It was July 1957 in Liverpool, England a nearly 17-year-old John Lennon was impressed by the just 15-years-old Paul McCartney's ability to play Eddie Cochran's Twenty Flight Rock on the guitar when they met at a church garden fete. The good impression that McCartney's performance of the song made on Lennon, led to him inviting McCartney to join The Quarrymen, the band that eventually evolved into The Beatles. McCartney later was quoted: "I think what impressed him most was that I knew all the words."
The possibility to pick your own price for any version of Radiohead's In Rainbows physical or digital release has returned. TBD Records, an offshoot the Dave Mathew's owned ATO label which is owned by Sony/BMG has so many price points for this record if I was a retailer I would be pretty pissed and as a consumer very confused.
TBD Records has mySpace banner ad's that link to directly to the TBD Records Radiohead website. From their you can pick to shoot off to iTunes late-night dollar menu or link to Amazon.
As you can see from the screenshot above, currently you can purchase the physical record new for $7.99. If you change your mind and want an mp3 (and do not care for iTunes or never saw that link a few pages back) you can buy it direct from Amazon as a digital download for $7.99.
If you really hard-pressed you can pick the price of... oh say... $6.99. For $6.99 you can purchase via Amazon store's a used copy of In Rainbows for that "pick your own price" that you kinda picked.
Now, Wal*Mart's price is currently $11.88.
When has Wal*Mart been undercut on anything... ever?
And by nearly 30% at that vs. other retail and digital outlets!
But, again, if you want to pick the price of $11.88 -- you can do that. On this more than confusing day to buy a simple record, you can pretty much still get In Rainbows for any price you wish to pay it seems.
The point -- with all these price variations there is something either really great going on or Radiohead corporate sales machine's is doing a bunch of incredibly devious things to most likely "test the sales waters" for what essentially is a record that was set with an original price of $0.00 back in October.
So, really at this point, any amount of records sold at retail or via digital outlets is major bling bling in the bank for the corporate parties involved that are locked arm in arm selling Radiohead's In Rainbows.
And, oh yeah, if you want to buy In Rainbows for $11.99 - you can. Just head over to Target. This is really interesting cause Target's music is powered by Amazon. Earlier, didn't we say you could get the record at Amazon for $7.99?
I know the Radiohead rabid fan contingency is not getting caught in this price confusion -- but, god those poor Wal*Mart moms. They all could be getting a better deal by nearly 30% and don't even know it probably... and ya know, is it really fair to take advantage of the least suspecting group out of the entire Radiohead buying bunch? Seems kinda sad to take advantage of Wal*Mart moms trying to save a buck here and there to feed their families and such.
But, when corporate Wal*Mart can be undercut like this, it is hard to wage an argument other than -- this is like a revolution.
The backstory: Saul Williams cd called NiggyTardust! is a
100% independent release and 100% free of any corporate support or
traditional corporate record industry involvement. It was produced and
partially (or fully?) funded by Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails...
Text below reprinted from Nine Inch Nail's Website on 01.03.08 regarding the COMPLETE AND FULL DISCLOSURE OF THE SALES FIGURES for giving away SAUL WILLIAMS NIGGY STARDUST record:
Trent Reznor speaks: 03 January 2008: saul follow-up and facts
It's a strange time to be an artist in the recording business. It's pretty easy to see what NOT to do these days, but less obvious to know what's right. As I find myself free from the bloated bureaucracy of major labels, finally able to do whatever I want... well, what is that? What is the "right" way to release records, treat your music and your audience with respect and attempt to make a living as well? I have a number of musician friends who are either in a similar situation or feel they soon will be, and it's a real source of anxiety and uncertainty.
I'd like to share my experience releasing Saul Williams' "The Inevitable Rise and Liberation of NiggyTardust" and what I've learned from the process. Perhaps by revealing of all our data - our "dirty laundry" - we can contribute to a better solution.
A quick history: Saul makes a great record that I produce. We can't find the right home at a major label. We decide to release it ourselves, digitally. Saul does not have limitless financial resources so we shop around for a company that can fulfill our needs. We choose Musicane because they are competent and are willing to adapt to what we want. The results are here: niggytardust.com
We offer the entire record free (as in totally free to the visitor - we pay bandwidth costs) as 192 MP3s, or for $5 you can choose higher fidelity versions and feel good about supporting the artist directly. We offer all major CCs and PayPal as payment options.
