Dear Trent Reznor: Don't Be Disheartened Yet
from the it-ain't-over-yet dept
Back in October, we had mentioned that Trent Reznor was producing an album by Saul Williams and had decided to mimic the Radiohead name your own price model for downloads. At the time, I was a little worried that musicians would simply mimic Radiohead's first part of the promotion (the name your own price part) without recognizing two important things: (1) the "name your own price" part was just one part of a larger strategy to get publicity for a variety of things that would earn money and that (2) whether or not anyone pays a dime for the album is meaningless in that larger context. We've already seen a few people make that mistake, and it's rather "disheartening" to see that Trent Reznor is making that mistake himself (in part...).For reasons that are not at all clear, Reznor's site is a blog that has no history. There's no way to link to a specific post and once a new post goes up the current one will disappear. However, as pointed out via Digg, the current front page of Reznor's site has some stats about how the "name your own price" experiment went: "As of 1/2/08, 154,449 people chose to download Saul's new record. 28,322 of those people chose to pay $5 for it, meaning: 18.3% chose to pay." Reznor then says: "I'm not sure what I was expecting but that percentage - primarily from fans - seems disheartening."
Chris Anderson has already challenged Reznor's math, by pointing out that by avoiding a record label, they still probably made more money this way, but even that is missing the larger point. You don't do a "name your own price" offering to make money directly off the downloads. Any money you actually make is a bonus. You do it to get publicity and to add value to other things that you're selling, creating a larger market for them. Reznor seems to admit to that part at the end, stating: "But... Saul's music is in more peoples' iPods than ever before and people are interested in him. He'll be touring throughout the year and we will continue to get the word out however we can." When you begin to focus on that larger picture, how much is made directly from sales, and what percentage pays vs. what percentage "freeloads" is meaningless. It will be more interesting to see the eventual results going forward.
Of course -- there is one more thing that should be mentioned when discussing all of this. None of these business models work if no one actually likes the music. This isn't a comment on Saul Williams' music (which I have not heard), but if you can't make music that people like, no business model is going to be effective. And, especially in the case of a new act that people have not heard of, they may be even more reluctant to pay upfront for the music, because they're unsure how much they actually like the musician, especially if the music itself is an acquired taste. It's yet another case where obscurity should be a much bigger worry than "piracy" or "freeloaders." Every one of those "freeloaders" or "pirates" is not just a potential future buyer, but a potential marketer, promoter or sales person for future endeavors by that artist. To understand the business models in the future of music, you need to take a long-term view. So, don't be disheartened, Trent. Focus on that final thought and look to the future.
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
Filed Under: free models, saul williams, trent reznor
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Who's Downloading?
I downloaded the free version, listened, liked it enough to pay the $5.00.
Is he counting the number of people that did both? That would be excellent info to have.
Another interesting thought: Do you think the RIAA would have people downloading the free version like crazy to inflate the numbers so the percentages would be skewed? I wouldn't doubt it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
spot on
If one must (misguidedly) focus on the math, I think they should also consider that of the 80% that didn't pay, a large number of them may be like me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: spot on
Most of the songs on this album was cRap, so I deleted it. For me, a longtime fan of NIN, it wasn't worth the time it took to download.
YMMV.
EtG
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: spot on
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: spot on
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nope, he should be disheartened, truly
I haven't purchased any in years because the asking price is just plain stupid.
What is revealed in that first days "sales" is that most fans agree. That should dishearten Mr. Reznor quite a bit.
1$ for a song is a great price. Throw in 10.3 other tracks for free, cause most albums are just a good single with 40 minutes of fluff. The fluff tracks should be free, cause the cost to produce them is usually around 3% of the cost of producing the one good single.
So if 14% of people paid 5$ for it, thats still ~.7/album sale. By my speculative and horridly inaccurate math, thats only losing 30% of revenue for all that great publicity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Nope, he should be disheartened, truly
Also, a good single is a great way to advertise a new album, but selling it alone does not make any sense because the record company paid for the entire album to be produced, but instead of making $15 a pop, they are making $1 on that one good song. I am certainly not defending the record label, but looking at this from all angles you can see why selling only a single is not good business when you had to front the cost for the production of a whole album. And it is certainly not a good idea to sell and produce only singles, cause that would kill a ton of good music that the record label decides does not make the cut for a money making single.
just tring to provide a different perspective, with that said, i think Reznor's idea is a good one, and techdirts analysis of it is also a good one. I think this is a much better way to go than signing with a big record label.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
NPR had an interesting piece on today...
