The supply of recorded music: A report on the supply
in the UK of prerecorded compact discs, vinyl discs and tapes containing
music
Summary of report (html format)
Full text (pdf format)
Adobe Acrobat Reader can be downloaded from http://www.adobe.com
Summary
The UK record industry is large and internationally important. Retail
sales in the UK amount to over £1 billion per annum and UK employment
associated with the industry exceeds 48,000. The industry earns considerable
income from licensing its recordings overseas. UK sales represent 7 per
cent of the world market, but it is estimated that a larger proportion
of world sales (about 18 per cent) are recordings involving UK artists.
Our inquiry has looked at both the record companies and the retailers
of recorded music in the UK. On the record companies side five multinational
companies, known as `the majors', account for about 70 per cent of the
market. These companies are EMI, PolyGram, Sony, Warner and BMG. We find
that a complex monopoly situation exists in their favour by reason of
their pricing practices, arrangements on parallel imports and terms of
contract with artists. The remainder of the market is made up of some
600 other companies known as independents, many of which are small and
specialize in particular genres of music, eg dance or jazz. Many of these
companies engage in similar practices to the majors but lack the majors'
market presence both in the UK and internationally. Across the UK industry
the great bulk of sales are of popular records, with classical music accounting
for only 9 per cent of sales.
On the retail side W H Smith, through its own shops and through its
subsidiary Our Price, supplies 26.6 per cent by value of the market. Since
this amounts to more than 25 per cent, this group of companies has a scale
monopoly. Other significant retailers are Woolworths (15 per cent), HMV
(13.5 per cent), Virgin Retail (4.2 per cent), Boots (3 per cent) and
Tower Records (2 per cent). There are also some 1,100 independent specialist
record shops and a growing number of `nontraditional' outlets such as
petrol stations and supermarkets. In addition, mail order and record clubs
account for some 12 per cent of the market.
Copyright is central to the operations of the record industry, both
in the UK and internationally. It allows record companies to invest money
and enterprise in creating commercial recordings which can be exploited
in both the home and overseas markets knowing that they have legal protection
against unauthorized reproduction. Copyright is also important in ensuring
that the talents of successful artists and songwriters are rewarded.
The MMC inquiry was prompted by concern about the prices of compact
discs (CDs), and particularly the fact that prices appeared to be significantly
higher in the UK than in the USA. Much of the apparent difference relates
to different tax arrangements. Sales taxes in the USA are considerably
lower than the UK's 17.5 per cent rate of VAT. Moreover, record prices
are displayed without sales tax in the USA, whereas shelf prices in the
UK include VAT.
We commissioned our own survey of comparative UK/US prices and found
that the real price differentials were considerably lower than is often
supposed. The survey showed that, when tax is excluded, the prices of
full-price popular CDs are on average 7 to 9 per cent higher in the UK
than in the USA at an exchange rate of $1.50 to the pound. The differential
for full-price classical CDs is greater at about 25 per cent. However,
some 55 per cent of classical CDs sold in the UK are in the mid-price
or budget categories and there are strong indications that the price differentials
covering the complete range of full-price, mid-price and budget CDs are
on average lower than the differentials for full-price CDs.
These price comparisons are based on an exchange rate of $1.50 to the
pound, which was the average for the second half of 1993. Variations in
exchange rates will lead to changes in the measured US/UK price differentials.
We sought to check whether record price differentials were out of line
with those existing in other low to medium priced manufactured goods associated
with leisure activities. We found that they were not. This suggests that
the price differentials for CDs are not the result of circumstances specific
to the record industry.
Apart from the influence of particular exchange rate levels it was argued
that the much larger size of the US market (resulting in longer manufacturing
runs and the ability to recover the high initial cost of a recording over
a greater number of sales) and the generally lower US retailing costs
(relating particularly to lower premises costs and higher labour productivity)
lead to price levels being generally lower in the USA. It has not been
possible to quantify the effect of these factors but we believe the arguments
have force and apply both to CDs and to a wider range of manufactured
products.
We also compared record prices with those in a number of other industrialized
countries and found that UK prices are generally lower. Thus it appears
that the UK is not experiencing systematically higher prices for recorded
music.
It was suggested to us that the differential with the USA could be eliminated
if the record companies' ability to control parallel imports were removed.
We do not believe this would be the case. Such a move would in any event
be contrary to the EC Rental Directive and could be damaging because of
the increased risk of piracy and the general weakening of copyright protection,
which is territorially based.
We found that the major record companies compete vigorously amongst
themselves and with the independent sector. New entrants are a pronounced
feature of the industry. The major record companies' strength in the market
place is balanced by powerful retailing groups. The major companies are
not therefore able to exercise market power to the disadvantage of consumers
and we conclude that prices are set at competitive levels in the UK market.
