| John S Stuart 22.12.2008 11:47 |
I have been reading the existing 'singles box-set' threads with interest, and hopefully, without regurgutating the same old points, I thought now was the correct time to write this mail to those who may read it with an open mind. I stress this is my mail - and makes my points. If others have a different opinion - then that is good - but please start your own threads rather than flame mine. I also understand that I am not forced or compelled to do anything against my will. However, I do believe 'some' Queen fans agree with me, and so I thought I would like to articulate these thoughts on both mine (and their behalf). So; if at least one other person agrees with me, please leave a supporting message to show that it has been worthwhile. For example - I am very lucky, as I own six watches: A 'Rolex Perpetual Submariner' which I received as an anniversary present. A 1947 'Omega Chronometer Classic' which I inherited from my late father-in-law. An 'Accurist Greenwich Commemorative Limited edition' (which I bought myself) A '2001 Hamilton Electronic' a friend took back from the USA. A Queen 'The Works' promo wrist-watch (another present), and finally, A cheap 'Swatch' men's chronograph - which I wear most of the time. Now my point is - I am not in the market for another watch. If anyone wanted to buy me another watch for Christmas - please don't - I have enough. Spend your money on something much more needed and worthwhile. Therefore, I do not write this from 'sour grapes'. Nor do I have an axe to grind. Even if the 'singles box-set' was made from solid gold discs and jewel encrusted sleeves - I would still not be interested. I do not want it - I do not need it. It really is that simple - and in today's credit crunch economics and 'environmentally' friendly climate - I think that this message should be heard clear and loud - the 'singles box-set' is a marketing disaster. (As I so eloquently expressed in the past - wrapping sh*t in tinfoil does not make it chocolate!). Forget all the 'yes-men' mentality and sychophants. (If only someone had the bottle to tell Elvis he was eating too many burgers, or had the guts to say that Ali faught one fight too many - what different tales we could now tell). Might (as history tells us) - does not mean right - and this product is not right on so many levels - and needs to be acknowledged as such. Spin is for politicians, not buisness men. Queen are now a dying band - and if they think they are immune from the buffeting of the current economic fall-out, they will soon find that like F.W. Woolworths, they too will collapse from corporate incompetence. I really do not expect any sensible discussion or reply from GB or the 'powers that be', but the main lesson from 'Woolies' is - 'do not deliver - and the public will quickly move on'. As it is, I have a wallet full of cash and credit cards - but Queen PLC (do not deserve) or will smell one penny of it - and without money, QPL will quickly wither and dry-up. If QPL want my (or my representative) cash in the future, they better come up with some seriously inventive ideas - or it sounds like the death knell for one of rock's most ingenious and innovative bands. PS: Yes, I dare say QPL could survive without my single meagre solitary contribution to this project - but like many in here, I feel that my voice is not alone - and in that sense, united we may be able to boycott this sort of tatt in the future. Perhaps then, democracy may return to the paying customer. |
| Marcos Napier 22.12.2008 12:16 |
Bravo. Unfortunately, the few of us that will ignore this and other "new" releases aren't enough to stop them at QPL from getting their Christmas sales bonuses. |
| icmrocha (The Man From Planet Marzipan) 22.12.2008 12:20 |
Couldn't agree more, John.. Very well said indeed ! |
| on my way up 22.12.2008 12:50 |
I agree with many points made by John S Stuart. I think NOW is the time for Queen to release something new and really exciting. If they do not deliver the following years I fear many people will not be interested anymore. It's important to keep the Queen name fresh and that needs a nice release from time to time. Not releasing the same products over and over again. Thare are still many projects that can happen. Why not release something truly substantial like the BBC set, or a fantastic 70's DVD? Or a box with great things? or A wonderful book about the band? |
| gnomo 22.12.2008 12:54 |
John, I am no collector, nor completist, nor even proper fan of the band, and I don't have much money anyway, so I wouldn't have bought this set even if it had been true to Greg's original project. Still, I do agree with you. I only wish we could have clearer info on the distinctions and boundaries between the company and the band, and how decisional power is distributed. Because I don't feel it fair that someone should take most of the flack, for someone else's decisions - as it has unfortunately happened often. But of course I am aware that none of that critical information will ever be made public. FWLIW |
| Darren1977 22.12.2008 14:18 |
Well done John. If we could only persuade other people here to do the same and not buy this shite and other similar releases we would be doing something worthwhile. But we are in the minority. |
| Sebastian 22.12.2008 15:25 |
I want a watch... |
| John S Stuart 22.12.2008 15:29 |
DARREN1977 wrote: Well done John. If we could only persuade other people here to do the same and not buy this shite and other similar releases we would be doing something worthwhile. But we are in the minority. Thanks for the support guys. It is nice to be recognised as something other than some weird cult on the outer fringes of the 'zone! DARREN1977, what makes you think we are the minority? In the absence of any 'real' verifiable figures, all we have to rely upon is the 'spin' coming out from QPL, and frankly, I really do not hold any confidence in the reliability of QPL as a sole source of information - especially if they need to hi-jack 'Queenzone' to brow-beat us into believing how good this product is - and how well it has been selling. Interestingly enough, the following story has been doing the rounds since Sunday: link If established stars like Madonna are finding it hard to shift 'new' product - what gave QPL the arrogant assumption that stamping out a new glut of tired discs (albeit with the Queen logo) would perform any better? |
| John S Stuart 22.12.2008 15:32 |
Sebastian wrote: I want a watch... I will ask my wife for you, but I think she's too prudish... (Try using fake NY or Italian accent!) |
| Micrówave 22.12.2008 16:17 |
DARREN1977 wrote: Well done John. If we could only persuade other people here to do the same and not buy this shite and other similar releases we would be doing something worthwhile. But we are in the minority. So you're saying that if we DON'T buy this, QPL is going to release something we will buy? That's interesting marketing. I don't think that's ever been tried before. Usually when a brand stops selling, after countless re-packaging and re-designs, they just stop even trying. MAKE IT STOP. JUST MAKE IT ALL STOP AND GIVE ME SILVER HANGMAN STATE OF SHOCK, studio version. Ah, that feels much better. But I'm still probably gonna buy the box set. If anything, it will force me NOT to buy the Big Country Box Set which is better for us all. |
| inu-liger 22.12.2008 16:17 |
John S Stuart wrote:Sebastian wrote: I want a watch...I will ask my wife for you, but I think she's too prudish... (Try using fake NY or Italian accent!) I have a friend in NY. Would that help? :P |
| TRS-Romania 22.12.2008 16:30 |
well said John! But, do expect a lousy response from Greg (in case he wants to respond) |
| vadenuez 22.12.2008 18:00 |
I totally and cheerfully approve of John's post. There are some sad facts stated by the archivist which have been somewhat bypassed. Mainly the fact that this wasn't QPL suit's (awful) decision, but the band agreed of this too. "It was the band that decided not to go with the elaborate 10-CD set, not mine." "The band decided that putting out a Singles Collection which effectively offered 60 or 70% of the album catalogue (when you stop and think about it) was not what they wanted to do at this time. They simply wanted to offer a Singles set, not their life's work." Sad to say, after reading this I don't see a chance that any anthologies will be released anytime soon. |
| Reading Princess 22.12.2008 19:36 |
Nice one John. |
| oh-ja 22.12.2008 20:44 |
yeah. |
| john bodega 23.12.2008 00:11 |
I think you guys are underestimating human apathy. Yeah, it sucks that there's no great Queen product coming any time soon, but really; how many people give that much of a toss? Certainly not enough to send a message to the guys up top, at any rate. |
| Ken8 23.12.2008 01:31 |
vadenuez wrote: .....They simply wanted to offer a Singles set, not their life's work." Am I reading between the lines? Does that imply the band considers their body of work as "Queen" is not yet complete? |
| mike hunt 23.12.2008 01:35 |
I used to buy anything with the queen name on it, but not anymore. Those days are over. I have no desire to spend my money on another greatest hits package, it's a shame it has come to this. How many 80's concerts do we need on DVD before we get something from the 70's?....I don't even care about that, but this whole singles boxset drives me crazy. Give us a real boxset with rarities and other goodies. |
| Saint Jiub 23.12.2008 01:35 |
I agree John, but I do not believe that Queen/QPL gives a rats ass about customer satisfaction and releasing any significant archive material. There are several easy excuses as to why archive material will likely never be released: [listu] [li]It is just too easy for Queen to ignore the cries of, at most, a few thousand unhappy fans. [li]Queen seemingly has an endless supply of knuckle-headed completist hardcore fans that will buy any piece of shit that has the Queen name on it. [li]Recycled Greatest Hit packages do sell and are cheap to manufacture. [li]The profit margins and return on investment for an archive box set do not compare to a recycled box set of 13 two song CD's ($$ John Deacon). [li]Queen will not release unpolished archive material or imperfect live material from the 70's (Brian). [li]Queen are too lazy to seriously review the work put in by their archivist (Roger). [li]Queen are too hard-headed, and will not allow themselves to be bullied into releasing archive material. [/listu] |
| mike hunt 23.12.2008 01:40 |
Panchgani wrote: I agree John, but I do not believe that Queen/QPL gives a rats ass about customer satisfaction and releasing any significant archive material. There are several easy excuses as to why archive material will likely never be released: [listu] [li]It is just too easy for Queen to ignore the cries of, at most, a few thousand unhappy fans. [li]Queen seemingly has an endless supply of knuckle-headed completist hardcore fans that will buy any piece of shit that has the Queen name on it. [li]Recycled Greatest Hit packages do sell and are cheap to manufacture. [li]The profit margins and return on investment for an archive box set do not compare to a recycled box set of 13 two song CD's ($$ John Deacon). [li]Queen will not release unpolished archive material or imperfect live material from the 70's (Brian). [li]Queen are too lazy to seriously review the work put in by their archivist (Roger). [/listu] I'm not so sure a rarities boxset wouldn't sell, that's all they need is one interesting unreleased song as a marketing tool (think of the beatles boxset "free as a bird") and The long version of Bo Rhap could be another huge selling point. |
| Saint Jiub 23.12.2008 01:43 |
Nah ... it is not a guaranteed money maker. Queen have not taken a serious risk since 1982 when they got burned by Hot Space. Also, Free as a Bird was over-rated, and was a sub-standard (although worthwhile) Beatle's release. Granted the Beatle's archive material was imperfect but brilliant, but I do not think that Queen has the balls to put out imperfect, although interesting and desirable, archive material. |
| inu-liger 23.12.2008 01:53 |
