"Next Album" rumor / speculation thread *UPDATE AUG 22/2023*

[ice cream sand pig]

You're all assuming the remix record, if released separately, would be available at regular retail stores (which are becoming less and less easy to find).

There's all kinds of ways they could release it on its own without going down that avenue. If the band and record company wanted to.

Digital only, digital and vinyl in an online exclusive. And so on.





/jarmo

Yeah, I was thinking maybe they could do a digital release (which wouldn't be risky I'm assuming) and then have custom packages available for die hard fans. Maybe to make sure the costs would be covered they could charge a certain amount to preorder them or something. I'm guessing then they could just sell them online or through Amazon or something? I would be willing to pay a good chunk of change if it was a real custom kind of thing (with all kinds of bonuses and artwork/stuff like that). Maybe for the people that buy it on itunes they could give out access codes that lets you view certain things online (new interviews and information about CD and its creation, artwork, etc...).

Needless to say I'd buy it as a standalone even without any kind of bonuses or custom packaging involved.

[pilferk]

You're all assuming the remix record, if released separately, would be available at regular retail stores (which are becoming less and less easy to find).

There's all kinds of ways they could release it on its own without going down that avenue. If the band and record company wanted to.

Digital only, digital and vinyl in an online exclusive. And so on.

/jarmo

There's still costs involved.

It still needs to make money.

And by limiting the options to buy, you limit that ability even more.

You're probably going to suggest that it's "cheaper" to release all digital..and logically, you'd be right.

The label will tell you the costs are roughly equivalent (because thats they way they do their accounting..check their SEC filings and annual reports).

They can do all sorts of stuff "if the record company agrees".  We agree there.  The trick is getting them to do that. No matter what, there are costs the label is going to attach (fairly or unfairly) to the product that they want covered.  That's just business.

On TOP of that..they really do everything they can to make scads of money on their releases.

[ice cream sand pig]

^^ Really, does releasing music on itunes actually cost anything though? I'm really surprised if that route is also risky.

[pilferk]

^^ Really, does releasing on itunes cost anything though? I'm really surprised if that route is also risky.

There's two questions there:

What does it actually cost.

What does the label say it costs.

All that really matters, to the discussion at hand, is the second part.  Their accounting filings, SEC filings, and annual reports show that the labels say the costs are roughly equivalent in physical vs digital.

How they justify that, I can only imagine.  But they do.

[ice cream sand pig]

^^ Well that's just strange. I can't see how that makes any sense at all. To put your music online you just upload it right? For example, don't people create music at home and upload it to itunes all the time? It can't cost that much can it? Maybe Axl could front the costs for us haha

I guess if they really wanted to get it to us and the record company was standing in the way they could always *gasp* leak it on purpose.

[jarmo]

They justify it with "that's how it is". Everything is treated the same. Like we are still buying out music mostly on vinyl. Maybe soon that'll actually be true. 

There's still costs involved.

It still needs to make money.

Of course. But which is better, spend some on it and sell it. Or spend money on it and give it away for free as a bonus disc.....




/jarmo

[pilferk]

^^ Well that's just strange. I can't see how that makes any sense at all. To put your music online you just upload it right? For example, don't people create music at home and upload it to itunes all the time? It can't cost that much can it? Maybe Axl could front the costs for us haha

It's a little more than that.  You're paying the "owner" of the store to use their digital storefront, payment processing , infrastructure, and storage space...essentially covering their overhead so they can do business. You're also paying for someone to digitally rip those files, and makes sure the mix is preserved (because there IS quality loss), etc.  There's other cost you'd be surprised at too.

To put your music online...you're basically doing all that "for free", and then dumping it on some free storage space.  You can't really do that with a label release.

Now...are the costs REALLY the same as physical manufacturing and distribution?  I can't imagine they are...but I can only tell you what the labels claim in their accounting.

I keep telling you they are evil....

[jarmo]

Also, do you guys have any understanding why things don't always go as smoothly as wished regarding releasing music now?

There's a lot of explaining and reasons why the remix album shouldn't even come out in this thread. What if the topic was the new album itself?



/jarmo

[pilferk]

Of course. But which is better, spend some on it and sell it. Or spend money on it and give it away for free as a bonus disc.....

/jarmo

You know..you'd think the answer there is simple...but it's not.

