Re-Releases = Rip Off?

The only problem with the reissues are they are trying to cater for everyone and truely serving no one. A real shame, but I've been very happy with them. The combined bonus material is a stunning anthology.

It is a rip off when you consider ANATO being identical to the 2005 (apart from a small cleaning of bo rhap).
To me, that is dishonest to all those 2005 ANATO owners.
The remastering is still not definitive, bonus material is patchy.
If I was in the greatest band of all time and had plenty of spare time and didn't need cash, I'd take care to make sure my legacy was released the best it could be. But then again, plenty of badgers and foxes might die in the process.

Do I think they are a rip-off?  Probably. 

I haven't bought any of them because, I guess, I don't really want them.

pittrek wrote: rhyeking - the Japanese vinyl replicas were released in 2001. The 2004 edition has the same audio content, but it comes in standard CD cases
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Isn't it the other way around?

I own the Greatest Hits 1 from the EMI-Toshiba 'Queen Digital Remasters' series, dated on the CD as 2001 and on the sleeve as '01-11-21' (November 21st, 2001).

I don't own any of the mini-LPs, but when I look them up they consistently are advertised as 2004 releases, including Amazon Japan:

http://www.amazon.co.jp

and the Queen Vault:

http://www.queenvault.com/madeinheavenalbum.html

A genuine "rip-off" happens when something is advertised as one thing, inducing you to buy it, and when you get it, you find out its less than what it was promised to be. That's a real "rip-off".

If you spend money on something knowing exactly what you're getting and you don't like it, that's not a "rip-off" - that's buyer's remorse and that's your fault.

If you are disappointed that something isn't what you wished it were before you ever buy it, and yet you still buy it solely for the sake of being able to say you were "ripped-off", you're mental or childishly irrational.

If you don't like the looks of something and use rational decision making and don't buy it, you haven't been "ripped-off" because you're not out anything.

A lot of you who cry "rip-off" are incorrectly using the word as a shorthand way of saying "I want more unreleased Queen material I have never had access to before and no one's putting it in a shop for me to buy and its making me mad" - and that's fine, but don't call it a "rip-off", because it isn't.

Zebonka12 wrote: I don't really have to explain this, but it's not a rip-off.  When you look at something - for argument's sake, these reissues - you do a quick mental calculation of how much you want it vs. whether or not you think it is priced decently.  If you buy it, you've accepted the price of the thing, and it is your fault for buying it.  Or, you think it's too expensive, and you don't buy it - therefore you keep your money and no one has ripped you off.

There really isn't any such thing as a rip-off.  Take it or leave it, and if you're too cheap - just download the cunting thing ....

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

the only justification you would have for feeling "ripped off" is if they took your credit card details and the first time you actually saw what you got and how much it cost was when the goods arrived with a credit card receipt...that would be a rip off

they didnt do that....so nobody was ripped off

you can call it lots of things, "missed opportunity" "let down" "disappointment" "anti-climax" etc...but all of these things refer to the meotional or logical reaction to the announcement of the detail, rather than the process of purchasing it.....

so no....for anyone anywhere....this is NOT a rip off

Zebonka, Dr. Zoiberg and Brenski nail it right on the head.

No, not a rip off....if you don't like the product, don't buy it...i didn't buy them....simple as that!

Okay - maybe I used a wrong word (rip off instead of disappointment). I am not a native speaker.

It is simply disappointing to see another chance to reveal the teased tons of unreleased material gone to waste. 

I am surprised that many here do not seem to care that we may never hear genuine stuff from the vault, and instead are treated to those half-ready bonus EPs.

ct0409 wrote: Okay - maybe I used a wrong word (rip off instead of disappointment). I am not a native speaker.

It is simply disappointing to see another chance to reveal the teased tons of unreleased material gone to waste. 

I am surprised that many here do not seem to care that we may never hear genuine stuff from the vault, and instead are treated to those half-ready bonus EPs.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

as i said above - initial response could be "disappointed" but surely not now - weeks later? if you are still disappointed, the  you need to get a life...ffs - get over it......once you have been a queen fan a while you will get used to this kind of stuff....

for me...NOTHING they do, no matter how disappointing it is initially, EVER surprises me.....cos one thing is - QPL are completely consistent......never make any kind of effort

and who says we don't care? i htink you just become desensitised and immune to QPL's lack of iniitiative

rhyeking wrote: Zebonka, Dr. Zoiberg and Brenski nail it right on the head.