mike hunt wrote:Panchgani wrote: I agree John, but I do not believe that Queen/QPL gives a rats ass about customer satisfaction and releasing any significant archive material. There are several easy excuses as to why archive material will likely never be released: [listu] [li]It is just too easy for Queen to ignore the cries of, at most, a few thousand unhappy fans. [li]Queen seemingly has an endless supply of knuckle-headed completist hardcore fans that will buy any piece of shit that has the Queen name on it. [li]Recycled Greatest Hit packages do sell and are cheap to manufacture. [li]The profit margins and return on investment for an archive box set do not compare to a recycled box set of 13 two song CD's ($$ John Deacon). [li]Queen will not release unpolished archive material or imperfect live material from the 70's (Brian). [li]Queen are too lazy to seriously review the work put in by their archivist (Roger). [/listu]I'm not so sure a rarities boxset wouldn't sell, that's all they need is one interesting unreleased song as a marketing tool (think of the beatles boxset "free as a bird") and The long version of Bo Rhap could be another huge selling point. Umm, I'm sure you're being sarcastic, but I think the Beatles Anthology had more unreleased rarities than just "Free As A Bird" and "Real Love" :P Also, I take it you never downloaded the jumbled mess that is the BohRap multitracks. |
| mc7t 23.12.2008 02:11 |
John..An excellent post, well written & balanced. |
| mike hunt 23.12.2008 02:15 |
inu-liger wrote:mike hunt wrote:Umm, I'm sure you're being sarcastic, but I think the Beatles Anthology had more unreleased rarities than just "Free As A Bird" and "Real Love" :P Also, I take it you never downloaded the jumbled mess that is the BohRap multitracks.Panchgani wrote: I agree John, but I do not believe that Queen/QPL gives a rats ass about customer satisfaction and releasing any significant archive material. There are several easy excuses as to why archive material will likely never be released: [listu] [li]It is just too easy for Queen to ignore the cries of, at most, a few thousand unhappy fans. [li]Queen seemingly has an endless supply of knuckle-headed completist hardcore fans that will buy any piece of shit that has the Queen name on it. [li]Recycled Greatest Hit packages do sell and are cheap to manufacture. [li]The profit margins and return on investment for an archive box set do not compare to a recycled box set of 13 two song CD's ($$ John Deacon). [li]Queen will not release unpolished archive material or imperfect live material from the 70's (Brian). [li]Queen are too lazy to seriously review the work put in by their archivist (Roger). [/listu]I'm not so sure a rarities boxset wouldn't sell, that's all they need is one interesting unreleased song as a marketing tool (think of the beatles boxset "free as a bird") and The long version of Bo Rhap could be another huge selling point. I'm not being sarcastic at all, and no never heard the bo rhap multitracks. How do you know the boxest wouldn't have a lot of interesting rarities?...You don't know. It could be a big seller, it's not out of the question. It could also flop. |
| Saint Jiub 23.12.2008 02:27 |
Yeah, I heard the Bo Rhap multitracks, but they will never see the "official" light of day, as they are too interesting and enjoyable for Queen to release. Remember, the leaking of those tracks put QZ into hot water with QPL. Also realize, because the archive "rare" material is imperfect, Queen will never have the balls to release it. |
| mike hunt 23.12.2008 02:38 |
are the multitracks the one heard on "the making of Anato" dvd?...if that's it, then yes I heard them, and loved every second of it. |
| Queen Collector 23.12.2008 02:46 |
Well done perfect Yes yes If we don't buy such the same always the same releases ...remastered versions;;;; reremastered versions;;;;;mastered of remastered versions;;;;; cd singles of b sides ( I have already began to hate the b sides) Democracy wil surely return to the paying customer.We must show our reaction for not being to buy such things |
| Rick 23.12.2008 04:07 |
Great letter, John! I loved the watch metaphor :) Anyway, I think Brian is the crucial factor in this matter. In my mind, he is the one making the final decisions. We all know he is a perfectionist, which means that gigs like EC, HP, Houston etc. will never see the light of day as those have all kinds of flaws. On the other hand, I can't really give a fair opinion about the HP concert as the bootleg video isn't really representative. Nevertheless, that concert was very important for Queen's career and an official release would be very welcome! We all know it will never happen, but fantasizing keeps you young (well sort of!). I think the truly great releases will come when Brian dies. Sounds harsh, but that's just my point of view. As Niek already pointed out in another thread: it's a hard to be a Queen fan. The initial ideas are often very promising, but the end result is often (rather) disappointing. It's a repetitive cycle which needs to be broken one day. The question is: when? |
| Benn 23.12.2008 04:33 |
Hi John, Again, can't fault the logic here. What I struggle with is QPL's complete lack of interest in listening to what the more serious fans / collectors have to say. Of course they're in a position of strength in terms of being the controlling factor in what does or does not come out. However, *SURELY* you'd have thought that they were thinking outside of the box (no pun intended) and looking to get the very best possible ideas to them from the best sources. If Greg was the funnel for that feedback, then more's the better, but there simply appears to be no interest in anyone outside of "the masses" who will happily settle for another collection with WWRY / WATC on it. The catalogue looks and sounds increasingly tired these days when compared to other "name" bands. The Beatles are about to go through a huge re-issue programme. The Who, Pink Floyd, AC/DC, Led Zeppelin etc have done it already. As a result, I can't remember the last time I listened to any Queen material having listened to virtually nothing BUT Queen from '79-'89 - I used to care SO much about the band and it's material and now I find myself laughing at it. Those in control of the Queen cannon simply can't be bothered to innovate. I simply can't be bothered to care any more. |
| Jjeroen 23.12.2008 05:08 |
Good idea, John! But does it mean that Rolex or Swatch or any watch-maker are out of business? I actually only have one watch (true! ;-) - and it is way out of fashion; you brought me the right idea what to ask for christmas. I DO need a new watch! Personally, I am as least interested in the singles box set as so many other people in here. But Queen is still a band that gets new fans and collector's every day. Some of them don't have a watch at all! And they sure don't want to start with the diamonds-on-platinum edition as their first watch. Yes, WE have had enough of this material for a long time. But that does not mean that demand for product that doesn't offer US anything does not have it's demand. The singles box set will sell just as well as ANY other new QPL product. Every product has it's own market and as long as Queen gets new fans and collectors recycling will remain profitable. And as long as Queen is a business and Brian doesn't turn into Mother Theresa - I'm afraid that we have to accept that there will be releases that 'WE' regard as uninteresting, turd in silverfoil or even plain crap. |
| Benn 23.12.2008 05:43 |
Jjeroen, You're absolutely right, of course, however, the fact remains that there is little - actually NO - product of interest on the market to satiate the appetites of the likes of *us*. As wonderful as it is that Queen still have the power to captivate new listeners every day with their unique brand of music, frankly, I couldn't give a fuck about those people and what is available for them to buy. They are, literally, spoilt for choice...... John Q Newbie hears WATC for the first time and thinks: "Wow - that's amazing; the fusion of *that* voice to such a unique guitar sound and a really solid rythm section. Amazing harmonics on both vocals and instruments. Never heard anything like that before! I'm off to the shops to see if I can learn more about this amazing band called Queen!" Off he goes. Walks in to HMV and heads strait to the Q section......... ".......N.....O.....P.....Q.......aha! Queen. Right, what have we here?" "I have Greatest Hits albums for all sorts of bands at home and they generally give you a good overview. That song I heard on the radio is on this one. GH1. And look!!! A GH2 and a GH3 set. Wow what a lot of choice!" "Hang on a minute though - here's 'Queen Rocks'. Maybe that'll give me more of the heavier side of the band's music?" "Would you believe it! Queen - The Platinum Collection! This looks like all the GH albums in one package!" "And here's 'Queen - The Singles Box Volume 1' - looks to be a nice package but there are 13 CDs with only a few tracks on each. I can get most of them on the GH albums or The Platinum Collection at a much better price and I only have to change the CD twice to hear all three!" "And all these individual studio albums too! Maybe I'll just start at the beginning and work my way through their career chronologically from the beginning. Head's up - I've got a choice here of all sorts of versions - Mini-LP CDs, 1991 Re-Masters. I can even get them on vinyl again. And, here's an import box set called "The Crown Jewels which is ALL OF THEM." "Hi." "Hello - you look a bit confused" "Well, yes I am actually - I'm a new Queen fan and have just decided to start really getting in to them because what I heard on the radio really excited me, you know!? My name's John Q Newbie." "Yes - the same thing happened to me about thirty years ago. They really are amazing. By the way - my name is John Q Collector." "Pleased to meet you John." "Likewise. Well, my suggestion is that you go through the albums as they were released originally. That way, you almost get to hear them like everyone else did originally. The material on the first three albums is quite heavy and very raw. The mid-late 70's material is more heavily produced and much more theatrical. The material in the '80's is heavily targetted towards radio and singles airplay with the 90's material moving back towards the production ethics of the mid-late 70s era." "How about the GH albums - there are 3 of those?" "Well, they're OK - Queen were a great 'hits' band and I'm sure you've heard of Bohemian Rhapsody?" "They recorded THAT!?" "Yes" "Is that on an album?" "Yes - 'A Night At The Opera' which was their 4th." "Well, in that case, I'll get their first 5 albums and move on from there then!" "Great - you really won't be disappointed. And, as well as all that, there are some cracking DVD's of the videos for their singles and a couple of live ones from concerts they played in the 1980s!" "Ha ha - give me a chance! I'll move on to thise later." "Good idea - small steps!!" "So, with all your knowledge, what are you in here for?" "Well, with it being Christmas, I'm looking to see if there's anything available for someone to buy me for a present. I've been a fan and collector for 30 years and, looking at all of this, I seem to have at least one copy of each of the tracks on the studio albums, if not 5 or 10 copies across fifferent formats / versions." "Wow! You're a real Queen devotee, aren't you?" "Yes - it's cost me a few quid over the years, but it's been worth it." "I'm sure. I bought The Who's '30 Years Of Maximum RnB' box set in 1993 - it's absolutely brilliant. Record Collector even called it the best box set ever released. If you haven't got the Queen version, why don't you suggest that as your present?" "Well, I would do, but Queen's management company haven't ever released one. They've been talking about it since Freddie Mercury died in 1991 but nothing's ever come along." "That's a shame, because they're such a big, famous band. Lots of other bands have sets like that available." "I know - we've been trying to get it released for years, but they seem to want to keep releasing GH albums of the same old material." "Well, that's great - especially for people like me." "I know, but it leaves me in a bit of a dilemma every year when people ask me if there's anything I'd like." "What about this Singles collection which was released last month?" "Nice idea, but I don't want to have to change the CD 13 times to hear everything and, besides, I have all the tracks on there at least once." "Oh. Well......er.........I'm not sure what to suggest....." "Don't worry. It's the same every year, but I still come in here every so often just in case something comes along." "Well, thanks for your help and, with all this to choose from, I'm completely spoilt for choice and I've only been a fan for a few days!" Tumble weed............... |
