o2cool8
join:2002-04-19
Miami, FL
| redownloads
Its been said before, but this isn't accurate because some people downloaded for free, then went ahead and then went ahead and redownloaded it and paid for it. Making 10 million in one month sounds pretty good. I wonder how it compares to what they made on previous albums with a label? |
|
BosstonesOwn
join:2002-12-15
Everett, MA
clubs:
 ·Comcast
| Thats what I did , downloaded and listened , then went back and paid. I also did so with Reznors record.
It's the best way I know how to do it. I like to hear the music first.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" |
|
raythompsontn
join:2001-01-11
Oliver Springs, TN | Another Issue
The numbers also do not take into account those that downloaded, did not like the music, and thus did not want to pay. They may have removed the music from their system. |
|
DataDoc
My avatar looks like me, if I was 2D.
Premium
join:2000-05-14
Greenville, NC
·Suddenlink
1 edit | I'd pay just to not have to fight the packaging.
Not all of those downloads were kept after listening, and it's a whole lot nicer to find out you hate the album and delete it than kiss your cash goodbye because you can't return it.
Like I just deleted the Saul William's album.
--
Strappin’ the ol’ yowza-pow milk truck to grampappy’s riverside wikka-wokka. |
|
Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
 ·Site5.com
 ·AT&T Midwest
·Comcast
| reply to raythompsontn
Re: Another Issue
said by raythompsontn  :The numbers also do not take into account those that downloaded, did not like the music, and thus did not want to pay. They may have removed the music from their system. Then you have the people who downloaded it, liked the music, and didn't want to pay.
Either way, the main thing here is...
How much did Radiohead make from selling their album this way compared to going through a label? That is what they should be focusing on. |
|
The Beer
I Love It When A Plan Comes Together
Premium
join:2001-07-24
Omaha, NE
clubs:
2 edits | And the downloaded it at home, wen't to work downloaded it again....
Came home, lost the first download so downloaded it again. |
|
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
| Obviously an experiment but...
What about the other option? Charge everyone but only an amount equal to what the group normally receives if they distributed a CD through the normal channels. Isn't this amount less than $1.00?
Clearly they made $10 million but probably a lot liked it and still didn't pay. It would be interesting to see if they made more (or less) if they removed the free option but charged $2.00 for the entire album. And where is the revenue sweet spot where most pay and piracy is a not an issue? Is it $4.00? $3.00? $1.00? 50 cents?
Is there a price at which people don't consider it theft because they think, "my illegal copy is only costing them 50 cents...big deal..."
Is the inverse true where an internal moral compass forces payment because the thought of stealing 50 cents feels so wrong? (Like stealing all the spare pennies at the checkout lane...) |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to Nightfall
Re: Another Issue
said by Nightfall :How much did Radiohead make from selling their album this way compared to going through a label? That is what they should be focusing on. Probably more than if they went through traditional channels because everyone wants a piece of the action even before the album hits the store shelves. |
|
cork1958
Cork
join:2000-02-26
Fruitport, MI | Downloaded it. Didn't like it.
Didn't pay for it. Deleted it.
Great optional way to check out the music!!
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/ |
|
ATMW
@att.net
| reply to rradina
Re: Obviously an experiment but...
I buy a lot of used CD's at garage sales. My "sweet spot" is $1.00 a CD and at that price I usually buy all the CD's the seller has if they are not all scratched up. Sure I get a few dupes, but when I make an offer I can usually cut a deal. It's rare (real rare) for me to pay retail ($11.99-$19.99) for a CD. Last one of those was a CD the local church made up.....
I just can't justify the iTunes charge of $.99 a track and the restrictions they put on how I listen to the tracks. I only have one set of ears (least I think so) so can only listen to the tracks one at a time. Purchasing the CD gives me the flexibility to set up the play back on what ever I want. When the record companies wake up to this then I'll consider on-line purchases. I'd also like a release so I can sell off or transfer the tracks to a 2nd party. The way things are set up now that is not possible. Giving them to my sister is considered piracy!!
DRM'ed tracks does not stop piracy. What happens is one person buys the album. Rips the tracks at a bit rate they like and then passes it on to their friends as the friends can't download the DRM free tracks to use on their music players.