Couldn't agree more...I on the other hand, like the remasters...compared to the HR versions I was used to, they sounded really good...I think alot of people expected these remasters to be 5.1 digital surround 'you're in the studio as they are recording it' kind of audio. That's not gonna happen...sorry! Expectations are much too high! I live in the US, and I'm sitting here bitching ONLY about the fact that the other new remasters that came out everywhere else, are NOT available in the US and Canada. None of you know (ok, maybe GT and a handful of others) exactly what else is about to come out...sit back and be surprised, and at the end of it if all of a sudden your 'Hangman' didn't come out on CD in 5.1 perfection audio...oh fucking well! No one got ripped off...I think alot of people have forgotten the word of 'THANKS'!

K, rant over with...

mooghead wrote: Not worthy of a response....
Definitely worthy of a response! Thank you ct0409 as i've wanted to point this out a long time ago. This is obviously not for the fans but for the money. Like you said, the whole thing is for us to buy all the albums again because they reel us in with some shitty bonus tracks. Even if you believe they actually DID do this for the fans, you gotta admit they could have done a WAY better job with the bonus tracks.

It was a genuine rip off as such, in that for ages in advance they were promised to be 'deluxe editions' when, based on the standard recognised interpretation of that, they were nothing of the sort. So much so that they even dropped the 'deluxe' definition after the first batch. Having said that, it was only a rip off of our expectations because the track listings were still known before we handed over any money.Dr Zoidberg wrote: A genuine "rip-off" happens when something is advertised as one thing, inducing you to buy it, and when you get it, you find out its less than what it was promised to be. That's a real "rip-off".

If you spend money on something knowing exactly what you're getting and you don't like it, that's not a "rip-off" - that's buyer's remorse and that's your fault.

If you are disappointed that something isn't what you wished it were before you ever buy it, and yet you still buy it solely for the sake of being able to say you were "ripped-off", you're mental or childishly irrational.

If you don't like the looks of something and use rational decision making and don't buy it, you haven't been "ripped-off" because you're not out anything.

A lot of you who cry "rip-off" are incorrectly using the word as a shorthand way of saying "I want more unreleased Queen material I have never had access to before and no one's putting it in a shop for me to buy and its making me mad" - and that's fine, but don't call it a "rip-off", because it isn't.

^ what he said.

cmsdrums wrote: It was a genuine rip off as such, in that for ages in advance they were promised to be 'deluxe editions' when, based on the standard recognised interpretation of that, they were nothing of the sort. So much so that they even dropped the 'deluxe' definition after the first batch. Having said that, it was only a rip off of our expectations because the track listings were still known before we handed over any money.Dr Zoidberg wrote: A genuine "rip-off" happens when something is advertised as one thing, inducing you to buy it, and when you get it, you find out its less than what it was promised to be. That's a real "rip-off".

If you spend money on something knowing exactly what you're getting and you don't like it, that's not a "rip-off" - that's buyer's remorse and that's your fault.

If you are disappointed that something isn't what you wished it were before you ever buy it, and yet you still buy it solely for the sake of being able to say you were "ripped-off", you're mental or childishly irrational.

If you don't like the looks of something and use rational decision making and don't buy it, you haven't been "ripped-off" because you're not out anything.

A lot of you who cry "rip-off" are incorrectly using the word as a shorthand way of saying "I want more unreleased Queen material I have never had access to before and no one's putting it in a shop for me to buy and its making me mad" - and that's fine, but don't call it a "rip-off", because it isn't.

I think most people mean it was a "rip-off" in the sense that it wasn't what they expected. Yes it was great that they were able to include SOME good bonus tracks and videos but that was only some especially when they had the opportunity to include much better stuff and instead they just stuck in there stuff that was already released like Rock Montreal and Bowl tracks. 

And this is the main reason why I didn't spend a single dime on it. Why should I? If they release something totally new like a 70's live release, yes, then I'd buy it in a second. Hell, I'd even be willing to spend extra for it!