(#canadianmusicweek, #cmw) An incredible 81.7% of new album sales come from just 1% of new release titles, according to details released by Nielsen Soundscan on Wednesday morning. "It's ridiculous," commented Nielsen executive David Bakula during the presentation at Canadian Music Week in Toronto.
But it's been that way for years, at least in the US. According to the same Nielsen dataset, the top 1% accounted for 83.3% of new album sales in 2009, and 82.8% in 2008. And, the figure was just shy of 80% in 2005, 2006, and 2007.
The story is much better in Canada, where stronger breadth and diversify exists - at least on frontline releases. In 2010, the top 1% accounted for 57.6% of overall sales last year, though previous years have also shown a lopsidedness. In 2009, the figure was 67.9%, and earlier years were mostly in the 60-percent range.
Here's a snapshot of the slide (pardon the bad lighting). For each year, the US is on the right, Canada on the left.
Paul Resnikoff, Publisher, reporting from Toronto.
Comments Closed
@Motema Thursday, March 10, 2011
Motema Music
Not surprised
@juliomuniz Thursday, March 10, 2011
Julio Muniz
it has always been the same
@giuliabaldi Friday, March 11, 2011
giulia baldi
it's a trend really, and not a nice one
jvandriel Friday, March 11, 2011
The difference between Canada and the US may have a lot to do with regulation in Canada by the CRTC and the enormous amount of money the Cdn Gov't spends on developing talent and recordings. So there is spillover from the predominant US pop music base, accompanied by the effect of subsidized acts. Many Americans have never heard of some of the top Canadian acts that have gained popularity due to minimum Cdn content rules for radio airplay - and many of these same bands fail to break the US market without that support.
wallow-T Friday, March 11, 2011
re: Canada:: Bingo.
As a culture, we are going to have to decide: do we want art, or do we just want cheap entertainment. Art requires subsidy. The Canadians understand this, as does most of Europe.
In the old days, label heads could use the profits from cheap entertainment to subsidize art music of more lasting value. Think of the Velvet Underground, of whom it was said: their album only sold 5000 copies, but everyone who bought a copy started a band.
Now, as America worships at the altar of the Free Market, any subsidies which were steered towards worthy artists have been squeezed out, because that money rightfully belongs to the stockholders. There is no reason, according to the god of the free market, for any music below that top 1% to even exist. Gaga, Bieber, Boyle and Beyonce should fulfill all consumer needs, and screw the rest, there's not enough money in it.
Coming next: the defunding of NPR, which will strike a huge blow to liberate us from art music. Isn't freedom glorious?
@tiz9000 Friday, March 11, 2011
Tom Butcher
So much for the long tail
Visitor Friday, March 11, 2011
No, no. It is so much for the hopes of the indie artists and labels that services like Spotify can change anything. What do you think the average Spotify user streams during his or her 20 hrs a month? Is it Lady GaGa or one of the thousands of (sorry!) unknown names in the deep-deep catalog?
@b_mcdonald Friday, March 11, 2011
Brad McDonald
Staggering statistic.
@lakdavinci Friday, March 11, 2011
Vinch The Great
DAY-UMB and the rich get richer.
@HBSmktg Monday, March 14, 2011
John Deighton
Follow up on last wk's music industry case in Harvard Business School Digital Marketing Strategy (#hbsdms)
Alex Patterson Monday, March 14, 2011
And why should it be any different? Radio onlys plays 1% of released music. And they play it over and over each hour day after day for weeks on end. The same freakin songs over and over. It is not uncommon to have the same song playing on 2 different radio stations at the same time.
Bobby J Tuesday, March 15, 2011
a new artist doesn't stand a chance unless they are affiliated or work with the artist in the one percent
@masonm2 Wednesday, March 16, 2011
mason munoz
RADIO MUST SUPPORT NEW ARTISTS! 1% ACCOUNT 4 80% OF SALES!
Lee Fox Thursday, March 17, 2011
Describing the situation as "better" in Canada because the top 1% of music releases there account for less of the overall income is nonsense and reveals the author's lack of objectivity.
The numbers could just as easily be interpreted as a lack of prowess on the part of top Canadian artists.
The numbers also raise the question of whether the "long tail" is a myth for most artists.
Any serious conclusions require more data than a single, poorly presented lecture slide.
OUR SPONSORS
© 2011 All Rights Reserved
Follow Us