So my solution is to NOT buy any on-line tracks until the marketing people wake up to a world that is not rooted in vinyl thinking. I want flexibility, not restrictions!!
The new Eagles CD is only available at Wal-Mart.... I don't buy much of anything from that company and my local record store does not have it.... What are my other choices? Restrictive marketing is not the answer. |
|
major marco
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA
clubs:
| Writing on the wall
And what about the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ Radiohead stands to make from the soldout concert tours as a result of this "experiment." Road shows are where bands make the bulk of their profits.
Personally, I like Radiohead, but I didn't rush out and download the free album b/c I've been expecting the servers to be crashed due to overwhelming demand. I totally expected piss poor planning and so have been waiting for the novelty of the free download to wear off. If I download the tunes and like the music, then I'll pay for it. But this "experiment" should be the writing on the wall for the record companies who continue to believe that the world revolves around them.
--
The Toll
Let's Go Flyers!
|
|
HardwareGeek
join:2003-11-15
Brooklyn, NY
| When you do the Math
Radio head made 2.28 per download
They would of made 2.38 with the record industry
So they lost 10 cents big deal they still made 2 million plus dollars with out them.
--
Email/MSN: Michael at hardwaregeeks.comAIM: MikeR35292 |
|
NOCMan
Verizon Fios User
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Flower Mound, TX
| reply to DataDoc
Re: I'd pay just to not have to fight the packaging.
My thought's exactly. People are forced to buy music and if they do not like it can not return it because we could of made a copy. Talk about captive buyers.
I believe that's a unfair practice, but my complaints have fallen on deaf ears every time I've complained to those who can change the laws. |
|
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX
| reply to Nightfall
Re: Another Issue
said by Nightfall :How much did Radiohead make from selling their album this way compared to going through a label? That is what they should be focusing on. Nothing official has been released just yet, but speculation puts the sales figure at least around $6 million. If they are keeping all of the proceeds then Radiohead really came out ahead since album royalties hover around $1-$2 (depending on copyright ownership of the songs, length of song, number of tracks, etc) with the record label keeping the rest.
On top of that record labels tend to tag on production and promotional costs on their contracts, which means the label gets a lion's share of the profits while at the same time taking the artist's share of the album royalties. Essentially they are getting paid back their costs to produce (sometimes even promote) the record by the artist.
If Radiohead did all of their own production and distribution on this little project (which can't be more than a million... and that's a gross over-estimation) then they definitely netted more on this than with the label. On top of all that Radiohead will still get their share of the album sales from the label when the physical disk is released.
The cheapskates got their free album with no fear of copyright infringement, the band got millions of dollars from the people who like supporting the artist, fans got to buy the album at a price they felt was fair, the record label got zilch. It's a win/win  |
|
Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
·Site5.com
·AT&T Midwest
·Comcast
| said by SRFireside :said by Nightfall :How much did Radiohead make from selling their album this way compared to going through a label? That is what they should be focusing on. Nothing official has been released just yet, but speculation puts the sales figure at least around $6 million. If they are keeping all of the proceeds then Radiohead really came out ahead since album royalties hover around $1-$2 (depending on copyright ownership of the songs, length of song, number of tracks, etc) with the record label keeping the rest. On top of that record labels tend to tag on production and promotional costs on their contracts, which means the label gets a lion's share of the profits while at the same time taking the artist's share of the album royalties. Essentially they are getting paid back their costs to produce (sometimes even promote) the record by the artist. If Radiohead did all of their own production and distribution on this little project (which can't be more than a million... and that's a gross over-estimation) then they definitely netted more on this than with the label. On top of all that Radiohead will still get their share of the album sales from the label when the physical disk is released. The cheapskates got their free album with no fear of copyright infringement, the band got millions of dollars from the people who like supporting the artist, fans got to buy the album at a price they felt was fair, the record label got zilch. It's a win/win It will be interesting to see how unsigned artists do with this. For as much as the RIAA sucks balls, they do advertise and get artists airtime. Radiohead is popular because of their past popularity.