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=17846588
Furthermore, the unknown artist (to me at least) in this piece now has fans her studio time through voluntary donations. The more money they give - the more time she has in the studio - the more music she puts out - the more music fans get for free (not to mention the value in letting fans feel like they played a part, no matter how small).
Trent Reznor should take heart in the fact that he's smart enough (has the cajones?) to do something different than the music industry's status quo procedure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
More " it-ain't-over-yet"
To download the mp3 version of the album is free.
Five dollars gets you the cd.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://nin.e-lopo.com/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What does he mean, primarily from fans? Does that mean he assumes fans paid or that only fans downoaded the album, and only 20% paid?
If it's the first, it was an odd way of putting it. If it's the second, it's a profoundly naive way of looking at the traffic.
Most people who do buy albums these days still find new artists by downloading the album first. As we see, plenty of people downloaded first and thought little of the album. Radiohead had a better buyer-to-downloader ratio because, at the very least, they were a known quantity (and perhaps the album was better).
That's why I like Quote Unquote Records' strategy. They're an online only, donation-based label. All bands on the label offer free albums, and all donations go through one paypal link. When you donate, you can suggest which band the money goes towards or just let it go equally.
Instead of asking the listener to chose at the point of download whether or not to pay, the label encourages people to come back (to find new free music) and to donate based on past experience.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
New world
The way to get a song in someones ear isn't going to work through the old channels, the artists will have to find a new way to get their music heard that doesn't cost listeners up front.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: New world
I have the report with all the statistics, but i cant seem to find it...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I actually wrote an email explaining that it just didn't correspond with my tastes and I got a nice reply back.
Soo... I mean, not a fan of the guy's music, but I think well of him (or whoever writes his emails).
I mean, the whole free music download thing is a crapshoot for artists, but it's a better crapshoot than charging for the music.
I've been reading the RCRD LBL blog for the past few months and I've downloaded and kept maybe... 5% of the music they've linked to, but of that 5%, I'd DEFINITLEY buy music or pay for a live show. The problem that RCRD LBL is having is that they're giving me the broad range of music that I want to sample, but they're not trying to get paid for it!
I wrote another email to them complaining about the lack of "BUY SOMETHING" links attached to a post about an artist... they didn't get back to me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Saul Williams
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
niggy tardust
I downloaded it when I saw the chance. I thought it was cool. I didn't pay anything for it.
It definitely is an acquired taste. Is this a platinum album? Probably not..
I thought the N word was killed off a year ago anyways...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let's get back to all things NIN. M'kay?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The spoken-word artist is destined for poetry reading in coffee shops. Make mine to-go.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
1 that does.
If he happened to be at a coffee house poetry reading I would stay. If I happen to see that he is performing around me, you can bet you'll see me there. Though I do agree that it is an acquired taste.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I
I think Trent Reznor has raised the profile of Saul Williams. Unfortunately, I'm not sure NIN's fanbase is ultimately Saul's target audience.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
niggy
and on a final note, it was refreshing to be able to buy the album in a format that i actually want. what am i supposed to do with a cd? pay an extra 15$-20$ for artwork i'm going to wipe my ass with and throw away after i ripped the cd?
most people just listened to this album because they were curious, so 20% buy rate isnt so bad.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Archived nin.com comment section
Use the the comment link directly below original post/picture to go to a Blogger archive.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I downloaded and would have paid
I didn't care for Saul's album at all. Had I liked it, I would have gladly paid $5 voluntarily.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here's what should be done: Saul should have his own separate account on youtube and his own website, I mean apart from Nine Inch Nails and I don't mean his MySpace site. Saul is piggybacking on Trent because if it wasn't for his generosity, Niggy would hardly be heard. The only good thing in the album is NIN's obvious influence plus: NiggyTardust = Ziggy Stardust, Bloody Sunday = U2 and etc. Could it be more unoriginal?
And I'm not "missing the point". Like Mike stated, If no one actually likes the music.. . Figure it out. I couldn't care less about the $$$$, I want GOOD music.
Everything Trent did using the web was fine by me. I feel badly, he was excited about Niggy and I don't have the heart to tell him: Hell no. I gave the 5 bucks because he believed in it and I wanted to believe but I can't. God knows I tried.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
On the Myspace account Saul wrote Niggytardust is the "love child" of he and Trent Reznor.
I hope they don't plan on having any more children.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here's why I supported it
You had radiohead, who did the "choose your price", which publicity-wise, did wonders for them. But it was publicity, and i'm actually very disappointed at that cock-tease of that promotion. When they first announced "we'll be releasing it online in 10 days". I went through the roof. But when they signed to a label...meh.