| Jjeroen 23.12.2008 05:57 |
You forgot the time in fan-dom where some people that already have all the songs in whatever form decide to start COLLECTING... "Oh, wow, a box set! Apart from the ANATO anniversary cddvd, I only have jewel case cd's at home - THIS sure would look good on my shelve! It has the cool, old band-logo on it. And look at those sleeves - I never saw them, only on the internet. Heck - maybe it will be even worth some money in a couple of years! It does say it is a limited edition...! Maybe I will even leave it in the shrinckwrap then..." |
| John S Stuart 23.12.2008 08:02 |
Again, many thanks for the support. But after being brainwashed into believing "lovely to look at - lovely to hold", why am I not suprised that there has been no reply from those this thread was addressed to? After all, there have been archivist 'pages' devoted to the petty pedantism of colour and spelling - so why no contribution to the 'real' issues? |
| John S Stuart 23.12.2008 08:29 |
Jjeroen wrote: You forgot the time in fan-dom where some people that already have all the songs in whatever form decide to start COLLECTING... "Oh, wow, a box set! Apart from the ANATO anniversary cddvd, I only have jewel case cd's at home - THIS sure would look good on my shelve! It has the cool, old band-logo on it. And look at those sleeves - I never saw them, only on the internet. Heck - maybe it will be even worth some money in a couple of years! It does say it is a limited edition...! Maybe I will even leave it in the shrinckwrap then..." Sorry Jjeroen, but with respect, I have to disagree. First: There are no safe investments - even the top 5 world banks have collapsed - wiping billions of dollars from shares - and leaving investors bankrupt. When times are good - and there is a lot of money and financial stability - people will pay crazy prices - even for 2nd hand Queen merchandise. When we hit recession and money is tight - we return to basics. Think back to the 1930's great depression, people would have sold their soul for a tin of beans - let alone keep hold of worthless trinkets. (After all, you can not eat a blue vinyl disc!). Generally, the market place is depreciating - not appreciating - so this means that over time your box set will become worth less - rather than worth more. Second: Fashion too also changes. Queen are recognised mainly as a 1970/80's band. That means that they are 20 - 30 years out of date. If we flashback to 20 - 30 years before my birth, who today would pay vastly inflated prices for an Al johnson, or Bing Crosby acetate? Indeed if the world's rarest Bing Crosby recording was suddenly discovered in a New York attic this morning - how much do you think it would be worth now? I accept that maybe in its hayday that the disc may have been worth a few thousand dollars - but now - I think you would be lucky to recieve a few hundred at best, simply because the world has moved on and no one is interested anymore. The same will be true of your Queen rarities in 30 - 40 years. Finally, what has killed all 'music' collecting is the internet. Really, anyone in here can "roll their own" Queen collection - for free. The whole back catalogue of both released and unreleased tracks is in here. Who really can fault the mentality of "why pay £40 - when I can have the same product free"? (Even the sleeves can be downloaded). I am sorry if I appear to rant - I do not mean to - but from whatever angle I approach this box-set from (and being an investment is a valid proposition) - it just does not make sense to me - on any level. It could be argued, that is why I am no millionaire, then again, unlike EMI, I am no bankrupt either! |
| Darren1977 23.12.2008 08:29 |
If the band and Jim Beach do not want to release anything from the vaults why don't they let someone else do it for them. Would it work though, a separate label handling all archive releases? Would Brian be able to let these tracks out of his mitts. It just seems to me to be a complee fucking waste to have all these great tracks Face It Alone and numerous others i have yet to hear, rotting away in the vaults and then having that muppet Greg play us snippets of these songs at the conventions with his great voiceover work "Property Of Cash Cow Productions". The mind boggles. I bought the Bon Jovi 4CD Box set that came out a couple of years ago. Some set over 45 previously unreleased tracks and all of great quality. Marc Bolan 4CD Set is out there with a load of 2 and 3 minute demoes. Great. Queen again come to the fore with numerous Hits Albums and now this Singles Box rubbish. I have said this on numerous occasions to Greg. WHY CAN'T THE BAND/JIM BEACH release a statemen or come here and give us THEIR REASONS FOR NOT RELEASING any demoes etc. Enough said. |
| Benn 23.12.2008 09:16 |
To be fair to Greg, John, he knows that the game's up. He had no need to post - no one was pointing the finger at him for getting this wrong because we, rightly, knew the ampunt of work that had gone in to the original project which was then suppressed by the powers that be. All he needed to do was push this whole event into history and forget about it. However. He then comes in and tries to justify the set, even though, as he knows from having done the original work, it's a pile of shit. Surely, if he stands behind his work, he'd defend it as opposed to voluntarily working on a set he knows will compromise him, his 'standards' and his work. My take on it is that he was "asked" to come in here and stir the pot a bit in order to generate a bit of discussion and (perhaps) interest in the set in the run up to Christmas. And, as a result, a few extra sales from people not quite sure whether they want it or not. He'll now do what he always does (a beast of type is this boy) and disappear from site until he either needs some information he should already have access to or has been asked ro spread sketchy details of a future official release which will be bastardised completely before it's release. |
| John S Stuart 23.12.2008 09:40 |
Benn, to be fair to you - I totally agree with you. I have no argument with Greg, and I have no illusions about the restrictions he works under either. That said, it would be nice of him - or some other 'represenatative' to come back and say "hands-up - we messed up on this one". I also understand that Queen owe me nothing - and if they wish to move on without releasing any back catalougue demos - then that too is fine. I can respect that. But at least retire with dignity. Love him or hate him - at least Eric Cantana knew when to quit. As did John Deacon. Perhaps it is time for QPL to die with respect - rather than this slow humiliating decay - which makes a mockery of both the Queen legacy and their fan base. |
| Marcos Napier 23.12.2008 09:45 |
Finally, what has killed all 'music' collecting is the internet. Really, anyone in here can "roll their own" Queen collection - for free. The whole back catalogue of both released and unreleased tracks is in here. Who really can fault the mentality of "why pay £40 - when I can have the same product free"? (Even the sleeves can be downloaded). I felt strange when I heard that the MJ/Freddie demos had leaked some years ago. I had been hearing about their existance since the 80s, and when I finally heard them I kinda thought "well what's left there as a rarity now?" I have raised my bootleg collections by 5x in volume since the internet, without spending a dime (or a dozen!). You can find nearly everything. At the same time that this caused a "bankrupt effect" in these people that had the bootlegging selling as a daily job, it should call the attention of QPL or whomever is in charge of that stuff. Dylan released a few (a lot) of bootlegs I think when he or his label noticed the potential these recordings have in terms of sales. Beatles fans probably also had all these "rarities" already, but what EMI did? Polished them. Took care of them. And that costs money... which QPL is not decided to spend at all. Greg will never respond to this more than he already did - he's an employee, and just does what his bosses tell him to. QPL? They're laughing at us. |
| Jjeroen 23.12.2008 09:51 |
John S Stuart wrote:
Jjeroen wrote: You forgot the time in fan-dom where some people that already have all the songs in whatever form decide to start COLLECTING... "Oh, wow, a box set! Apart from the ANATO anniversary cddvd, I only have jewel case cd's at home - THIS sure would look good on my shelve! It has the cool, old band-logo on it. And look at those sleeves - I never saw them, only on the internet. Heck - maybe it will be even worth some money in a couple of years! It does say it is a limited edition...! Maybe I will even leave it in the shrinckwrap then..."Sorry Jjeroen, but with respect, I have to disagree. First: There are no safe investments - even the top 5 world banks have collapsed - wiping billions of dollars from shares - and leaving investors bankrupt. I am sorry if I appear to rant - I do not mean to - but from whatever angle I approach this box-set from (and being an investment is a valid proposition) - it just does not make sense to me - on any level. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- John, of course I in my turn agree with you on this. There indeed are NO safe investments in these kind of materials. Especially Queen product that hits normal shops - 99,9% chance that it will never ever become a collectible at all. But do you remember how YOU thought about this kind of releases when you were 13? I remember how *I* felt about these things when I was 13! I was one of those people that DID buy these kind of things when I was 13! The now 13 year old Queenfans that just started collecting do think like that as well. (Yes, a lot of kids are up to their necks into the internet-freeware stuff and won't ever start collecting physical product. But there still is a group, still large enough to make releases like this a commercial succes. (And on a sidenote I even dare to say I am GLAD that there still is a group of youngsters that sees the value of and has interest in physical product.) Not entirely coincidentally, this IS the group of people that are actually least hit by whatever economical crisis... |
| john bodega 23.12.2008 09:58 |
Finally, what has killed all 'music' collecting is the internet. Really, anyone in here can "roll their own" Queen collection - for free. The whole back catalogue of both released and unreleased tracks is in here. Who really can fault the mentality of "why pay £40 - when I can have the same product free"? (Even the sleeves can be downloaded). Great, isn't it! Collecting is the silliest thing ever. Stamps are for collecting. Cards are for collecting. Music is for listening! I was pretty damned happy when Face it Alone leaked, lemme tell you... after all those years of bitching, I finally got to hear it. I would've paid money for the privilege, but I've never been given the opportunity. Collecting should be limited to physical media, ie. the original tapes or reels that the rare item came from. That way, shit hoarders can trade and have their trinkets, whilst listeners (the people who made the band so big in the first place) can hear the damned music. And if QPL don't like it.... too freakin' bad. It's their fault for not pulling the finger out and making stuff available. Right now, I can pick up my Anthology 2 CD and hear Paul McCartney breaking a glass by accident. If I want to hear Freddie muck up Bohemian Rhapsody and grunt "FUCK", what do I have to do? I have to dig up a VCD of that doco hosted by Richard E Grant. Isn't there something wrong with this picture? I guess it's a moot discussion now with Queen. There can't really be that much left of interest... except of course for Two Worlds Apart. I hear Deacy redid his bass parts for that during the No One But You sessions. |