Getting your name out there as being a big time musician is not an easy task. Thats not saying this delivery system won't work for everyone though. It will vary. However, how much would some beginning unsigned artist make off this system? Not much probably. |
|
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX
| said by Nightfall :Getting your name out there as being a big time musician is not an easy task. Thats not saying this delivery system won't work for everyone though. It will vary. However, how much would some beginning unsigned artist make off this system? Not much probably. At the same time the overhead will be much less. One of the original purposes for MySpace was a way for unsigned artists to get their music out. Social networking sites such as that one are probably the best way to go. If I finally got off my butt and actually put together an album full of broadcast-worthy songs these are the steps I would take:
- Be prepared to sell a fully produced hard-copy CD. Last I checked it would cost $1-$2 per CD to make high quality pressings with color inserts in small amounts (1000 CDs). Less for a higher stockpile. Get set up with Amazon.com and you're golden.
- Create an eCommerce website to sell the songs for those who want to download. This will also be the official artist's site with message boards, news and all that other stuff potential fans want. I was thinking of offering free downloads at a lower bitrate than the purchased files, but maybe using Radiohead's business model would be a better approach.
- Get crazy with the social networking. Make a MySpace site with streams showcasing my songs along with links to Amazon and my site for purchase. Go to other social networking sites and do what you can on them to promote the album. Probably bug BBR with some shameless promotional plugs in the forums (don't ban me yet BBR) 
- Do some local networking with college radio stations and other independent broadcasts that would consider airing my music. This would also include talking to web radio stations. Maybe go to some retail stores that would like playing my music for their customers. Offer all of these outlets royalty-free access to my music to help sweeten the pot.
Will I end up making $6 million? Not likely. But good music has a way of getting around so if my music is any good I will definitely get a return on my investment. If it's really good then we're talking some serious supplemental income. Jeez... why am I not doing this now?!?!?
.
.
.
.
.
.
\\If a label did offer a contract I would definitely hire a music lawyer and make sure I have my bases covered (details on that would take a whole new post... if not thread). |
|
Lumberjack
Premium
join:2003-01-18
Newport News, VA
| Shareware for music?
Why not charged a fixed price like a user suggested above at the "sweet spot" but also provide a free ablum that only has half of each song. This is more or less how most shareware works in software land and I think people are more in-tuned to accepting software shareware/licensing than the music industry buy it vs. try it.
--
»www.fairtax.org |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
1 edit | reply to NOCMan
Re: I'd pay just to not have to fight the packaging.
said by NOCMan :My thought's exactly. People are forced to buy music and if they do not like it can not return it because we could of made a copy. Talk about captive buyers. This isn't a new release movie you know...
I can't buy that argument for the simple fact that people CAN and MOST OFTEN do know if they like the song. They've either listened to it on the radio, streaming through the web, digital music, etc. I would have to guess that damn near 99% of people that go to buy a song have already heard it in some sort.
So you think buying music with out a trial is unfair? So you'd want the laws changed? Sweet!
While you're at it.. I have a few other laws I want changed in the free market society too..
I want to live in my house before I decide to buy it.
I want to try the airline first to make sure I like the flight before I pay for it.
I want to have that flat screen in my home before I buy it.
I also want to take that cruise first before I buy it.. you never know, I may not like the view or the room.
And don't forget dinner.. restaurants vary so much. I may not like the food.. I CERTAINLY want to eat first before I decide IF I will pay for it.
Where is this notion coming from that if we don't like the way the free market works, we can just, by use of the courts or law makers, force those who sell a product to sell it in a specific way...
Talk about socialism at it's best!
Your post makes it sound like you have a right to music.. I won't address other topics because this only addresses music. But seriously.. I would be even MORE pissed is Barbara Boxer felt she could force the music industry to let people have a copy of their work first, by law, before they buy. Technically you already have it.. the radio is still free.
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..." |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| reply to Lumberjack
Re: Shareware for music?
Why not let the artist, who owns the music, simply decide how they want to offer their product on their own rather than sitting here discussing this like it's some sort of group decision?
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..." |
|
Mr Anon
@il.us
| Theories.
I've seen a few theories about the download information and I don't understand how people are coming up with this information. How do you know that these flaws might exist in the data?
When you purchase the album you get a url right away on the next page to download the album, also you get an email with the same url in it to download. You should be able to redownload from that url.
I do agree that there was no way to sample the music that I knew of before I purchased it. I do like Radiohead so I purchased it blindly just for the cause. |
|