But anyway. Niggy Tardust was out, and yet I was yet to hear anything by him. Five dollars is five dollars. Yet I hadn't heard him before, I did, on the other hand support the concept and the strategy so I paid the five, no questions asked. Do I enjoy the album? Yes, I enjoy a great deal of it; can live without some, but I like it. Do I regret shelling out five bucks? Absolutely not, particularly since I had mainly paid the five to support the cause, rather than the actual artist, himself.
Everyone can preach about "the labels are greedy", and this and that, but when it came down to it, they did nothing. Granted though, if you don't like something, why invest? But my true intent on paying for it was to help encourage this to progress and truly evolve into something. Saul seems to have profit a decent sum though, if you ask me. He sold almost 30,000, and there's no royalties and such involved, which is great. So I don't consider it so much a failure, but not so much a success either. Being as though it likely cost a few "cents" here and there to actually produce the album, that'd i'd imagine they'd (trent) would really just be breaking even, if even that.
But in a nutshell. Like it or not, if you want to make a point of artists going without the restraint and pressures of the record labels, show some support to the cause.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
christ
but my god... reading some of the crap the people above have written... what a pack of close-minded addle-brained dorks. hate hate hate. give ya a computer and an internet connection and you just spew your hate any chance you get. it's great because you can count on that everyone who calls the album "crap" probably doesnt have a creative bone in their bodies, except when bitching on an internet forum.
"wah, it's not pure unfiltered nine inch nails so it sucks!"
"wah, it's rap music! it sucks!"
"wah, saul williams is riding trent's coattails!"
dear lord. back in the day we used to take guys like you out back and beat you with a rubber hose.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: christ
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"It's an ok album with some ok tracks."
You attack but you also dislike Niggy, schmuck. Get off your rocking horse, go back to your playpen and stop being a troll.
And get your thumb out of your mouth. Or your ass.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I Hate Trolls
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I Hate Trolls
Very fat.
Or very ugly.
Many times, both, troll.
Niggy sux
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I did pay the $5 and did like the record, it does take a few listens.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
niggy tardust
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lame.
2. Reznor's model is not Radiohead's Cash Grab. Subtle but abundant difference reward the buying with FLAC and 320 kbps DL's. At a suggested donation of $5, NOT pay what you can. Radiohead's Pay what you can scheme was a waste, 192 kbps MP3's for what most loyal fans considered paying the standard album prices for. They didn't make the information about the DL's available and subsequently took advantage of their audience. Also excluding tracks that will appear on the CD version.
Reznor's model was more equitable and respected the relationships he has developed with both hi audience and Saul Williams audience.
3. Cost average for the production of the album, and the returns from the sales don't make for a great profit that go to support the artist funding his own tour.
If Trent Reznor weren't going to be involved with at least some of the touring, then it doesn't exactly help Saul Williams get his shit to hit the ground running. Know what I mean?
All in all, Reznor has a right to be disappointed, he and Williams sought a method to distribute their product in an unfair market, and offered people something they couldn't otherwise get from a major distributor, and a lot of people pissed on it.
I DL music and movies, mostly because I don't see the value in purchasing music from iTunes, or Amazon, the compression is usually shite, plus very little of that money goes to actually supporting an artist, but instead continues to inflate a dead music business model and practice.
People took it for granted... And will most likely continue to do so.
Too bad, because it's a good model.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I downloaded it for free
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Disheartened Trent
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Actually, the album is quite good
'pay' version.
Most of the complaints seen here and on the Saul Williams chat board seem
to indicate that the typical NIN fan isn't very flexible in their musical tastes.
Too bad, their overly rigid mindset is causing them to miss out on some
great music.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The complaints I've read here show the majority just didn't care for Niggy. Trent said he "didn't exactly call it hip-hop." Hip-hop, rap, spoken word, it's all the same: Irritating noise.
If Saul were removed from NIN forums (as stated above) I wonder how much traffic he'd actually receive from NIN fans. Unless Trent Reznor is mentioned my guess is very little.
I'll think twice if NIN decides to produce another unknown. After throwing five bucks away and losing some faith in Nine Inch Nails, the whole Tardust thing is unsettling.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
When and where can I read your comments?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
When and where can I read your comments?
My comments on what? This isn't a music review site. I don't review music here. The point had nothing to do with the quality of the music.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
As I said, I hadn't listened to it, and I'm not planning on it. So I won't be reviewing it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re #6 DCeyeC
Very interesting.
Especially with the whole name change bit. She really changed her life over and gives herself to this.
Has my respect.