| Jjeroen 23.12.2008 10:15 |
Zebonka12 wrote: I was pretty damned happy when Face it Alone leaked, lemme tell you... after all those years of bitching, I finally got to hear it. ...half of it... |
| John S Stuart 23.12.2008 10:32 |
Jjeroen, Zebonka12, I am pretty much in agreement with both of you. I am also divided in the 'Generalised' Vs. 'Secific' fan base target audience. As previously stated, the 'generalised audience' would be far more interested in the price and convenience of a 'Greatest Hits' CD or package. So I do not see the singles box set aimed at this audience. The 'Specific' or 'specialised' fan base has all these tracks already in various guises and packages. So I do not see how this set is aimed at this group either. Ofcourse, we have heard how it may be aimed at a third audience - 'the on-spec casual let's buy uncle Bob a Xmas present group'. This in itself is a good idea when times are good. But during a credit crunch, with less money being bandied about - this third group are interested in bargains - bottom line, and here - another greatest hits CD or package would suffice. Let me explain, I am not anti box set per se, its just that this specific set seems to begger all logic, (even poor business sense) so that is why I as a customer will not be buying one. I just wonder how many more poor releases it takes to flop before QPL realise the huge marketing mistakes they are making? |
| Holly2003 23.12.2008 10:37 |
Micrówave wrote:DARREN1977 wrote: Well done John. If we could only persuade other people here to do the same and not buy this shite and other similar releases we would be doing something worthwhile. But we are in the minority.So you're saying that if we DON'T buy this, QPL is going to release something we will buy? That's interesting marketing. I don't think that's ever been tried before. Usually when a brand stops selling, after countless re-packaging and re-designs, they just stop even trying. MAKE IT STOP. JUST MAKE IT ALL STOP AND GIVE ME SILVER HANGMAN STATE OF SHOCK, studio version. Ah, that feels much better. But I'm still probably gonna buy the box set. If anything, it will force me NOT to buy the Big Country Box Set which is better for us all. A very good point. I'm not suggested that people buy the singles box to encourage QP to release the long-awaited, proper box set, but I'm not convinced if it doesn't sell well that will have any effect on this decision either. In short, in the past Queen have done exactly what they wanted to do and have rarely, if ever, listened to their fans. I don't see that changing any time soon unfortunately. |
| Marcos Napier 23.12.2008 12:58 |
They might even think according to their brilliant marketing strategies that if the "masses" (10,000 is a "mass" of people? Compared to?) didn't buy this or other releases, they won't bother to release something that will have a much smaller "mass" of possible buyers. |
| poppo 23.12.2008 14:41 |
QPL are in the same situation as most record labels who don't get the profits they were used to make a few years back with new product. The CD market is going down bigtime. Since they hardly can make any profit on regular cd's, they won't make any profit on box sets at all. According to Gartner this Christmas will be the last Christmas for music cd's (see link. Billy Corgan of Smashing Pumpkins decided to only release (download) singles in the future, since almost no-one is buying full play cd's. QPL don't know how to handle this trend. They don't even sell downloadable tracks from the Singles Box thrugh their own website, whereas you can buy all tracks from the Singles Box individually in 320kbs drm-free mp3-format from 7digital.com. Since QPL is all about profit they just have to forget about any box set in the shape of cd/dvd/book. Just offer the entire catalogue including all remixes/edits/demo's/video clips/whatever in high drm-free quality in the webshop and everyone's happy (well at least I would be). We have the tracks we want and QPL make more money than they can with any box set. |
| Queen Archivist 23.12.2008 14:50 |
GB: PROBABLY BETTER I REPLY IN CAP LETTERS, JUST FOR EASE OF SEEING WHICH ARE MY WORDS, AND WHICH ARE JSS's... I have been reading the existing 'singles box-set' threads with interest, and hopefully, without regurgutating the same old points, I thought now was the correct time to write this mail to those who may read it with an open mind. I stress this is my mail - and makes my points. If others have a different opinion - then that is good - but please start your own threads rather than flame mine. I also understand that I am not forced or compelled to do anything against my will. However, I do believe 'some' Queen fans agree with me, and so I thought I would like to articulate these thoughts on both mine (and their behalf). So; if at least one other person agrees with me, please leave a supporting message to show that it has been worthwhile. For example - I am very lucky, as I own six watches: A 'Rolex Perpetual Submariner' which I received as an anniversary present. A 1947 'Omega Chronometer Classic' which I inherited from my late father-in-law. An 'Accurist Greenwich Commemorative Limited edition' (which I bought myself) A '2001 Hamilton Electronic' a friend took back from the USA. A Queen 'The Works' promo wrist-watch (another present), and finally, A cheap 'Swatch' men's chronograph - which I wear most of the time. Now my point is - I am not in the market for another watch. If anyone wanted to buy me another watch for Christmas - please don't - I have enough. Spend your money on something much more needed and worthwhile. Therefore, I do not write this from 'sour grapes'. Nor do I have an axe to grind. GB: THIS IS A VERY FAIR POINT. BUT IT DOES NOT CATER FOR ONE VERY BASIC, IN FACT RUDIMENTARY POINT/CONSIDERATION.... 'DUPLICATING' ONES COLLECTION, BUYING THE SAME OR SIMILAR ITEM/S OVER AND OVER AGAIN IS A BIG PART OF COLLECTING. COLLECTORS BUY VIRTUALLY IDENTICAL THINGS ALL THE TIME, DIFFERENT ONLY DUE TO SOME MINOR DETAIL. THAT IS THE VERY NATURE OF COLLECTING. RECORD COLLECTORS, LIKE TEA-POT OR STAMP COLLECTORS, DON'T STOP BUYING THINGS IN A NEW FORMAT BECAUSE THEY ALREADY HAVE IT IN OTHER FORMS ALREADY. OF COURSE THEY DON'T. YOU ARE SAYING THAT YOU HAVE 6 WATCHES, SO DON'T NEED MORE WATCHES. BUT A SERIOUS COLLECTOR OF WATCHES MIGHT VERY WELL BUY THE SAME WATCH OVER AND OVER, IF ONE VERSION WAS RED, ANOTHER BLACK, OR ONE WAS LEATHER STRAP BUT THE RAREST VERSION HAD A METAL STRAP, ETC ETC. HAVING EVERY VERSION IS WHAT MAKES THE CHASE EXCITING TO MOST COLLECTORS. THAT'S WHAT MAKES IT A 'COLLECTION'. Even if the 'singles box-set' was made from solid gold discs and jewel encrusted sleeves - I would still not be interested. I do not want it - I do not need it. GB: DID YOU BUY GREATEST HITS 1 OR 2 OR 3??? OR QUEEN ROCKS? OR THE COMPLETE WORKS BOX? OR THE BOX OF TRICKS? DID YOU BUY THE FLIX BOXED SET EVEN THOUGH YOU ALREADY HAD 1 AND 2 AS SINGLE VHSs? AS SOON AS YOU HAD ALL THE QUEEN ALBUMS AND SINGLES (WITH NON-ALBUM TRACKS) YOU BASICALLY HAD IT ALL. ANYTHING THEREAFTER WAS A CASE OF RE-PURCHASING SONGS YOU ALREADY HAD. ALL OF US HAS IN OUR COLLECTION THE PLATINUM BOX CD, THE GREATEST HITS 1 AND 2 BOX OF 1994, QUEEN ROCKS, THE 12" COLLECTION CD (1992), NUMEROUS COMPILATION LP'S, THE USA 'CLASSIC QUEEN' AND 'GREATEST HITS' CDS ALSO OF 1992 (AND THE RELATED VHSs).... AND SO MANY OTHERS, BUT IT'S ALL MATERIAL WE HAD ALREADY AND DID NOT REALLY 'NEED' AGAIN - TO USE YOUR LOGIC. EVEN THE 'RARE' LP IN THE COMPLETE WORKS BOX WAS STUFF WE ALL HAD ALREADY ON 7" VINYL. SO WHY BUY THAT? WHY YOU AND OTHERS HAVE SINGLED OUT (NO PUN INTENDED) QUEEN SINGLES COLLECTION BOX 1 FOR THIS UNFAIR TREATMENT, ESCAPES ME. IT'S A VALID POINT WHAT YOU SAY ABOUT NOT ACTUALLY 'NEEDING IT'.... BUT, BE FAIR, AND APPLY THE SAME LOGIC TO SO MANY OTHER PRODUCTS TOO. I TAKE IT THAT YOU NEVER EVER BUY A QUEEN PRODUCT THAT HAS CONTENT YOU ALREADY HAVE IN ANOTHER FORM???? OF COURSE YOU DO. YOU BOUGHT GREATEST HITS 1, 2 AND 3 JUST LIKE ANY FAN/COLLECTOR DID. BUT NOW SUDDENLY IT'S A DIFFERENT STORY FOR QS1. ONE LAW FOR CERTAIN PRODUCTS AND ANOTHER LAW FOR THIS. IT'S JUST NOT CONSISTENT. |
| Queen Archivist 23.12.2008 14:51 |
It really is that simple - and in today's credit crunch economics and 'environmentally' friendly climate - I think that this message should be heard clear and loud - the 'singles box-set' is a marketing disaster. (As I so eloquently expressed in the past - wrapping sh*t in tinfoil does not make it chocolate!). SO WHY HAVE SIX WATCHES AT ALL. ONE WOULD SUFFICE, JOHN. QUESTION FOR YOU, JSS. YOU ARE APPARENTLY A GREAT EXPERT OF RECORD MARKETING IN THE 21ST CENTURY. THIS I SUGGEST BECAUSE YOU SO EMPHATICALLY ANNOUNCE, EXPERT WITH 25 RECORD RETAILING EXPERIENCE-LIKE, THAT " the 'singles box-set' is a marketing disaster." BUT JOHN... THIS BOX IS SELLING EXTREMELY WELL TO PRECISELY THE PEOPLE IT WAS AIMED AT. THE BOX IS BEING ADVERTISED IN NUMEROUS MAGAZINES PURCHASED BY GENERAL MUSIC LOVERS (AS WELL AS IN SPECIALIST COLLECTORS' MAGS) AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC, OR 'THE MASSES' (IF YOU PREFER) ARE INDEED BUYING IT IN THEIR DROVES. IT'S ONLY THE DIE HARD FANS LIKE YOU AND 'CLEAR' ETC, THAT 'THINK' IT'S a marketing disaster. HOW DO YOU FIGURE??? JSS. WHAT YOU REALLY MEAN, IS THAT IT ISN'T WHAT 'YOU' WANTED. YOU ARE UPSET AND ANNOYED SO ARE BLEATING OUT UNFOUNDED COMMENT LIKE the 'singles box-set' is a marketing disaster, WHEN THE REALITY IS THAT IT'S SELLING VERY WELL. Forget all the 'yes-men' mentality and sychophants. (If only someone had the bottle to tell Elvis he was eating too many burgers, or had the guts to say that Ali faught one fight too many - what different tales we could now tell). GB: IT WAS NO ONE ELSE'S BUSINESS, JOHN. YOU COULD ATTACH THAT LOGIC TO.... "IF ONLY PEOPLE HAD LISTENED TO THE SO CALLED 'EXPERT' RECORD EXECS IN 1975 AND CUT BO RHAPSODY DOWN TO 3 MINUTES." WHAT THE HELL DID THOSE PEOPLE KNOW TOO?????? NOTHING. Might (as history tells us) - does not mean right - and this product is not right on so many levels - and needs to be acknowledged as such. GB: ACCORDING TO YOU!!!!!!!!!!!! HOW ARROGANT DO YOU SOUND. IT IS RIGHT IF IT IS SELLING TO PRECISELY THE MARKET IT'S PITCHED AT. IT'S AS RIGHT AS A PRODUCT CAN BE. YOU'RE GETTING CONFUSED WITH WHAT YOU WANTED AND WHAT YOU GOT.... NOT WHAT WAS 'RIGHT'. Spin is for politicians, not buisness men. Queen are now a dying band - and if they think they are immune from the buffeting of the current economic fall-out, they will soon find that like F.W. Woolworths, they too will collapse from corporate incompetence. GB: THIS IS RUBBISH. QUEEN WILL BE SELLING RECORDS AND DVDS FOR THE NEXT 20-30 YEARS JOHN, JUST LIKE ELVIS WILL BE, AND U2 AND ELTON JOHN. YOU DO TALK ROT SOMETIMES. I really do not expect any sensible discussion or reply from GB or the 'powers that be', but the main lesson from 'Woolies' is - 'do not deliver - and the public will quickly move on'. GB: YOU'RE COMPARING WOOLWORTHS TO QUEEN. LUDICROUS. DO YOU REALLY BELIEVE THAT IT IS THE DIE HARD LONG TERM FANS LIKE YOU AND ME AND OTHER QZ-ERS THAT KEEP THE QUEEN CDS AND DVDS HIGH IN THE CHARTS, OR THE 'MASSES', THE GENERAL MUSIC LOVERS OUT THERE - THE MILLIONS THAT HAVE SEEN THE WWRY MUSICAL AND THE Q+PR SHOWS?????? COME ON JSS, GET REAL. REALLY. IT DOESN'T MATTER REALLY IF THE MINORITY LIKES QS1, OR BUYS IT OR NOT. IT'S THE 'MASSES' THAT MATTERS. YOU SURELY MUST KNOW THIS. YOUR WOOLWORTHS ANALOGY IS ABSURD IN THIS CONTEXT. As it is, I have a wallet full of cash and credit cards - but Queen PLC (do not deserve) or will smell one penny of it - and without money, QPL will quickly wither and dry-up. GB: NOW YOU'RE SOUNDING LIKE A PETULANT FOOLISH CHILD JSS. LETS SEE HOW THE NEXT QUEEN (NOT Q+PR) CD AND DVD DOES IN THE INTERNATIONAL CHARTS. LET'S SEE IF QPL WITHER AND DRY UP. I THINK NOT. I THINK YOU KNOW IT TOO. NO POINT IN SAYING IT. If QPL want my (or my representative) cash in the future, they better come up with some seriously inventive ideas - or it sounds like the death knell for one of rock's most ingenious and innovative bands. PS: Yes, I dare say QPL could survive without my single meagre solitary contribution to this project GB: DEAD RIGHT. NOW YOU'RE GETTING IT. - but like many in here, I feel that my voice is not alone - and in that sense, united we may be able to boycott this sort of tatt in the future. Perhaps then, democracy may return to the paying customer. GB: I WISH I LIVED IN YOUR UTOPIAN WORLD. JSS... QUEEN PRODUCT WILL CONTINUE TO SELL MILLIONS OF UNITS LONG LONG AFTER YOU AND I ARE DEAD AND FORGOTTEN. YOU CAN BOYCOTT ALL YOU LIKE. SO CAN I. IT'S THE MOVES AND BUYING HABITS OF THE MASSES THAT MAKE THE DIFFERENCE, NOT THE MOANINGS OF THE MINORITY. THAT'S LIFE I'M AFRAID. |
