Comments on: Radiohead DIY sales results

By: Claire

Claire — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 14:46:59 +0000

Let me preface the following post by saying that I’m in an indie band and I’m a partner in an indie label that we started in 2005 so I’m not a fan of the current state of the music business. I think the music industry is a good example of how the US government lets huge industry, including the big labels, retain a monopolistic stranglehold on the market which in turn squashes innovation. However, one thing I think everyone forgets in this matter of Radiohead having ‘independent’ success is this: Radiohead benefits from years of promotion provided by their record companies. The millions spent on marketing and tour support is why they are able to get millions of people to visit their download site and buy their music It would take a miracle for a truly independent band who has never been on a label or has been on a small indie label to generate this kind of revenue!

By: KD

KD — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 21:27:47 +0000

I would have paid for it if it was released as flac files rather than mp3s. That, to me, was the mistake here. I don’t pay for mp3s.

By: riddell

riddell — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 05:39:34 +0000

one thing not mentioned is the fact for bands with a back catalog but not on TOP 40 anymore with a central distribution web store people could discover NEW artists for the same user cost as radio(almost none) and then look, and purchase back catalog/ merchandise ETC

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 19:28:33 +0000

1 mill income/month is good for a new small band, it all goes to them directly too. who wouldnt kill for sutch income? ;p

The “idea” that everyone that starts into music have to make millions every month is the biggest problem, the good about this is record labels dont suck money of it and it shows theres no need to pay premiums and share income with record labels..

and imo the band sucked (sorry lol), thats why i never paid hopefully they could improve and when/if they do they will be even more successfull. a lossless music format would be awesome aswell.
Imagine if a popular and good band would try this, they would do the world a favor and make some decent money aswell.

By: Coconut

Coconut — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 19:04:05 +0000

Seriously…How many people downloaded this for free and listened to it and threw it away? I paid $12 for it and threw it away within hours of downloading it. IMO it is the worst crap I have ever heard. You can’t count downloading as a lost sale.
I am not sorry I paid because I wish my favourite bands would do this. I would love to give my favourite bands money this way.
Also the stories on this are reporting that people are stealing this album which freakin infuriates me as the band said pay nothing if you want.

By: Jon

Jon — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 18:32:47 +0000

Most people are fundamentally honest. They’ll pay a fair and reasonable price for whatever they’re looking for – music, movies or anything else, on- or offline.

Frankly, I’m not sure consideration of the artist came into it, much, before the file sharing / download controversy was fired up by the labels as a part of their ridiculous marketing campaign, which hinges on a scenario where millions of people around the world are cast as potential thieves and criminals.

Now people are becoming sensitised to the people behind the music, and that’s great.

To paraphrase the title of a 1961 movie [http://www.screenonline.org.uk/film/id/508279/index.html], today it’s the singer as much as the song.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 17:32:38 +0000

“I feel the number of people wanting to freeload will always increase”

Another guys that think that people pay for thing because they are forced to do so.

People basically don’t have to pay for small thing such as music recording.
Just go into a wall mart jack wathever you want and leave. No PROBLEM! And if you
carry a weapon the risk is zero.

People pay because because they agree to certain rules as social animals not because
they are forced too. Dogs could eat each other. They don’t.

People will continue to pay their favorite artists because they want them to continue to do whathever they are doing that’s all. But of cource for the rapacious criminal and anti-social music execs this is an alien concept that they are incapable to grab.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 17:24:05 +0000

Actually it was easier to dsownload for free and send the money via a mail to the band address.
I wnoder howe many did that.

By: Robster

Robster — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 16:06:49 +0000

I feel the number of people wanting to freeload will always increase , so an ongoing sales model will decline in revenue , also as mentioned with this being the first it achieved its own free publicity – I would only hope the rec. co`s bounce back with a fairer cut to their artists (meanwhile pigs flying etc)

By: Rob

Rob — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 15:07:48 +0000

If it was simpler to make small money transactions this model would work better. At the moment you have to fill out lots of details just to pay $6 or so it hardly seams worth it when you can download if for free. So many of the free down loaders may actually have paid. Possibly if a large site developed to manage all of this e.g create an account at somewebsite.com and then select the album and price you want to pay rather than creating accounts for each band.