The major record companies are not making excessive profits.
Record retailing is also a competitive market. There is no evidence
that the scale monopoly of W H Smith enables it to exploit its position.
Its profits on record retailing are not excessive.
The record industry is a high-risk business. The great majority of recordings
do not sell enough copies to recoup their initial investment. Record prices
must therefore be set so that the earnings on successful records will
cover losses on the failures. It would not be sensible for the record
companies to price CDs, cassettes and vinyl records strictly in relation
to manufacturing costs, which make up only a small proportion of the total
costs. Instead record companies have developed pricing structures for
different recordings and different formats which reflect consumers' perceptions
of quality and value and hence willingness to pay. Given the strong competition
in the market we believe this pricing policy is justified.
During our inquiry a number of issues were raised in connection with
the contracts between artists and record companies. We found that the
record companies compete actively in securing the services of new and
established artists. Terms of contract have generally moved in the artists'
favour over the last 20 years. Artists are normally professionally advised
in their commercial negotiations with the record companies about contract
terms, both at the time of the initial contract negotiations and at subsequent
renegotiations. Ownership and control of copyright for a significant period
is essential to a record company that has made a large initial investment
in recordings and in an artist's career. We see no case for any change
in the contractual or copyright framework governing the relationship between
artist and record company. The proper forum for the resolution of particular
disputes between artists and record companies is the court.
We had some concern about the record companies' practice of giving free
singles to retailers as a means of promoting new releases. However, on
balance we think no change is required in connection with this practice
because it forms part of the competitive process and benefits the independent
retailers, who do not receive discounts and other promotional support
to the same extent as large retailers.
Finally, we also felt some concern that consumers might be misled by
the practice of some major retailers in displaying charts which show the
retailers' predictions of future sales rather than actual sales as recorded
in the national charts. Where retailers do this we consider that they
should make clear the basis on which the charts have been compiled.
Although we have found two monopoly situations to exist, we have not
found that they operate against the public interest.
Full text
Contents
|
Part I
|
Summary and Conclusions
|
Chapter
1 |
Summary |
Chapter
2 |
Conclusions |
Part II
|
Background and evidence
|
Chapter
3 |
Background to the reference |
Chapter
4 |
The copyright system and its enforcement |
Chapter
5 |
The record industry and the supply of recorded music |
Chapter
6 |
The retail market |
Chapter
7 |
Prices |
Chapter
8 |
The financial performance of the principal suppliers
of recorded music |
Chapter
9 |
Views of interested organizations and members of the
public |
Chapter
10 |
Views of industry bodies |
Chapter
11 |
Views of independent record companies |
Chapter
12 |
Views of the major record companies |
Chapter
13 |
Views of retailers, distributors and record clubs |
|
List of signatories |
Appendices
|
|
(The numbering of the appendices indicates
the chapters to which they relate) |
1.1 |
Conduct of the Inquiry |
2.1 |
Extract from the report of the National Heritage Committee |
2.2 |
List of Issues for discussion with major record companies |
2.3 |
List of Issues for discussion with major retailers |
4.1 |
Signatories to the Rome Convention |
4.2 |
Signatories to the Rome Convention |
5.1 |
Some large acquisitions by record companies, 1983 to
1993 |
5.2 |
Label market shares |
5.3 |
Changes in catalogue for one major record company between
1987 and 1992 |
5.4 |
Number of titles released by the major record companies
in various countries |
5.5 |
Sales profile in the top 200 of Tasmin Archer's album
Great Expectations |
6.1 |
Examples of retailers' charts |
7.1 |
Published dealer prices of the major record companies
for non-classical recordings, September 1993 |
7.2 |
BMRB International survey of retail prices, September
1993 |
7.3 |
BMRB International survey of retail prices, November
1993 |
7.4 |
Average US/UK retail prices for full-price classical
albums |
7.5 |
Sony retail price survey |
7.6 |
Management horizons UK/US price comparison survey for
leisure goods |
7.7 |
PolyGram's realized dealer prices |
8.1 |
The core business results of each of the major record
companies |
8.2 |
Extract from KPMG Peat Marwick's report on business valuations |
8.3 |
The major record companies: reconciliation of results
shown in Table 8.10 with the results shown in Table 8.5 |
8.4 |
Discounts and other allowance from record companies to
their customers |
8.5 |
Products and services bought-in from connected companies
and divisions |
8.6 |
Results of the major retailers |
11.1 |
List of the independent record companies which submitted
views to the inquiry |
Glossary |
|
Index |
|
Back to the top
|