| Pim Derks 23.12.2008 14:55 |
I'd be happy to buy the whole frigging Queen discography - if they did it the way Genesis did. Each album fully remixed in 5.1 on DVD-A/SACD, with the original stereo mix on CD. Slap on the various video's and get Roger and Brian together for 30 minutes to talk about the album. Invite some producers, engineers or whoever worked on the albums. It's no boxset with hours of new music - but I'd be very happy to have Queen II in 5.1 surround, Made In Heaven with Brian and Roger explaining how they worked on the tracks or Roger apologizing for More of that Jazz on the Jazz documentary. |
| Marcos Napier 23.12.2008 15:27 |
IT DOESN'T MATTER REALLY IF THE MINORITY LIKES QS1, OR BUYS IT OR NOT. IT'S THE 'MASSES' THAT MATTERS. YOU SURELY MUST KNOW THIS. I'm shocked. Or not. But I'm not surprised I guess. So what is the so called public this material was aimed at? People who saw WWRY? People that were interested in Queen after knowing Q+PR? Fans born after 1991? It should come with a warning label. About buying things "over and over": I'd buy something I already have if it was some kind of an "improved" version of it - a (well) remastered cd, for example. Throwing a couple of b-sides in a boxset with every release or something else like crappy remixes - being these b-sides or extras available elsewhere in other formats - isn't enough for me to buy something "over and over". |
| bitesthedust 23.12.2008 16:09 |
Simple answer to all this....if you are not interested, then do not buy it. As such, I will not be buying the boxset. |
| TRS-Romania 23.12.2008 16:58 |
Greg, I am still waiting on the sales figures !!! How well is it selling? (NUMBERS please!) |
| vadenuez 23.12.2008 16:58 |
I don't know the rest of you but I find the term 'masses' a bit disrespectful. And well, the archivist has officially spoken... Queen/QPL aren't interested in fans. They want to get loaded with money coming from 'the masses'. If they are so interested in sales & profits then The Cosmos Rocks' low sales must've been a bigger shock than we all believed. Maybe that's the main reason of this release? you know... Queen/QPL love to play safe: "Bad sales alert!. Put the singles in a fancy box and re-issue them at once!" |
| Queen Archivist 23.12.2008 17:15 |
Marcos Napier wrote:IT DOESN'T MATTER REALLY IF THE MINORITY LIKES QS1, OR BUYS IT OR NOT. IT'S THE 'MASSES' THAT MATTERS. YOU SURELY MUST KNOW THIS.I'm shocked. Or not. But I'm not surprised I guess. It's simple, cold and clinical BUSINESS, Marcos. Nothing more, nothing less. EMI and Queen, and everyone else in music, are in the BUSINESS of selling records. It's never been any different. Don't be shocked. It will be the majority and not the minority that makes this product viable or not. There's no point in being offended or shocked, no more than you would be if an employee of WH Smiths or Waterstones suggested that the next Harry Potter book will be aimed at the masses (majority) rather than the minority (die hard fans). You shouldn't be surprised, correct, I guess. |
| John S Stuart 23.12.2008 17:59 |
GB: Apart from rehashing your previous hype - I see nothing new in your arguments. This product is a disaster - and we all know it. QPL are beginning to sound remarkably like the Disney execs who believed 'Pearl Harbour' would be the solution to all their financial problems. Unfortunately, 'Pearl Harbour' turned out to be a huge turkey, lost millions of investment dollars - and guess what - it was the execs who were sacked - not the public who were castigated. Since then, Disney have not repeated this mistake, and have not invested the same levels of dollars into any of their movies. It seems 'getting burnt' is a very harsh lesson to learn. Already, this afternoon (23rd Dec 2008), some 'HMV' and 'Virgin' stores were punting this box-set at 50% discount prices - precisely because it is not selling. I am confident that after Xmas - this product will end up in even bigger discount bargain bins. (Tell you what - I will post photographs of these January 'sales' for you). My information from those inside the trade - is that stores have already re-packaged the singles box-set for return. Not only Queen, but all major artists have hit a massive sales slump. This is a very poor retail Xmas. This country alone is now £200 million in the red. That means that the credit crunch has already hit everyone. That was my point about 'Woolies' (which you seem to have missed) - at one time one of the biggest selling singles retail outlets in the UK - but sadly - they exist no more. Now many smaller CD outlets ('Our Pice' for example) and even some of the medium-sized 'HMV' and 'Virgin' Stores still face closure because physical sales are now at an all time low - and are destined never to pick up. (Now that is not only my opinion but the very reason both Sir Alan Sugar and 'Dragon's Den' Theo Paphitis refused to throw 'Woolworths' a 'lifeline'). (I have no crystal ball - but like those 'experts' - I am willing to wager quite a few retail outlets will also hit the wall in 2009). How Queen think they alone can buck these world-wide trends - is beyond me, but as you say, I am no business man. But one does not need to be a rocket scientist to see that both the market-place, and the world, has moved on, since those record collecting halcyon days, and that this sort of singles box-set no longer cuts the mustard. Yes: I do believe that CD singles and even the CD itself will be a dead format in 10 years time. Even now internet downloads vastly outsells physical product. Most people are interested in iTunes, iPhones, iPods or whatever. Physical 'ownership' has taken upon itself a whole new vocabulary and set of rules. Gone now are the days of simple 'restamping', and for QPL to ignor this message is a bit like King Cnut trying to hold back the tide. Again, I concede to very little business acmen - but we are now entering a brave new world of new capitalism and ownership - something which QPL can only ignore at their peril. |
| John S Stuart 23.12.2008 18:09 |
Queen Archivist wrote:Marcos Napier wrote:It's simple, cold and clinical BUSINESS, Marcos. Nothing more, nothing less. EMI and Queen, and everyone else in music, are in the BUSINESS of selling records. It's never been any different. Don't be shocked. It will be the majority and not the minority that makes this product viable or not. There's no point in being offended or shocked, no more than you would be if an employee of WH Smiths or Waterstones suggested that the next Harry Potter book will be aimed at the masses (majority) rather than the minority (die hard fans). You shouldn't be surprised, correct, I guess.IT DOESN'T MATTER REALLY IF THE MINORITY LIKES QS1, OR BUYS IT OR NOT. IT'S THE 'MASSES' THAT MATTERS. YOU SURELY MUST KNOW THIS.I'm shocked. Or not. But I'm not surprised I guess. I could not have said this better myself - and this is exactly the reason why the singles box-set (is) and will be confirmed to be the Xmas turkey we all know it to be. Low sales (to the masses) - and I defy GB to demonstrate differently. Business is about selling - so no selling = no business! Simple economics really. This product is not selling - and I for one refuse to buy - along with many others. What happens to JB's Xmas bonus this year Greg? |
| Marcos Napier 23.12.2008 18:44 |
Queen Archivist wrote:Marcos Napier wrote:It's simple, cold and clinical BUSINESS, Marcos. Nothing more, nothing less. EMI and Queen, and everyone else in music, are in the BUSINESS of selling records. It's never been any different. Don't be shocked. It will be the majority and not the minority that makes this product viable or not. There's no point in being offended or shocked, no more than you would be if an employee of WH Smiths or Waterstones suggested that the next Harry Potter book will be aimed at the masses (majority) rather than the minority (die hard fans). You shouldn't be surprised, correct, I guess.IT DOESN'T MATTER REALLY IF THE MINORITY LIKES QS1, OR BUYS IT OR NOT. IT'S THE 'MASSES' THAT MATTERS. YOU SURELY MUST KNOW THIS.I'm shocked. Or not. But I'm not surprised I guess. I am shocked more than surprised just with the use of the term "masses" so... not sure what's the word to describe my thoughts without sounding a bit disrespectful. Of course I (and many others) know that it's pure business and it shouldn't be different, and this is what we are a bit upset I guess - it's too much business. What else record companies have to do in their business than sell their products - recordings? It's obvious. What still "surprises" some is how they (as in QPL) keep using the same techniques for almost 30 years (considering the GH1 release). And how people still fall in their traps. |
| Marcos Napier 23.12.2008 18:57 |
Continuing... Unfortunately, this happens not only at QPL, but in other fronts as well. KISS (them again!) released some boxset some years ago that was half filled with regular album tracks - not singles, but just tracks that "fans like the most" I suppose. Sure, there were some rarities in there, but half of it was stuff that was released in the albums. I'm sure every band or artist's label have these "Xmas bonuses" stored for some special occasions if they wish to get some extra cash. But some refuse to use them or at least to use them that often without giving the fans some treats inbetween. Imagine if we had a Beatles (a better product "for the masses" than Queen I suppose) compilation of #1's every year or so? Would it still sell the same after a couple releases? At the same time, people are eagerly awaiting for the Beatles catalog in digital format... and I don't doubt it will be a sales hit. |
| shoemanbundy 24.12.2008 00:19 |