The scenarios are more complicated, unfortunately, and involve someone(s) at the label doing a risk assessment on it.  Thinking things like "If we invest this many dollars in this, whats our return vs investing those same dollars, and the release slot, on something else" and "If we release this now, and it does poorly, what effect will that have on the bands brand name in relation to future retail offerings" and "Will this item, instead, spur additional or future sales to the point where it's more cost effective to be used that way, rather than as a stand alone release", and prolly 50 other things I'm not thnking of or mentioning.

I'll happily cop to the fact I don't know the answers to those questions, from the labels perspective.

But...neither does anyone not wearing a suit and tie and residing in their corporate structure.

So that's where we'll disconnect.  You think the label would look at the product and think it was a good investment/risk...because better "something" than nothing.

I'm not so sure.  I'm not so sure their definition of "something" is the same as the one we're using here.

[pilferk]

Also, do you guys have any understanding why things don't always go as smoothly as wished regarding releasing music now?

There's a lot of explaining and reasons why the remix album shouldn't even come out in this thread. What if the topic was the new album itself?



/jarmo

Oh, I definitely do.   But I'm not sure I was the target audience for that question....

[jarmo]

I'm saying that if I was the record company and saw that, I'd be thinking "nobody wants this thing".
And that's pretty sad.

Or, hopefully they'll see there's an opportunity to put out Chinese Democracy the way it was supposed to be released with proper artwork and a bonus disc.




/jarmo

[damnthehaters]

I'm saying that if I was the record company and saw that, I'd be thinking "nobody wants this thing".
And that's pretty sad.




/jarmo

I think your only talking about a couple people on here.  I also think Pilferk is blowing things way out of proportion.  Were talking about simply releasing a remix album (in some capacity and form) and he thinks its going to break the bank.  The initial question was would you like a remix album or not?  All of a sudden, were talking about IF the record company will support it or not and will it cover costs?  Were talking about GNR!  Were not talking about some band called Cement.  Yeah, a remix album won't sell as well as a new album, but it will still sell.  And I understand that GNR nowadays isn't as popular as they were in 1991, but they are still popular in comparison to the majority of other bands.  There IS an audience and want out there.       

[pilferk]

I'm saying that if I was the record company and saw that, I'd be thinking "nobody wants this thing".
And that's pretty sad.

/jarmo

Um....I think gauging demand is only part of it...especially as the label.

Remember, bottom line..its about the bottom line.

So, say you have something EVERYONE wants and something only some people want.

There are definitely times the label holds back the thing everyone wants, and gives them the thing only some people want, because it's more advantageous to their bottom line to do so. That's the way they think.

I suspect they wouldn't think of it as "nobody wants this", but more...how can we get this product to those that want it in a way that makes us the absolute most possible profit, in sum total, for the fiscal year.

As the label, I suspect they're looking at this album (assuming it's a thing) as a "freebie"...not in terms of giving it away for free, but in terms of being able to use it however they can best leverage it

That's really what we're talking about...not that we all don't want it.  But how the label thinks it might best be "used".

As fans, that might make some people a little cynical (or might make me look both cynical and jaded).  But that's what it comes down to.

[pilferk]

I think your only talking about a couple people on here.  I also think Pilferk is blowing things way out of proportion.  Were talking about simply releasing a remix album (in some capacity and form) and he thinks its going to break the bank.  The initial question was would you like a remix album or not?  All of a sudden, were talking about IF the record company will support it or not and will it cover costs?  Were talking about GNR!  Were not talking about some band called Cement.  Yeah, a remix album won't sell as well as a new album, but it will still sell.  And I understand that GNR nowadays isn't as popular as they were in 1991, but they are still popular in comparison to the majority of other bands.  There IS an audience and want out there.       

On the question of the original question..I think we all answered it.  Pretty much everyone would buy it, some are more excited by it than others.  We've launched into a tangental discussion about packaging and release strategy, now.  I think that's good!

I certainly don't think it would break the bank.  The labels could afford any potential loss and still be lighting their cubans with $100 bills. OK, that's an exaggeration..but they'd be doing just fine.

But I think the label considers profit above everything and anything else. It doesn't matter how much they have, or can afford to lose.

And the question, no matter what it is in terms of a band signed to a major label, is IF the record company will support what they're doing....because the label does what's best for the label, not, necessarily, whats best for the talent.

Man....can anyone tell how much I hate these organizations?