Here's what I was thinking: Fans are interested in music as soon as it's available (that's a good thing, remember) and usually that's a leak from the label's manufacturing plants. Offering the record digitally as its first appearance in the marketplace eliminates that problem. I thought if you offered the whole record free at reasonable quality - no strings attached - and offered a hassle free way to show support that clearly goes straight to the artists who made it at an unquestionably low price people would "do the right thing". I know, I know...
Well, now I DO know and you will too.
Saul's previous record was released in 2004 and has sold 33,897 copies.
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.
Keep in mind not one cent was spent on marketing this record. The only marketing was Saul and myself talking as loudly as we could to anybody that would listen.
If 33,897 people went out and bought Saul's last record 3 years ago (when more people bought CDs) and over 150K - five times as many - sought out this new record, that's great - right?
I have to assume the people knowing about this project must either be primarily Saul or NIN fans, as there was very little media coverage outside our direct influence. If that assumption is correct - that most of the people that chose to download Saul's record came from his or my own fan-base - is it good news that less than one in five feel it was worth $5? I'm not sure what I was expecting but that percentage - primarily from fans - seems disheartening.
Add to that: we spent too much (correction, I spent too much) making the record utilizing an A-list team and studio, Musicane fees, an old publishing deal, sample clearance fees, paying to give the record away (bandwidth costs), and nobody's getting rich off this project.
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.
So - if you're an artist looking to utilize this method of distribution, make of these figures what you will and hopefully this info is enlightening.
Why is the corporate control of music something to care about still in 2008?
Because for the same reasons government and corporate dictated regimes have a hold (still) of Darfur in 2008. Look what that has done to create one of largest human atrocities of modern times.
This is personal, cause it takes very little to care. Music saves peoples lives.Things like presidential elections do not. Yet, look what sops up most of our time each day.
Love and heart and the passion to amp things up...to get people to take notice is what will continue to happen for the forseeable future around the state of music... as this is what happens on most topics that matter and that one way or another impact the quality and abundance in our lives.
Why music? Why is it that important? Because music breaks boundaries and closes divides... it speaks beyond the words and our native language(s) that ultimately constrain us from understanding others. If you magnify upon it even closer --- music is peace... and it can stop forces and be the greatest of white flags to serve as a barricade from aggressors... it along with flowers are not only great signs of beauty, but clearly of peace.
If what I speak in this blog is perceived as attacks on someone...then it is all the other noise going on around them that keeps them in the darkness of taking these things for granted and assuming all will be well... as I have very little to do with the real outcomes... or do we?
Yes, the universe will take care of everything...Darfur, or poverty, or the presidential election... it has already been worked out by the Universe... I agree. So, what do we do? Just not care or pay as little attention as possible?
It amazes me how we can have such blindness to just simply choose to care. Usually, we don't do anything about something that actually matters to us or start paying attention until we start losing it. And, if the things that mattered to us were begun to be taken away... your life, my life, others lives would be drastically different... it is all very simple. And it all starts with being sympathetic to others and caring about what might just be important to them for the sake of doing what is right. I know... we each don't have time for yet another cause.
But, if you lost your hearing... your life would be different... If we lost Radiohead or music or the sound of music... our lives would be different... Those are facts. And it would hurt.
It's been documented many times through words and stories shared that many people who have struggled to survive in life - not only survived but prospered because of music. Yes, saved by music of all kinds and forms... many would go on record as saying "music saved their lives". I would venture to say its more a norm than not.
So, if the ability of all forms and genres and sub-genres and new genres of music are bottle-necked cause of old man-made corporate ways or commercial barricades...and we are limited to the options being Josh Groban or Josh Groban... then I don't want any part in that man-made manufactured reality... nor will I stand for it... nor should anyone else.
But, awareness and choice... is all we have. And the equality in giving artists the ability to self-sustain themselves no matter who they are should be considered as important as what we each take from music.
We love to take... we love to take every last bit until something is nearly all gone... especially in this country...
The rub for me is people's blindness and ability to just take what they are sold via corporate channels of music cause its perceived as a mere entertainment... or profit... and somehow... its okay to make music just a profit driven business... I guess because we have been birthed into believing this by and large... that is all it is... "music as entertainment".
I have news for people... go and test the waters... ask 10 people that you care about... ask them how music has mattered to them... on any level...
Trust me, the aggregate response will be...they couldn't imagine life without it... Now, let me allow you to connect the dots yourselves...
GOOGLE this: "2007 Copyright Royalty Board internet radio"
Look at the first entry or any one of them.