John S Stuart wrote:Queen Archivist wrote:I could not have said this better myself - and this is exactly the reason why the singles box-set (is) and will be confirmed to be the Xmas turkey we all know it to be. Low sales (to the masses) - and I defy GB to demonstrate differently. Business is about selling - so no selling = no business! Simple economics really. This product is not selling - and I for one refuse to buy - along with many others. What happens to JB's Xmas bonus this year Greg?Marcos Napier wrote:It's simple, cold and clinical BUSINESS, Marcos. Nothing more, nothing less. EMI and Queen, and everyone else in music, are in the BUSINESS of selling records. It's never been any different. Don't be shocked. It will be the majority and not the minority that makes this product viable or not. There's no point in being offended or shocked, no more than you would be if an employee of WH Smiths or Waterstones suggested that the next Harry Potter book will be aimed at the masses (majority) rather than the minority (die hard fans). You shouldn't be surprised, correct, I guess.IT DOESN'T MATTER REALLY IF THE MINORITY LIKES QS1, OR BUYS IT OR NOT. IT'S THE 'MASSES' THAT MATTERS. YOU SURELY MUST KNOW THIS.I'm shocked. Or not. But I'm not surprised I guess. Just putting some key words in bold like this doesn't prove your points. As I see it, Queen Archivist is pretty much just telling it like it is, and you're whining about it when you really don't need to be. You can't satisfy the minority with every release, and we have gotten some rarities in the past already. I'm personally not sure what you want besides to try to prove something you don't know. As I see it, he says it sells well, and he's actually in the business and was behind putting this compilition out, so I take his word over yours, which is essentially just ranting with bold font on some words trying to prove something you have 0 proof of. And it's their business, not yours. I'm lost why this is getting such a backlash. It's not your company your running and they're not looking to market to specifically the fans on a few message boards that want unreleased material. And personally again, going by what I've seen that's unreleased, it's either demos of stuff we've heard or just a couple songs that weren't a big deal to begin with). Somehow, though I will admit I don't KNOW(if I put it in bold maybe it will better help, huh? :) ), I'm guessing a WHOLE box set of unreleased material or whatever it is you want wouldn't be so interesting. Maybe some empty takes of songs(ever heard march of the black queen takes? pretty simple and not much to hear IMO), or an early version of a song, which will essentially be the song on one instrument. Turn this into a whole box set, I doubt there will be so much material to make a great seller. The Beatles have a whole catalog with tons of material that's unreleased and much more interesting from what I've seen so far, and I can understand why. So far I don't think any other band has gotten such a huge release of their behind the scenes material as the Beatles, maybe besides Jimi Hendrix, and that's because there's not such an amass of it worthy of making people spend who knows how much on a box set full of something that barely any music listeners will care for. Of course, correct me if I'm wrong and you're not looking for an Anthology thing as opposed to rereleases of old tracks, but I don't know what else it is you're fighting for here.. It may sound cold but I think you should take Queen Archivist's words as the truth. This is for the music listeners out there, the majority. They don't need a bad business venture just for the fans on here, that isn't going to make much money. It's business.... Enough from me, I'm sure I got some bold letters a' comin. |
| vadenuez 24.12.2008 00:36 |
Brian? |
| Benn 24.12.2008 04:24 |
shoemanbundy, re: >> As I see it, he says it sells well, and he's actually in the business and was behind putting this compilition out, so I take his word over yours, which is essentially just ranting with bold font on some words trying to prove something you have 0 proof of. But if you look at what's physically on show at HMV & Zavvi etc, you'll see the EVIDENCE which completely contradicts what GB is saying to be true. If a limited edition of 100,000 units WORLDWIDE (as pointed out by annother poster here) is already being discounted at the major High Street stores, that ought to point towards the fact that the price point is too high (at thevery least) to enable it to sell, let alone the fact that the content is crap. Just because GB has a 'title' does not mean that he is "actually in the business". He's being fed spin by QPL on what rate THEY say the set is selling at. But it's highly unlikely they will provide him with definitive NUMBERS to prove what they are telling him. |
| YourValentine 24.12.2008 05:59 |
I'll look out for the half-price offer. But then they might not release the other 3 boxes. I would hate to buy this box and they do not release the 3 follow-ups. Actually, that's my main concern with this box now that it's not what was planned initially. |
| Benn 24.12.2008 06:07 |
YourValentine, The Who released a similar set (Volume 1) and, once it was seen to be not selling, they pulled the plug on Volume 2. Figures that similar will happen with this one. |
| YourValentine 24.12.2008 06:29 |
Yes, that's what I am talking about. I hate buying a singles collection 1 and then there is no 2, 3 and 4. I own Greatest Video Hits 1 and 2 but there is no No. 3. I own The "A-Z of Queen" Volume 1 but there was never a Volume 2 or 3. The same with the DVD-A collection which was stopped after only 2 DVD-As. It's very much against my habit to finish things to have all these unfinished editions on my shelf. It's a very personal dislike and not representative for any Queen fan group but it keeps me from buying something with "Volume 1" written on it. |
| Benn 24.12.2008 06:43 |
.....but QP will take the gamble that people will do just that. Make the purchase with a view to the future and having to then buy subsequent volumes to make up the set. Ensures that they can keep the corn coming in over a sustained period as opposed to just releasing it all in one go. Hence what we have here in all it's purple glory! Wise and incredibly clever beings. But they won't get the likes of you and I! |
| Holly2003 24.12.2008 07:25 |
Queen Archivist wrote:Marcos Napier wrote:It's simple, cold and clinical BUSINESS, Marcos. Nothing more, nothing less. EMI and Queen, and everyone else in music, are in the BUSINESS of selling records. It's never been any different. Don't be shocked. It will be the majority and not the minority that makes this product viable or not. There's no point in being offended or shocked, no more than you would be if an employee of WH Smiths or Waterstones suggested that the next Harry Potter book will be aimed at the masses (majority) rather than the minority (die hard fans). You shouldn't be surprised, correct, I guess.IT DOESN'T MATTER REALLY IF THE MINORITY LIKES QS1, OR BUYS IT OR NOT. IT'S THE 'MASSES' THAT MATTERS. YOU SURELY MUST KNOW THIS.I'm shocked. Or not. But I'm not surprised I guess. There are bands out there that cater to BOTH the 'masses' and dedicated fans. Pearl Jam, for instance, release whole tours on cd. In fact, every aspect of PJ's marketing and sales strategy makes Queen look like amateurs. The wisest choice a band can take is to appease the widest possible audience, and that includes the 'masses' and the dedicated fans whose spending power on Queen products on a one-for-one basis is probably 50 times that of one of the 'masses'. However, as you state, Queen cater only to one group. The thing is, anyone officially connected to Queen with any marketing or public relations acumen would see that policy has caused considerable resentment and might take steps to retain the goodwill of fans. Sadly, as Benn says, Queen appear to be surrounded by yes men. |
| Benn 24.12.2008 07:37 |
Holly2003, And you're absolutely right in saying "sadly". Greg's proposed set would have been absolutely wonderful, however it had been released - either as physical product a-la the FM box or available on download with accompanying materials (booklet / pictures / essays etc) via QueenOnline.com or iTunes. It's shocking that QPL can have someone go to this type of effort, only to tell them that it's effectively a waste of time. Still, if the BOA can spend hundreds of thousands of pounds on consultancy for the 2012 olympic project and then not put their plans in to place, I suppose QPL can act as they wish with their consultant's recommendations. But, whilst there are no voices to contradict what either Bran or Roger or Jim want to do (however constructive they may be), the status quo will be maintained. Perhaps we need another high profile tragedy (and that's not me wishing anything upon anyone or being facetious in any way) within the camp to trigger some action? |
| John S Stuart 24.12.2008 08:38 |
shoemanbundy: Thank you for the reply. That is the beauty of the internet - it allows true democracy of speech - and I totally agree that we should all be allowed the freedom to voice our individual and collective opinions. Therefore, I respect what you have to say - and your opinions. However, as this is my turn to hold 'the conch' as it were - let me state my case clearly. I have already stated that "I am not anti box-set per se". I have never indicated that a substitute box set (or any other substitute alternative product) should be released. (Therefore I can not be accused of whining for such!) I have never had the audacity to tell QPL what to release - or any other company (Disney, Warner Bros etc) for that matter. I do not expect anything from anyone - let alone have expectations from Queen productions. Therefore my thread in sum is not about what I want - or fantasy alternatives - but about what has already happened - and my take on history - not my take on how to run QPL - that my friend, is a completely different conversation. So sticking to my point: It is a fact that these box sets are now selling 50% below the recommended retail price. (Notice no bold print there). I am sure that a visit to your own local High Street will demonstrate this to be the case. No need for long winded investigations - or protracted discussion, but if my point is accurate - will you have the courage to come back in here and admit "I told you so"? I predict that like the 'Who' collection - there will be no follow-up box set No2, or No3 - and while QPL (and some of the Stepford's) remain in a cocooned state of self denial - this will not in itself solve any of the world's economic problems. Finally; Mr. shoemanbundy, just to double clarify - I am not requesting anything - or want something in return. The Beatles, The Doors, Elvis Presley, Roy Orbison, Jimi Hendrex and Marc Bolan are all dead - (and Gary Glitter as a guilty pleasure is now economic leprosy) and I do not expect any new products from any of them . (If a better version comes along on blu-ray - I may be tempted to buy, but until that time I have no intentions of re-purchasing that which I already own). If that does not make me a true collector - then stroke my name off the Queen collectors list. Being drummed out the Brownies holds no terror for me. I wish you a very happy Xmas, and I hope you enjoy your box-set, and that you are very happy with your purchase. May it bring you years of pleasure and joy. For everyone else (whether it is a Queen box set, Plasma TV, an Automatic Range Rover - or a central heating system) wait until after the January sales - or even longer (mid Feb would be better). By then the consumer will be king. Hard-strapped companies will be fighting amongst themselves offering even bigger discounts for your dwindling disposible incomes - who knows - you might even pick one up for pennies on e-bay as some cash strapped junkie needs his latest fix. To quote Ted: "Wake up and smell the coffee". To quote Burns: "The man of independant mind is king of men..." So Mr. shoemanbundy, I now pass the conch to you so that you can come back and explain to me the problems with my way of thinking. PS: Pedantic pick of the week re nettiquette - I use bold (not to impersonate William Shattner) but to emphisise my own points. However, I do not need to shout by employing full-in-your-face CAPITALS! |
| Marcos Napier 24.12.2008 09:32 |
The wisest choice a band can take is to appease the widest possible audience, and that includes the 'masses' and the dedicated fans whose spending power on Queen products on a one-for-one basis is probably 50 times that of one of the 'masses' It seems that the marketing and sales experts at QPL don't know how much money we have waiting to be spent. On good stuff, though. And occasional post-Xmas discount sales too. |
| Markman38 24.12.2008 10:33 |
John I'm with you one this one I didn't thought of buying the box set. Becasue I don't read yeasterdays newspapar again and again too. It's old news, like the box set. |
| Micrówave 24.12.2008 11:25 |
This would not be unlike Queen to pull back volumes 2-4. Remember, Queen Rocks was promoted as "Volume 1"... and they weren't talking about those Hollywood promos. While it sold fairly well, perhaps it didn't meet the standards QPL was looking for. |
| John S Stuart 24.12.2008 13:07 |
