The cost of LP's and CD's - an observation

The easy answer is that LPs have become a status product. Status products cost more. CDs are not status products.

I'm glad there are people who still prefer the constraints of LPs and CDs. I sold off most of my CDs and recently found 40+ LPs in the basement I didn't know I still had that according to Discogs look to be worth at least $250 (using the lowest prices) wholesale in bulk. So now I can take those to my local vinyl store and get rid of them. Next step is to get rid of my old turntables that are wasting space. I was amazed to see that my first real turntable is selling for twice what I paid for it decades ago. Twenty years ago I thought I'd just wind up taking it to the dump. Meanwhile, my former CD and Bandcamp collection now resides on one 512GB flash drive and I have millions of albums to stream for ~ $150/yr.

ssmith

... LPs have become a status product. Status products cost more ...

They have ? To whom? Obviously not to you!

I'm glad there are people who still prefer the constraints of LPs and CDs.

@cleeds Obviously not to me. I got rid of (I thought) all my vinyl in 1990. But obviously to a niche of others it holds some kind of status, in-the-know or hip factor, otherwise all LPs would be at the dump with all the other obsolete technologies. Why else would you spend thousands of dollars on a turntable, cartridge and tens or hundreds of LPs on a technically inferior, inconvenient and space-consuming medium when the same money would give you 10-20 years of streaming millions of albums? OK, I get that a few prefer the added distortion of vinyl, but look at all the "pretty" megabucks turntables out there and all the vinyl aficionados who lust for them. That's not about function.

jssmith

...  it holds some kind of status, in-the-know or hip factor, otherwise all LPs would be at the dump with all the other obsolete technologies.

There are reasons to buy LPs other than the status you imagine they possess.

Why else would you spend thousands of dollars on a turntable, cartridge and tens or hundreds of LPs on a technically inferior, inconvenient and space-consuming medium when the same money would give you 10-20 years of streaming millions of albums?

This is the logical fallacy of "begging the question," also known as circular reasoning.

To understand why some still buy LPs, you might consider auditioning a high-end LP playback system at a local dealer. Then you might have an idea of what's possible with LP playback.

I didn't realize that my original post would generate so much discussion. I'm glad. Although I was thinking to respond directly to several posts, I think I'll just add a few extra thoughts:
1) I could have expanded on the comparing the cost between LP, CD to streaming. I'll leave that to some other economist or maths guy.
2) I purposely did not try to also compare quality as that is a whole other discussion, but it's a point well taken regardless of which format each person believes is good, better, best. You get what you pay for.
3) I listen to each type of media depending on my mood, desire/ability to handle a LP, to hear something new, and whether it's background music or a 'serious' listening session. Nope, not gonna tell you which is which as that will open another can of cables.
4) I like having a choice aside from just streaming as there have been many times the internet starts to act up as just as I want to listen. And I live in a city that has good bandwidth.
5) True, when buying used, that money does not go to the artist, but he did get paid for that CD originally. Should he get paid twice, three times? I believe there was a lawsuit long ago that tried to stop the sale of used CD's, video, etc. It failed. Also, in many cases I have brought the same album 2-3 times, and also then brought the CD. Then also streaming. How many times should you pay for one piece of music - another discussion thread perhaps? Now I don't get royalties, so my opinion might be different if I was.
Have a great and safe Thanksgiving all.