Patrick @izipho soul for £14. 

Edited June 11, 2022 by Harrogatesoul

[Solidsoul]

On 09/06/2022 at 20:55, Shinehead said:

Dinosaurs, and doing the music we love no favours.

 

 

 

Dinosaur to you too!  Some of the new releases are ok, and I have listened, but they don't have the chrisma and production flair of the records from the 60's and the 70's in my opinion.  They are just simply not as good! 

 

Edited June 11, 2022 by Solidsoul

[Shinehead]

3 hours ago, Solidsoul said:

Dinosaur to you too!  Some of the new releases are ok, and I have listened, but they don't have the chrisma and production flair of the records from the 60's and the 70's in my opinion.  They are just simply not as good! 

 

The dinosaur quote was in regards of people who only want music on vinyl only and stupidly imo  miss out on great music because  is not on that format when it is released on CD or download only .

Edited June 11, 2022 by Shinehead

[Benji]

If I miss out on any new limited release I want I'll see if the label offers download. I'd rather pay a few bucks to the label for the mp3 than buying from any greedy re-seller.