Also felt you needed a reply.
I have been addicted to NPR lately.
Everyday home from work, its no longer listen to radio.
Its turn radio straight to NPR.
Not so much while I am at home to turn radio on and listen to it, but its what I listen to in the car whenever these days.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonther NIN Fan
It is interesting to see the responses here, though, because from viewing the NIN Echoing The Sound forums you'd think that everyone loved Niggy Tardust. But obviously I see that isn't the case and does go a long way to explain the low number of purchases. Also, I wonder how many flac downloaders also downloaded the free mp3 version to play in their portable mp3 player?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Niggy
BUT!!!
Everyone does agree with the net downloading as it's the way to go. If fans (public and private) really liked Niggy we'd be promoting the helloutofit!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If you're offering the music for free, people will use the free method to listen first, then pay later if they like it. The percentages don't matter, it's the overall results, which take longer with this kind of experiment. Of the people who downloaded for free, many people hated the album and deleted it after a couple of tracks. So what? Those are people who would either not have bought a CD to begin with (they may not have heard of Williams, for example), or may have bought the CD based on Reznor's name and felt ripped off because they didn't like the music.
The people you need to concentrate on are those who did buy the album. How are the numbers - not percentages, but numbers of downloads compared to estimates of CD purchases? More to the point, how many downloaded after having listened to the CD for free? It's the conversion rate of free to paid downloads that should be the most interesting figure here, along with a comparison of estimated CD sales compared with paid downloads.
For the record, I had never heard of Williams before this promotion was announced, so was unlikely to have ever bought the CD. I downloaded the album for free, and bought the $5 download after a couple of weeks. Did this count as 1 or 2 downloads, I wonder? Either way, Trent, you have exactly one purchase from me where the alternative would be ZERO, and I'm sure many others did the same.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Saul Williams
I think it is working.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re #55 Smellthis
I have been to three NIN concerts so far in the greater Detroit area. At least as far as Michigan goes, I generally see very few overweight people. Ugly, some, but that might be in part that I am not into that whole fishnet goth type style of clothing draping people in makeup.
But, for a state that is not as sunny as some, and cold just as much as warm, I see many more obese people at a mall than I would at a NIN concert.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Niggy Tardust
I hope Trent has taken into account that a large number of his fans probably did the same thing I did.
In response to his disheartened comment, surely he wasn't expecting Saul to come out King of the World on this one?
And personally, I find overuse of the N word a little bad, even if it is used in a sarcastic sense by a man who refers to himself as an N word.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
An Acquired Taste
I myself enjoy the large majority of songs off of Niggy Tardust. I paid the money and would have paid more, even just to support the model and/or the artist. Is it an acquired taste? Maybe. But deducing from the fact that Panic! At The Disco and Redshoot Apparatus and 30 Seconds To Mars have been popular, I think a lot of people are lacking in the "good taste in music" department.
I think a lot of people need to give Saul another chance.
AND
I think the only mistake made was that maybe it was not the right target audience.
By the way, Mike, do you know how condescending you sound in your article?
Oh and, Saul, is a guy, fyi.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It'sOK!!!
To me it sounded like an extention of the YZ production done in a rap context. Rap is not my favourite medium but I can hear the Trent, that I like, with something else, interesting, that I assume is Saul.
What people have to realise with any of this is that artists are creators & experimenters. "We are the music makers, the dreamers of dreams" presenting you with something new. Just because you don't understand it does not negate it's value.
;-))
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Trent Reznor's Venture
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sweet Jebus, please help these poor souls...
As for the pathetic "cRap" and "spoken word = rap = rubbish" comments: grow up. No, seriously, GROW UP.
Was Niggytardust a great album? IMHO: no -- but there were some fine tracks on it.
So what went wrong? Well, the pricing obviously (a tip jar wouldn't have hurt). And I still cannot fathom why so many fans paid and then downloaded an mp3 version when a flac version was available. (Bandwidth? Pur-lease, the file size difference between 320k MP3s vs Flac files isn't that big.)
As for those complaining about not being able to hear it beforehand: Trent leaked one track days before the release via The Pirate Bay, and two more on the day of the release via SendSpace. But considering that so many people proved to be unable to figure out what FLAC was by clicking on the link that was provided, I guess that was asking too much.
In the end, the only people to blame are the music industry, who instead of developing a worldwide platform themselves, spent their time and money suing people. In the end, they were bypassed by Apple -- and then the music industry complained some more. And don't get me started on DRM. Sorry guys, but if kids these days are leeching music through whatever p2p technology is the shiznit these days, the music industry only has to blame itself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]