Oh come on. You didn't buy the CDs as an investment, planning to sell. You got what you paid for. You can still listen to the CDs. You have lost nothing. A price drop matters only if you were planning to sell (as with a house).
I'm a bit puzzled by this claim: "If I were totally set in my ways, I really would be $40,000 poorer with no offsetting gain." Even if you were not to use new streaming services, you have had the wonderful experience of having listened to all that awesome music during the previous decades. Only you know whether that was worth the $40,000 you dropped on it. As for me, knowing what I know about the music I've adored, what that has meant to me as the soundtrack of my life, and how that has enriched my life for decades (on vinyl, casettes, and CDs), *that* is precisely a tremendous value for me that I will never regret spending all that money on.
I want to note, for the record, that I totally agree with you about housing deregulation. Even if that were to drive housing values way down, I never thought I was entitled to have that be any particular valuation.
Libraries no longer loan out CDs. (That is, in Fullerton CA). So they don't accept CD donations anymore either.
Instead use "playlists" on youTube. Takes up no space at all in your house.
Here's mine. I'm very proud of it. Put this in the search window "BEST OF THE LEAST known composers" And on the right click on "filters" and choose "playlists."
Just wondering, how do you think a musician should feel about this essay? It appears that a substantial source of their livelihood (CD sales) has recently been gutted of its economic value.
As much as I love my spotify subscription, I also feel guilty on behalf of the musicians whose CDs I used to buy, who no longer get that income (my understanding is that the formula for payment ends up paying the vast majority of musicians far less money than they would have made by selling their CDs, unless they are among the few with massive listening audiences).
I do still by CDs or digital downloads from bandcamp, etc, but not nearly as many as I used to (I believe my collection is a bit smaller than yours, but still in the thousands, and a fair number of those are duplicate CD versions of albums I had previously bought on vinyl).
3. Pleasure. joy in the object, status of ownership, identity, signalling
let's assume owning a CD collection is more likely to be for reasons of pleasure - you gain status from having every Beatles record, there is joy in the hunting and fulfilling a collection, the object is a work of art and so on
Owning a house is more likely to be for security and financial reasons - the potential home owner makes a bet on whether to buy or rent based on the likely future value before committing to a long-term mortgage. If the home owner experiences the pleasure of the home (e.g. it is a work of art) then it matters less
a better comparison is education. is it worth spending $100,000 on education and a certificate if the value of the education is diminished by a free alternative?
This is good, but I think undersells the value of owning CDs (and a local-only music streaming server.)
I pay for Apple Music to: a) spare myself the expense of running such a server, and b) to find new music and playlists.
But I thoroughly enjoy the insurance value of knowing I own (significantly fewer) CDs in case streaming music services become too expensive or stop being a source of valuable new music.
Also, did you really pay full price for every CD? Did you never sign up for Columbia’s CD subscriptions with 12 CDs for $1??
(I know it’s just to make your overall point. But I think you also ignore how having more neighbors makes my home more valuable by giving me more possible friends and collaborators and giving local businesses more incentive to locate close to us.)
Oh come on. You didn't buy the CDs as an investment, planning to sell. You got what you paid for. You can still listen to the CDs. You have lost nothing. A price drop matters only if you were planning to sell (as with a house).
I'm a bit puzzled by this claim: "If I were totally set in my ways, I really would be $40,000 poorer with no offsetting gain." Even if you were not to use new streaming services, you have had the wonderful experience of having listened to all that awesome music during the previous decades. Only you know whether that was worth the $40,000 you dropped on it. As for me, knowing what I know about the music I've adored, what that has meant to me as the soundtrack of my life, and how that has enriched my life for decades (on vinyl, casettes, and CDs), *that* is precisely a tremendous value for me that I will never regret spending all that money on.
I want to note, for the record, that I totally agree with you about housing deregulation. Even if that were to drive housing values way down, I never thought I was entitled to have that be any particular valuation.
There is a collective action problem here.
NIMBY loses housing value for sure (let’s assume) when new housing comes to his neighborhood.
But housing prices don’t drop until there is new housing everywhere else.
So for the NIMBY, losses look certain but gains a lot less so.
Libraries no longer loan out CDs. (That is, in Fullerton CA). So they don't accept CD donations anymore either.
Instead use "playlists" on youTube. Takes up no space at all in your house.
Here's mine. I'm very proud of it. Put this in the search window "BEST OF THE LEAST known composers" And on the right click on "filters" and choose "playlists."
Just wondering, how do you think a musician should feel about this essay? It appears that a substantial source of their livelihood (CD sales) has recently been gutted of its economic value.
As much as I love my spotify subscription, I also feel guilty on behalf of the musicians whose CDs I used to buy, who no longer get that income (my understanding is that the formula for payment ends up paying the vast majority of musicians far less money than they would have made by selling their CDs, unless they are among the few with massive listening audiences).
I do still by CDs or digital downloads from bandcamp, etc, but not nearly as many as I used to (I believe my collection is a bit smaller than yours, but still in the thousands, and a fair number of those are duplicate CD versions of albums I had previously bought on vinyl).
I don't think you are comparing apples with apples
a better comparison is between education and housing, not CDs and housing
Three reasons for ownership:
1. Security. Ownership ensures continued, uninterrupted access
2. Financial. Bet on the increase in value
3. Pleasure. joy in the object, status of ownership, identity, signalling
let's assume owning a CD collection is more likely to be for reasons of pleasure - you gain status from having every Beatles record, there is joy in the hunting and fulfilling a collection, the object is a work of art and so on
Owning a house is more likely to be for security and financial reasons - the potential home owner makes a bet on whether to buy or rent based on the likely future value before committing to a long-term mortgage. If the home owner experiences the pleasure of the home (e.g. it is a work of art) then it matters less
a better comparison is education. is it worth spending $100,000 on education and a certificate if the value of the education is diminished by a free alternative?
This is good, but I think undersells the value of owning CDs (and a local-only music streaming server.)
I pay for Apple Music to: a) spare myself the expense of running such a server, and b) to find new music and playlists.
But I thoroughly enjoy the insurance value of knowing I own (significantly fewer) CDs in case streaming music services become too expensive or stop being a source of valuable new music.
Also, did you really pay full price for every CD? Did you never sign up for Columbia’s CD subscriptions with 12 CDs for $1??
(I know it’s just to make your overall point. But I think you also ignore how having more neighbors makes my home more valuable by giving me more possible friends and collaborators and giving local businesses more incentive to locate close to us.)