[jarmo]

So, say you have something EVERYONE wants and something only some people want.

Sure, there's a bigger market for an album of new studio material. But I think a remix album can also be used to create buzz....
The impact might not be as big, but it'd create buzz among the fans. And who knows where else. We're talking about remixes after all.

Some bands I like have released this kinds of things over the years. Some commercially, some fan club only releases...




/jarmo

[pilferk]

So, say you have something EVERYONE wants and something only some people want.

Sure, there's a bigger market for an album of new studio material. But I think a remix album can also be used to create buzz....
The impact might not be as big, but it'd create buzz among the fans. And who knows where else. We're talking about remixes after all.

Some bands I like have released this kinds of things over the years. Some commercially, some fan club only releases...


/jarmo

The fan club only thing is interesting..it would certainly get me to resubscribe.  But...you'd have to get label approval, obviously.  All things considered, I wonder if they'd give it....

And the part you quoted..not really the point out of context (and I agree...it's a no brainer on the new material preference).  The point was...the label isn't necessarily going to do the thing "everyone" (meaning their customers) want, just to satisfy them, either.

They're gonna do what's best for them.  And it works the other way, too....if it works best for them.

[jarmo]

Depends. Only available through fan club. Maybe not. But then again, if they don't wanna put it out on its own, that could be a way...
But then you'd have people complaining that they don't wanna pay a membership fee just to get that album.


In an ideal world, all of the above scenarios happen. Standalone release, a release with the remixes as a bonus and some kind of fan club only edition.

You can't please everyone...




/jarmo

[pilferk]

Depends. Only available through fan club. Maybe not. But then again, if they don't wanna put it out on its own, that could be a way...
But then you'd have people complaining that they don't wanna pay a membership fee just to get that album.


In an ideal world, all of the above scenarios happen. Standalone release, a release with the remixes as a bonus and some kind of fan club only edition.

You can't please everyone...




/jarmo

With live recordings, there's some wiggle room.

With anything done on the labels dime.....there usually isn't. By that, I mean, there's no "wiggle room" on having to get approval.  I'm not sure, given it's basis is Chinese (def a label release), they could slip it by without approval.  I think that's a tough sell.....and in this case, potentially set up for a litigious situation.

I mean...even so...I don't think having to ask for permission automatically means it's impossible, either.  I guess it would depend...

[ice cream sand pig]

What about if they offered a version that you had to preorder if you wanted it? They could charge a certain amount for the preorder that would at least cover most costs up front couldn't they? That may sound kind of desperate but sheesh, I guess the situation is a lot more desperate than I thought. If it comes down to this thing never getting an ok from the label in any form I hope the band purposefully leaks it.

[D-GenerationX]

I also think Pilferk is blowing things way out of proportion.  Were talking about simply releasing a remix album (in some capacity and form) and he thinks its going to break the bank.  The initial question was would you like a remix album or not?  All of a sudden, were talking about IF the record company will support it or not and will it cover costs? 

As I said last night, we got a bit down the rabbit hole on this.  Likely talking about it in greater detail than it really needed, considering it very likely never comes out.

But, such meandering happens where there is not that much to talk about.

Were talking about GNR!  Were not talking about some band called Cement.  Yeah, a remix album won't sell as well as a new album, but it will still sell.  And I understand that GNR nowadays isn't as popular as they were in 1991, but they are still popular in comparison to the majority of other bands.  There IS an audience and want out there.

I wonder.

Yes, we are talking about GNR.  But what is GNR in 2014/15?  Its not exactly a hot property.  I think part of what fueled a lot of the talk about the problems with a remix reflects that reality.  This is not a band playing with a lot of capital, nor goodwill and benefit of the doubt. 

GNR is a band that released an album 6 years ago that didn't exactly set the world on fire.  We may have liked it, but we are far from objective.  And there just ain't that many of us.

So let's make you the label.  Assuming Axl wants to push for a remix album first, you are looking at a band looking to release alternate versions of songs that didn't catch on the first time.  Even if you could make your peace with all that, you are faced with a guy that you have no idea will even promote it.  Dude could go AWOL again for whatever reason.  Is that a great recipe for success, such a project?

pilferk's repeated point about not jeopardizing a future release of new material is a good one.  The reality of the situation is that GNR might be down to their last chance.  If the next album tanks as well, what is their value to the label?