Music Fans Not Actually Criminals, Willing To Pay For Music
from the sell,-don't-sue dept
Memo to the record labels: You don't have to treat your customers like criminals. Canadian pop singer Jane Siberry has been experimenting with a voluntary pricing scheme for downloading songs over her website. Fans are offered the choice to pay nothing, pay later, pay what they wish, or pay $0.99 for each song they download from her. The results might come as a surprise to the record labels as the majority of people opted not to take the free track; in fact the average price paid for a track came in at $1.14 per track. But should it really come as a surprise that people will pay voluntarily for music? People often throw a dollar into a musician's bowl when they're playing on the subway -- people who are fans of the musician and actually go to their website should be even more inclined. What's more interesting is that the typical explanation for why people give to the subway musician (or donate $100 to NPR in exchange for a tote bag) is that they get some sort of recognition from others for their generosity. In the case of Jane Siberry the transaction is completely anonymous, meaning that people are happy to support a musician if only for personal satisfaction. This experiment doesn't prove that the donation model would work on an industry-wide scale, rather it simply shows that music fans aren't thieves, and that they do want to support the musicians they like. The labels should see this as a reason to least explore alternative models of pricing and distribution.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The band Winters Bane hooked me up with an advance of copy of their cd, just a burned one, but great enough to listen to on my iPod. The day it was available at their online store, I went and bought a copy.
It's all about supporting the things we love, and the people who appreciate the support.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Huh?
Indie musician makes small time bucks; record label gets zip.
By what leap of logic do you think this is something record labels should mimic?
This supports the idea that musicians may be better off without record labels - but suggesting this as a tactic for labels to follow?
Hmmmmm......
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Huh?
Whether they actually do is another matter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Huh?
Your logic may play to the choir, but that doesn't mean it makes sense.
The mainstream music industry already gives fans ways to pay for music - by purchasing their CDs or downloading tracks from places like iTunes.
Are you suggesting that if major labels gave everybody the option to download tracks for free or name a price that they'd get an average of $.14 more per track, based on Siberry's experience?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Huh?
I think you're missing Joe's point. He's saying that the industry insists there's no way to make money unless they treat their customers like criminals.
This is proof that that's false -- and, in fact, that it is possible to make money treating your customers right.
He's not saying that this is the way to go, or that this demonstrates how much money they'll make. Just that what they've said in the past is clearly false... and there could be some benefit in treating customers right.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Huh?
"The labels should see this as a reason to least explore alternative models of pricing and distribution."
Indeed they should. It's long overdue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
New Business Era? New Business Model.
This is a stepping stone to new business models, maybe it won't work with everyone across the board, but it's just one step in the right direction and perhaps the final step for certain genres.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
US?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: US?
But thank you for making me laugh, that was very nice of you.
As for the topic, the music industry hasn't got a clue. I downloaded "I did it" by Dave Mathews from a defunked P2P called Aimster. I didn't steal it, the band gave it away through Aimster. Guess what. I liked it so much, I bought the album.
Bottom line, sharing music is one way for ppl to try before you buy. If they don't like it, they are not going to buy it anyway.
It is not and has never been "stealing" to begin with.
Was it Shakespear that said "nothing is evil, unless it is thought evil"?
I guess someone thought it.
My2cents
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If It's Good I Buy...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: If It's Good I Buy...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They just dont get it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
US Mark
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
an interesting observation
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
owning the genunine article is much better than the pirated version, you dont get the artwork or the inside stuff in a pirate version
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'll go to this site and check out the music, I might pay for it even if I think it's only so/so to prove a point.
I'll never buy anything from any musician or recording company that's a member of the RIAA, period - ever again.
As a matter of fact, the second I hit submit below, I'll check out that site and see what she's got~!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I buy all my music.
(german metal WOOOO! |..|, )
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
meaningless
By labeling Jane Siberry a "Pop singer" it implies that she is a Canadian Brittany Spears - and in turn that labels can sell pop music this way/trust their pop fans this way.
For those who have not heard her music, she is a Tori Amos meets Sara McLaughlin with a little less angst - less pop/more singer songwriter adult alternative.
Can this model be used to sell other such artists that thrive on a hugely devoted fan based? Probably. It would not be useful though for selling sugar pop... and sugar pop makes lots of money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: meaningless
With most other categories of products, there is a cost savings to be had by accepting goods that roll off a conveyor belt in high-volume, and there is a premium to be paid for things produced with much personal attention and care. Why should music not have to deal with those same market forces?
I will henceforth listen to assembly-line pop crap only if it's stolen, but I will go out of my way to donate at least twice for the work of real artists. ;-)
Vive la Revelucion!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: meaningless
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Great idea
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
OLD NEWS
Nov. 28, 2005....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Continue the greatness
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Artists Earning a Living
The artists can now sell their products directly to the customer fans, and don't need the labels. Knowing that this is only a matter of time is what scares the labels into irrational behaviour.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hold for a minute
I'd like to see the number of downloads, highest and lowest donation. Anyone have another link?
Lets say the track was downloaded 30 times. 2 friends or family members anonymously donated $15 - already we are at an average of $1.00 per download.
It would be interesting to see.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
First, as someone else commented, we're talking about Canadians. I mean, they give free healthcare to everyone. They just have a greater social conscieness then we do here in the US.
Second, as someone else commented as well, she's a singer/songwriter type. So she draws an older audience who, presumably, are more willing, and have the funds, to pay for music.
Third, the sample size is just too small. Doing this on a wider scale, say on the whole of iTunes, might show people paying less for music. This singer, for instance, might be seen as a struggling artist, thus drawing sympathy from her listeners. I'd be surprized to see many people handing money over to groups calling themselves the Cash Money Millionaires.
The truth is there hasn't been much good music released by major labels in a long time. Once they open their eyes they'll see that putting out shitty music won't make them money. They need to stop blaming 12 year old kids about a lull in their market, which is only due to the bad music they've been releasing, and start putting out tunes people will want to buy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The difference is....
~TuxGirl
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm an American
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm an American
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm an American
[ link to this | view in chronology ]