At the heart of this whole matter with Radiohead is the corporate controlling structures they remain in bed with. Namely the largest corporate music litigators - the RIAA (mind you lobbiests, lobby; litigators sue the parents and their kids who took some music off the Internet or otherwise distributed it). So, do not attempt to believe the RIAA are some fair little organization that just politefully talks about their corporate supporters interests... they ultimately sued little kids...
The RIAA is trying to contain control of what will end up being the re-birth of pirate radio most likely in 2008... and what is the point or problem with all that?
As we sit here something we and many young folks have grown up with aka "Internet Radio" is already closing down... all because people do not care or do not keep up with and are not aware of what is happening in the big old "music world"... Internet Radio has essentially been put on... DEATH ROW... by Radiohead's corporate bedmates! And this after all they have had to deal with during their last corporate slavehood with EMI. Seemingly, Radiohead is ok with continuing to sleep with someone who is fucking everybody else.
Write Tim Westergren at Pandora Radio and ask what our government and the RIAA corporate structures (major and mini major labels) are doing to what is a fair and legitimate business model. A business that criss-crosses boundaries leveraging the true power of the Internet - to deliver music and sound to far off lands without any new infrastructure or new controlling entities. The brilliance of Internet Radio is it hits all the places otherwise would not have the choices we all take for granted in terms of content or access to the content we really want. And, it's being shutdown as I type, it already started last year in many European countries.
So, tell me again how not caring and not considering and not asking questions around the state of music or of even our most celebrated and loved artists like Radiohead is less than appropriate for everyone given music has saved many of our lives?
If it takes a village to move a mountain... Radiohead could of delivered an entire metropolis to the digging site in spades... the sheer magnitude of Radiohead and the opportunity they were presented with... in no longer having the shackles around their ankles from a slave labor contract with EMI and them being on the cusp of launching a much heralded record...
Radiohead could of been the inflection point that caused the corporate towers to crumble, they could of built the entire village or gotten key investors like Branson to build it... they fucking didn't even need to use any of their own capital! Why now? Because the corporate structures are at the weakest point they have ever been at... and it would of been time finally that the corporate structures (labels, distribution, retail lock ups, RIAA) were the ones on an official "death watch".
Instead, directly and indirectly, Radiohead is still assisting the death of Internet Radio and pretty much the opportunity that exists in 2008 for any artist to boldly rise up in a less "controlled by a few" independent global music community...
In training my dog, what works is strong gestures by me to him to get him to learn. Yelling or hitting doesn't work. Shaking Thom Yorke really hard wouldn't work. Shaking and hitting and yelling aren't really successful "gestures" to create the awareness that would allow my dog's growth to take place and get him to learn. My common gesture is to hold my dog by his nose and hold him for 10-15 seconds and convey the feeling of "no" to him. I can't even just say "no" --- he doesn't really understand "no". But, the feeling or energy I give off during the 10-15 second hold - he gets the message.
So, to Thom Yorke and all those that choose to remain unaware and uncaring to the situations facing something that matters to you - may this blog grab you by the nose and allow the feeling to sink in - "no, this is not right". Because if I sat and coddled my dog all day and tried to have a nice little discussion with him he would just continue pissing in the house everywhere.
The RIAA Soundscan Report for 01.03.08 shows, yep, plenty of copies of In Rainbows available at Wal*Mart. We will keep you posted.
Some Wal*Mart buying tips to my Radiohead funny monkeys...
1. Don't forget the $11.88 is a fixed price. Haggling or negiotiating price or attempting to forcibily name your own at the checkout register might give in-store security the opportunity to go ape-shit on some punk kid.
2. Try and be friendly to the fucking greeter on your way in. Grumbling or mumbling something to them attempting to impersonate your alter-hero Thom Yorke is not respectful frankly of old people. And generally greeters are old retired folks. So, please be kind - one of them might be my dad.
3. Be thankful you are saving over $3.00, but please do not draw attention to this fact, just get your crack, pay the girl at the register, and try and walk out appearing to be un-aimless. The only thing bigger than Wal*Mart is Google and the only thing bigger than Google is the FTC. And just who ate the $3.10 (21% discount) or what they got in return sometimes is a small bone the pesky FTC likes to pick especially around the selling of corporate records (the thing you are holding in your hand) in retail stores. Anyhow, ahhh, the joys of big corporate record sales and the retail back office dealings of cooperative advertising allowances that I can only imagine the FTC never ever gets to hear about. So, shhh, I won't say anything if you don't.