Sorry to say "I told you so", but: "I told you so!" link It was also stated on the BBC radio news that another fifteen major high street stores face administration in the new year. I think that means - game, set and match to me? |
| Pim Derks 24.12.2008 15:27 |
Micrówave wrote: This would not be unlike Queen to pull back volumes 2-4. Remember, Queen Rocks was promoted as "Volume 1"... and they weren't talking about those Hollywood promos. While it sold fairly well, perhaps it didn't meet the standards QPL was looking for. Ah yes, Queen Rocks. Good idea, poor tracklist. Would've been a lot better if they would've included stuff like Princes of the Universe, Dead on Time, Let Me Entertain You and ofcourse the promised remix/remake of Tie Your Mother Down. But I guess Brian felt that too much material was written by Freddie - which ofcourse wouldn't have fitted with Brian being the rocker in Queen. So he decided to include some classic rock tracks like WWRY, I Want It All and other tracks written by himself which already were on GH1 or GH2. Because "That's what the people want to hear". |
| Pim Derks 24.12.2008 15:28 |
Pim Derks wrote:Micrówave wrote: This would not be unlike Queen to pull back volumes 2-4. Remember, Queen Rocks was promoted as "Volume 1"... and they weren't talking about those Hollywood promos. While it sold fairly well, perhaps it didn't meet the standards QPL was looking for.Ah yes, Queen Rocks. Good idea, poor tracklist. Would've been a lot better if they would've included stuff like Princes of the Universe, Dead on Time, Let Me Entertain You and ofcourse the promised remix/remake of Tie Your Mother Down. But I guess Brian felt that too much material was written by Freddie - which ofcourse wouldn't have fitted with the image of Brian being the rocker in Queen. So he decided to include some classic rock tracks like WWRY, I Want It All and other tracks written by himself which already were on GH1 or GH2. Because "That's what the people want to hear". |
| Queen Archivist 24.12.2008 16:21 |
You lot are a load of Devils. Box 1 is only just out and you're debating whether 2, 3 and 4 will be axed. It could only happen on QZ. |
| Lester Burnham 24.12.2008 16:24 |
Show us the sales numbers then to prove us wrong. |
| John S Stuart 24.12.2008 16:33 |
Queen Archivist wrote: You lot are a load of Devils. Box 1 is only just out and you're debating whether 2, 3 and 4 will be axed. It could only happen on QZ. So why begin a new thread to refute the point? |
| Darren1977 24.12.2008 17:47 |
On the subject of box sets whatever happened to the Crown Jewels Part 2 box, the first part being released in the usa. |
| idscorpion 24.12.2008 18:01 |
I don't want Rocks vol.2 or GVH 3 or QS 2,3,4 for that matter. Bring us Queen Dance Traxx II as promised 12 years ago!!! |
| 7Innuendo7 24.12.2008 19:02 |
@QA/GB, No, not only on QZ-- other bands pulling subsequent volumes have previously been mentioned. Still eager, though, to find out where the spoken word bit from BBC WWRY comes from...could that show up in a booklet, perhaps? maybe a sticker on the shrinkwrap? |
| shoemanbundy 24.12.2008 21:43 |
John S Stuart wrote: Sorry to say "I told you so", but: "I told you so!" link It was also stated on the BBC radio news that another fifteen major high street stores face administration in the new year. I think that means - game, set and match to me? Well, I'm honestly a bit lost what your point is here. That's a retail chain that went out of business, and I doubt they started going downhill because this Queen set isn't selling. What is your point with them, how does it relate to sales of the Queen set? If you want to say to everyone "I told you so", you should bring in some actual sales figures so we can work with some real evidence relating to this matter, not a retail chain that's going in the dumps because of this obvious economic recession that's going on right now. I just want to make clear I'm not passionate here about this topic and am not particularly on any sides here, I'm more just trying to figure out what is being fought here as I'm not sure what exactly has been done wrong here with releasing this set. And I will point out that Queen Archivist does come off as a dick with his making his responses more clear by making sure it's all in caps. I'd find it hard to believe anyone can read anything in all caps without the voice in your head SCREAMING it as if you were on a rampage. That's how it is for me anyway :p And FYI, I didn't buy this set and don't intend to. I'd rather stick to original LPs than buy anything new. Not even past CD releases. :) |
| John S Stuart 25.12.2008 07:15 |
shoemanbundy: Another very reasonable post - which deserves a reasonable answer. (Please note that I try to respect my 'audience' - as GB puts it - so I at least attempt to give creditable answers). Sorry if my posts can appear oblique at times - but I try to cram as much info into as little space as possible so the reader does not have to wade through pages of text. I accept in doing so I may skip past some points. So in essence - here is my (pre)/argument. The economy constantly changes. For example, between c5 BC - c1914 the blacksmith was king. Every village had it's own blacksmith. From sharpening knives and swords, wrought-iron work to (especially) working with horses, blacksmith's (although not unionised) were a giant staple on a global scale. What killed the blacksmith was not the economic downturn of the 1930's, but the mechanisation of WW1 - and the loss of horse-power as a major technological power. Flash forward to today: The reason 'MVC', 'Woolworths' and 'Virgin Mega Stores' have all gone bankrupt is not because of the credit crunch in itself - but because they are losing customers hand over fist - because the way we listen to music has changed. The internet has changed all that. Now customers are more likely to download than purchase. Music has been truely liberated, in that the relationship between the huge corporations and the customer have changed. No longer do I need to buy albums. No longer do I have to queue for material which runs out of stock. Technology has democratised customer dynamics on a scale and fashion never imagined before. Therefore, the writing has been on the wall for these retailers for the past two or three years - but rather than adapt - they died. So who is next? 'Blockbusters', 'Tower Records', 'HMV' - even the mighty EMI (the 'Queen' mother if you will) faces bancrupty - if not hostile take-over. The days of the dinosaur dynasties are over. Now, against that backdrop - coupled with a credit crunch and a more environmentally friendly aware society - what do QPL decide? "Let's release another needless and pointless boxset - for the 'masses!". This boxset was a bastard conceived in an ivory tower - doomed for failure before birth. It was always going to be an uphill struggle to break even. That is how out of touch the Queen ludites are with both their market and audience. It's not rocket science really, just unbridled sycophancy reaping its rewards. |
| Holly2003 25.12.2008 10:34 |
It's pretty clear that Queen don't care much for their fanbase. For instance, they don't turn up to conventions, they treat the fan club as an annoyance, and it's apparently hard work even to get a signature from them for the magazine. They are also content to re-release the same old stuff year after year rather than make even the tiniest effort to release something 'from the vaults'. They have also surrounded themselves with sycophants --- which would be fine if they were talented sychopants, but they're not. They have amateurs working for them at almost every level. Not only that, these amateurs appear to have a collective chip on their shoulder. There are fans here who are better art designers, better researchers, better restorers, better sound engineers and -- frankly -- nicer people than the professional idiots that Queen hire. So that leaves Roger and Brian in a very bad position: too arrogant and lazy to provide anything relevant, new or interesting, and too protected by untalented hangers-on for anything to change from within the organisation. All of which was fine until this point, because fans have pretty much had to lump it due to lack of choice/input. But now, as JSS & Benn have pointed out, the consumer is king and Queen Productions will notice that very soon when their profits begin to fall (if they haven't already). I predict new releases from the vault next year, and Brian & Roger suddenly finding they have the time to 'meet the fans' more often as they realise that profits have plummeted and the cash cow has moved on. I, for one, am looking forward to 2009. |
| Michael Allred 25.12.2008 14:19 |
Jim Beach will have to retire and Queen get a new manger with a 21st century attitude before QP starts putting out quality product on a consistent basis. |
| CM 25.12.2008 19:09 |
Dear Greg, just a simple question after reading all your words: Most of people will be buying the same stuff for decades, OK, so... can we now say hardcore fans do not matter at all? If so, I just need to know it so I can forget the dream of a Box Set. And then I will live aware of We Will Rock You / We Are The Champions being released in another 100 new amazing formats is the only kind of product this world will hear from the best band of the planet. Thanks in advance for your time, your answer and good work in things like the FM Box Set. |
| AmeriQueen 26.12.2008 03:45 |
7 points: 1. NOTHING today sounds anywhere near the 20 years back and further days of rock except for the occasional return of a Guns N' Roses, an AC/DC or some other old band that's fallen off and suddenly are making a comeback. 2. The Beatles Anthologies sets were not the best job that could be done, but they sold like crazy, brought big attention back towards the band, and had amazing success despite their limitations of technology and studio duration, two items that suggest Queen's would be far greater technically speaking. 3. I'm 35, but a lot of Queen fans are heading into their 50's and 60's. Do some of them need to die waiting and allow an earlier generation who knows GH I and II, not appreciating what an early take of The March of the Black Queen would mean to our ears. Must the Queen generation pass forward even more before our appetite is filled??? 4. Out of spite, I would not pay more than 20 bucks tops for this 'Singles' set, and I'd feel guitly if I got it for 20 because I went with the greed plan of selling refurbished content already available when so much is hidden to the public and even bootleggers. 5. I'd pay $200 per album for en equal length 2nd CD of album demos, cuts previously unreleased or leaked on the net. I'd pay $300 for Queen II - The Game. 6. There is NOTHING I can comprehend that suggests waiting as a good plan once the compiling effort has been accomplished. There's no trend, no future demand, and no profitable concept providing an argument for delay. It's already WAY overdue, and the net leaks have certainly cost a lot of quality material that could have once been worth a good buck. Feel Like is incredible, Polar Bear is historically fascinating, and many others would have been no brainer spend decisions before they became free downloads for me to collect. 7. Who would not profit from this overdue anthology of Queen's being released at last? |
| Queen Archivist 26.12.2008 06:35 |
