I really like the whole album, I don't skip any track!
The way of selling it is very strong for the music industry!

____________________

Claude

MySpace

article in chicago tribune business section today notes that there were 1.3 million or so visitors to the download site in october. OF THOSE WHO DOWNLOADED, around 60% paid nothing for the album. non-freeloaders spent an average of $6. so...let's say half the visitors ended up downloading:

.65 million times 40 percent times $6=

approximately $1.5 million in download payments. not exactly a windfall for the band. and there was a lot of excitement for this project. so they would not have been financial winners if they had entirely scrapped the idea of putting out a CD later

of course, i don't necessarily entirely trust the numbers given in the article, but they seem a lot more reasonable that other figures i've seen

In reply to:

---

approximately $1.5 million in download payments. not exactly a windfall for the band

---

Maybe, but not exactly chump change either. God knows what it cost them to build the back-end for something like this, but even then, $2.40 per unit is probably more than they ever got out of EMI.

That's genious and you're stupid.

1.500.000 x £ 0,45 = £ 675.000!!!!
Euro= 969.549,08
$= 1.404.683,5

That's the minimun price!!!!

____________________

Claude

MySpace

Not taking into account the die-hards (like myself) that forked out the big bucks for the deluxe package. And we all know how much of a market there is for that kinda stuff. So I'm buying the album twice, they better fucking come to Australia soon.

God have mercy, you're a hopeless guitar player! You even make ME feel better you son of a bitch!

In reply to:

---

$2.40 per unit is probably more than they ever got out of EMI.

---

i dunno about that. top artists tend to get like $4 per unit if i'm not mistaken. doubt radiohead got quite that much, but probably more than what they got for the download. but again, the experiment will not have hurt them financially due to the other sales methods. fans win, record company loses. it's all good. i just don't see it as a good business model in the vast majority of cases (which shouldn't be a surprise since people are asked to pay whatever they want). of course, the prospect of eschewing the labels in favor of low flat download fees might very well be promising to artists

The costs for CD-boxes, CDs, the pressing, the labels, the covers, transport etc. have more or less all been avoided. Plus they got worldwide free advertising and promotion as the media picked up on the story. So maybe $2.40 is not as bad as it sounds.

And I want to believe that a light's shining through somehow

no, i assume it's almost pure profit. but i don't think the costs you mention are subtracted from an artist's cut of a per unit pay agreement with a record label either

In reply to:

---

Plus they got worldwide free advertising and promotion as the media picked up on the story.

---

This part is true, but doesn't speak for the viability of the method as a whole; obviously, you only get that kind of publicity for doing this once.

Still, though, I think the results are mildly encouraging. Bands who offer digital distribution at a price which simply matches a normal per-unit will find themselves losing out dramatically in the absence of a record company promoting them; still, there's a lot of breathing room between the normal band's cut and the normal retail price of a CD. I think there's a magic number in the 6-10 dollar region where a band will be able to fund their own promotional efforts, and still have enough left over to make similar profits to what they'd make going through the regular channels. Maybe.

TW's Top Fag!

In reply to:

---

there's a lot of breathing room between the normal band's cut and the normal retail price of a CD. I think there's a magic number in the 6-10 dollar region where a band will be able to fund their own promotional efforts, and still have enough left over to make similar profits to what they'd make going through the regular channels

---

i think you're correct. bear in mind that you can get albums from itunes for $10. anyone know why an unsigned artist would sell through them rather than just do it themselves?