CM wrote: Dear Greg, just a simple question after reading all your words: Most of people will be buying the same stuff for decades, OK, so... can we now say hardcore fans do not matter at all? If so, I just need to know it so I can forget the dream of a Box Set. And then I will live aware of We Will Rock You / We Are The Champions being released in another 100 new amazing formats is the only kind of product this world will hear from the best band of the planet. Thanks in advance for your time, your answer and good work in things like the FM Box Set. Hello CM I have never suggested that long time 'die hard' fans do not matter; I have only said, and it is irrefutably true, that it is the masses that matter most in the cold clinical world of industry and finance. In the world of selling records it is obviously the majority that has the 'clout' (if you will) rather than the minority. There is no reason to be offended or upset by this. Such rules dictate most aspects of life in this type of context. It is exactly the same principal as voting - voting in a true democracy I mean. Yes YOUR vote counts, mine does too... but only a tiny bit if it's against the main flow of popular opinion. But if you and me and 1,000 others all vote for the little man (the unlikely runner with no chance of winning in the real world), while 10,000,000 vote for the bookie's favourite (let's call him BUSH just for now), then HE will win, sickening though that prospect is for the minority, and our minority votes won't have changed that. Sad but true in the grown up world. So....... ultimately it is the masses that make the difference, while the voices of the minority (even if there's a million of them) go pretty well unheard - amid the overwhelming decision of the collective masses. I know that you and many others hate the fact that in the real world your/our minority views will be lost Vs that of the masses, but that still remains, as far as I know, the fairest way of things. If you were EMI or Queen, would you pitch your 'product' as 2,000 die hard punters, or 40,000 general public music lovers???????? You know the answer to this and no doubt fully appreciate the dilemma, so why are you fighting it and being, apparently, all offended??? I don't like it either, but I see it is the fairest and most logical way of things. |
| Holly2003 26.12.2008 07:33 |
Complete nonsense. In the music industry you can cater to both sets of fans. I've been given the Ozzy Osborne box 'Prince of Darkness' for Xmas. It has stuff that caters to both the casual fan but also demos and covers that would attract more dedicated fans. Rush do this, Zepelin do this, The Who do this, Pearl Jam do this, and so on. Among big rock bands Queen are probably the exception to the rule in releasing ONLY their big hits with no rarities, demos, alternate takes etc. that would attract dedicated fans too. |
| Holly2003 26.12.2008 09:02 |
I see GB has decided to slope off again without addressing any of the points raised here. Same shit, different day. |
| Marcos Napier 26.12.2008 10:42 |
Holly2003 wrote: Complete nonsense. In the music industry you can cater to both sets of fans. I've been given the Ozzy Osborne box 'Prince of Darkness' for Xmas. It has stuff that caters to both the casual fan but also demos and covers that would attract more dedicated fans. Rush do this, Zepelin do this, The Who do this, Pearl Jam do this, and so on. Among big rock bands Queen are probably the exception to the rule in releasing ONLY their big hits with no rarities, demos, alternate takes etc. that would attract dedicated fans too. While this, a band that is very know to like the masses's money - KISS - releases a boxset with half or more of studio tracks with a few demos. Because they know that masses are stupid. What about the "bonus tracks" of these remastered cds? What are for God's sake these remixes? Remixes are for dance tracks, not for rock'n'roll. Even the masses didn't like these, I suppose. At least they didn't remix BoRhap (and the possibilities are countless considering the 24-tracks). What JSS said is exactly the result of Greg's view: the companies are getting out of the business and are falling down like dead flies just because they don't know how to do their business anymore. Which company (of the music business) probably has/had (who knows who owns their catalogue anymore) the most sellable merchandise (aka Beatles)? EMI. And look how bad they are nowadays. |
| CM 27.12.2008 10:27 |
Greg, thanks for your answer. I think you are right, and people should understand you would love a box set of rarities as much as we do. I agree, big sales can only be based on the old stuff. That is nobody's fault. I dont see you as an enemy against our opinions but just as someone placed in the middle of both sides. Im glad there are compilations and old stuff released again and again to keep the name of Queen alive, but I live waiting the day we can buy something really new. I wonder how other bands have got some rare stuff released and Queen can not yet, but the answer is beyond me. You work for them and you know the real situation much better than many of us. That is why I respect your opinions and simply keep my fingers crossed until the day you got some good news for this harcore fans community. All the best. CM |
| Raf 27.12.2008 12:00 |
I don't know how people can be so shocked about those big record labels facing an end... If you stop to think, it didn't really last much. It all start in the final decade of the XIX century. Music's existed for thousands of years. Music has been made without them. They were useful to help spread one's work across the world. But with the internet, anyone can spread his/her own work to the whole world, so the labels aren't necessary anymore. Useful, maybe. Necessary, not really. It's not that hard to see a world without them in a couple of decades... |
| cmsdrums 28.12.2008 06:10 |
Queen Archivist wrote: GB: THIS IS A VERY FAIR POINT. BUT IT DOES NOT CATER FOR ONE VERY BASIC, IN FACT RUDIMENTARY POINT/CONSIDERATION.... 'DUPLICATING' ONES COLLECTION, BUYING THE SAME OR SIMILAR ITEM/S OVER AND OVER AGAIN IS A BIG PART OF COLLECTING. COLLECTORS BUY VIRTUALLY IDENTICAL THINGS ALL THE TIME, DIFFERENT ONLY DUE TO SOME MINOR DETAIL. THAT IS THE VERY NATURE OF COLLECTING. RECORD COLLECTORS, LIKE TEA-POT OR STAMP COLLECTORS, DON'T STOP BUYING THINGS IN A NEW FORMAT BECAUSE THEY ALREADY HAVE IT IN OTHER FORMS ALREADY. OF COURSE THEY DON'T. YOU ARE SAYING THAT YOU HAVE 6 WATCHES, SO DON'T NEED MORE WATCHES. BUT A SERIOUS COLLECTOR OF WATCHES MIGHT VERY WELL BUY THE SAME WATCH OVER AND OVER, IF ONE VERSION WAS RED, ANOTHER BLACK, OR ONE WAS LEATHER STRAP BUT THE RAREST VERSION HAD A METAL STRAP, ETC ETC. HAVING EVERY VERSION IS WHAT MAKES THE CHASE EXCITING TO MOST COLLECTORS. THAT'S WHAT MAKES IT A 'COLLECTION'. Even if the 'singles box-set' was made from solid gold discs and jewel encrusted sleeves - I would still not be interested. I do not want it - I do not need it. GB: DID YOU BUY GREATEST HITS 1 OR 2 OR 3??? OR QUEEN ROCKS? OR THE COMPLETE WORKS BOX? OR THE BOX OF TRICKS? DID YOU BUY THE FLIX BOXED SET EVEN THOUGH YOU ALREADY HAD 1 AND 2 AS SINGLE VHSs? AS SOON AS YOU HAD ALL THE QUEEN ALBUMS AND SINGLES (WITH NON-ALBUM TRACKS) YOU BASICALLY HAD IT ALL. ANYTHING THEREAFTER WAS A CASE OF RE-PURCHASING SONGS YOU ALREADY HAD. ALL OF US HAS IN OUR COLLECTION THE PLATINUM BOX CD, THE GREATEST HITS 1 AND 2 BOX OF 1994, QUEEN ROCKS, THE 12" COLLECTION CD (1992), NUMEROUS COMPILATION LP'S, THE USA 'CLASSIC QUEEN' AND 'GREATEST HITS' CDS ALSO OF 1992 (AND THE RELATED VHSs).... AND SO MANY OTHERS, BUT IT'S ALL MATERIAL WE HAD ALREADY AND DID NOT REALLY 'NEED' AGAIN - TO USE YOUR LOGIC. EVEN THE 'RARE' LP IN THE COMPLETE WORKS BOX WAS STUFF WE ALL HAD ALREADY ON 7" VINYL. SO WHY BUY THAT? WHY YOU AND OTHERS HAVE SINGLED OUT (NO PUN INTENDED) QUEEN SINGLES COLLECTION BOX 1 FOR THIS UNFAIR TREATMENT, ESCAPES ME. IT'S A VALID POINT WHAT YOU SAY ABOUT NOT ACTUALLY 'NEEDING IT'.... BUT, BE FAIR, AND APPLY THE SAME LOGIC TO SO MANY OTHER PRODUCTS TOO. I TAKE IT THAT YOU NEVER EVER BUY A QUEEN PRODUCT THAT HAS CONTENT YOU ALREADY HAVE IN ANOTHER FORM???? OF COURSE YOU DO. YOU BOUGHT GREATEST HITS 1, 2 AND 3 JUST LIKE ANY FAN/COLLECTOR DID. BUT NOW SUDDENLY IT'S A DIFFERENT STORY FOR QS1. ONE LAW FOR CERTAIN PRODUCTS AND ANOTHER LAW FOR THIS. IT'S JUST NOT CONSISTENT. Now I'm confused - all along Greg has said that the singles box set wasn't aimed at the fans/collectors, but was aimed squarely at joe public walking into the record store off the street. Now it seems he's saying it is aimed at the collectors, and with the specific reliance on them buying recycled product again cos it's in a different box and will look pretty on the shelf. I could be reading this wrong but that's how the above looks to me. In addition, he really does seem very angry and makes it sound along the lines of '.....well you've bought duplicate product in the past, so I'm afraid that ties you contractually in to buying EVERYTHING that is rehashed in the future - how dare you even say that this time you are not going to buy this product' !!! |
| Flush_Gurdun 28.12.2008 09:20 |
cmsdrums wrote:Queen Archivist wrote: GB: THIS IS A VERY FAIR POINT. BUT IT DOES NOT CATER FOR ONE VERY BASIC, IN FACT RUDIMENTARY POINT/CONSIDERATION.... 'DUPLICATING' ONES COLLECTION, BUYING THE SAME OR SIMILAR ITEM/S OVER AND OVER AGAIN IS A BIG PART OF COLLECTING. COLLECTORS BUY VIRTUALLY IDENTICAL THINGS ALL THE TIME, DIFFERENT ONLY DUE TO SOME MINOR DETAIL. THAT IS THE VERY NATURE OF COLLECTING. RECORD COLLECTORS, LIKE TEA-POT OR STAMP COLLECTORS, DON'T STOP BUYING THINGS IN A NEW FORMAT BECAUSE THEY ALREADY HAVE IT IN OTHER FORMS ALREADY. OF COURSE THEY DON'T. YOU ARE SAYING THAT YOU HAVE 6 WATCHES, SO DON'T NEED MORE WATCHES. BUT A SERIOUS COLLECTOR OF WATCHES MIGHT VERY WELL BUY THE SAME WATCH OVER AND OVER, IF ONE VERSION WAS RED, ANOTHER BLACK, OR ONE WAS LEATHER STRAP BUT THE RAREST VERSION HAD A METAL STRAP, ETC ETC. HAVING EVERY VERSION IS WHAT MAKES THE CHASE EXCITING TO MOST COLLECTORS. THAT'S WHAT MAKES IT A 'COLLECTION'. Even if the 'singles box-set' was made from solid gold discs and jewel encrusted sleeves - I would still not be interested. I do not want it - I do not need it. GB: DID YOU BUY GREATEST HITS 1 OR 2 OR 3??? OR QUEEN ROCKS? OR THE COMPLETE WORKS BOX? OR THE BOX OF TRICKS? DID YOU BUY THE FLIX BOXED SET EVEN THOUGH YOU ALREADY HAD 1 AND 2 AS SINGLE VHSs? AS SOON AS YOU HAD ALL THE QUEEN ALBUMS AND SINGLES (WITH NON-ALBUM TRACKS) YOU BASICALLY HAD IT ALL. ANYTHING THEREAFTER WAS A CASE OF RE-PURCHASING SONGS YOU ALREADY HAD. ALL OF US HAS IN OUR COLLECTION THE PLATINUM BOX CD, THE GREATEST HITS 1 AND 2 BOX OF 1994, QUEEN ROCKS, THE 12" COLLECTION CD (1992), NUMEROUS COMPILATION LP'S, THE USA 'CLASSIC QUEEN' AND 'GREATEST HITS' CDS ALSO OF 1992 (AND THE RELATED VHSs).... AND SO MANY OTHERS, BUT IT'S ALL MATERIAL WE HAD ALREADY AND DID NOT REALLY 'NEED' AGAIN - TO USE YOUR LOGIC. EVEN THE 'RARE' LP IN THE COMPLETE WORKS BOX WAS STUFF WE ALL HAD ALREADY ON 7" VINYL. SO WHY BUY THAT? WHY YOU AND OTHERS HAVE SINGLED OUT (NO PUN INTENDED) QUEEN SINGLES COLLECTION BOX 1 FOR THIS UNFAIR TREATMENT, ESCAPES ME. IT'S A VALID POINT WHAT YOU SAY ABOUT NOT ACTUALLY 'NEEDING IT'.... BUT, BE FAIR, AND APPLY THE SAME LOGIC TO SO MANY OTHER PRODUCTS TOO. I TAKE IT THAT YOU NEVER EVER BUY A QUEEN PRODUCT THAT HAS CONTENT YOU ALREADY HAVE IN ANOTHER FORM???? OF COURSE YOU DO. YOU BOUGHT GREATEST HITS 1, 2 AND 3 JUST LIKE ANY FAN/COLLECTOR DID. BUT NOW SUDDENLY IT'S A DIFFERENT STORY FOR QS1. ONE LAW FOR CERTAIN PRODUCTS AND ANOTHER LAW FOR THIS. IT'S JUST NOT CONSISTENT.Now I'm confused - all along Greg has said that the singles box set wasn't aimed at the fans/collectors, but was aimed squarely at joe public walking into the record store off the street. Now it seems he's saying it is aimed at the collectors, and with the specific reliance on them buying recycled product again cos it's in a different box and will look pretty on the shelf. I could be reading this wrong but that's how the above looks to me. In addition, he really does seem very angry and makes it sound along the lines of '.....well you've bought duplicate product in the past, so I'm afraid that ties you contractually in to buying EVERYTHING that is rehashed in the future - how dare you even say that this time you are not going to buy this product' !!! sorry mate... you're first point maybe i.e. argument shifting from collectors from masses. That I picked up a bit. But the other point i.e. angry and we MUST buy it... na, you've read that wrong I think. In all fairness it is a discussion, so if you personally can come up with a constantly changing argument with fresh view points then maybe he can too? Discussions wont get far with the same facts being brought up... you've been asking Greg from the start to stop bringing up the same points... as soon as he does you complain LOL. (I'm no fan of either side now lol). |