Enjoy your Wal*Mart corporate rock my funny Radiohead monkeys :-)
iLooneyTunes sucks in Radiohead... "Da, Da, Da, De, De, De, Da-ats, All Folks!"
Radiohead's almightly In Rainbows digital record will be.... uh... released... again... digitally...on the Internet... digitally... again... via iLooneyTunes late-night dollar menu starting next Tuesday 01.08.08... digitally... Did I say that already?
The full digital album (no Mime hands will be needed to DIY assemble the bloody thing thank god!)will be downloadable or you can go a la carte and nab a single McDownload for .99 cents! The innovation is its being released officially legally twice... digitally. On the Internet... digitally.
I want to clarify the situation to my little Radiohead rabid-head monkeys. If you want to pay $1.83 and 1/3 cents a track, you can't. That's the innovation. Isn't it cool. Wow, those guys at Radiohead corporate HQ - what they do with the math and simplfying all the rounding we would be forced to do trying to come up with a different price versus what we paid the first time or again for the... um... digital version.
But, no matter, even if you say, "Ok Computer... make iLooneyTunes sell me a track for... 1.0101010101010101010101" iLooneyTunes will give you a sad Elmer Fudd face and say: "That was an awfuwwy good try wabbit!!You woscoe!!"
Let me shed more light on this - I know it's hard to understand. Here are a few more examples of what won't work:
Say you want to pay .47 cents a track. You can't. Why? Because.
And, right, you little SuicideGirl jokesters, if you want to spend .69 cents a track or for the whole record, iLooneyTunes won't allow it. Even if the band is into it, iLooneyTunes won't allow it.
Maybe you can try getting two tracks at one time instead?
Mmmh that would be fun to try... and that is as innovative and adventurous as it gets apparently in 2008 for the Thom Yorke Radiohead corporate record digital sales machine...
They had choices. And, instead they passed and did nothing different with their iLooneyTunes deal except for most likely getting a better percentage of revenues they will take for each album and track download sale!
But, it's fitting for them. Cause they maintain what they have been doing all along with the marketing and promotion of In Rainbows - sell a record the age old corporate way and attempt to appear as revolutionizing the industry by keeping their primary audience hooked and snowjobbed to virally feed the kool-aid to a new legion of mass-followers.
Sorry, for the graveness, but you each have the capacity to do something about something that actually does in fact save lives - "music".
You could start by questioning your leader's choices or be clear in knowing what they are really doing.
You want proof about iTunes and how it rips you off the artist? And how anyone who buys a single download from iTunes is still ripping off their beloved artists?
When Steve Jobs and Apple had to approach the solution of providing "content" to their new amazing little device, the iPod, they had very little imagination. As that time Apple's re-birth was being perceived as a specialized premium computer hardware designer and manufacturer, versus a content creator or service provider.
Apple makes and sell premium gadgets, that was their ONLY motivation with the iPod, too. Pitch to Apple boardmembers: "We will sell lots of these little iPod devices, cheaply made overseas, integrating pieces parts from other companies, that are well-designed bling and would fit into a new trendy lifestyle and change behavior and use."
But, without content -- Apple's iPod would be foiled and left as some little device that came out and disappeared and essentially commoditized (by the competition - think APPLE NEWTON) never causing any shift in people's music listening and ownership behaviors and causing very whiny and pouty Apple boardmembers. But, someone had an idea.
So, unimaginatively, Apple went and talked to the mighty stalwart content owners, the ones that owned content that clearly people still wanted to listen to and would want far into the future. For Apple, this would force a competitive block at least for a short amount of time... and allow them to get a behavioral shift underway aka "people cherishing their iPods and ripping every god-damn song off of every cd they owned onto it". Talk about a brilliant strategy - who would ever leave the iPod then? If each consumer ripped their entire collection to it - they would never jump to a competitive product regardless of content choices!
But, Apple didn't stop there. So, they went to these content owners (about 5 or 6 globally in total) that owned the full 100% copyrights to all the major recordings of our time (nearly). But, to get a deal done fast that looked great for everyone (never considering: independent music or artists or artists that hadn't even begun to be artists or bands)... Apple said to these 5 or 6 major content owners: "We can just work with all your old royalty deals. We do not need to change a thing. Or upset that pesky artist apple cart."
The majority of all recorded music from those 5 or 6 content owners minus a few bands (think Beatles) that had some control over their digital futures - made iTunes possible, which gave the iPod its next great positioning to unassuming consumers and the unaware and create a stranglehold that will be hard to dislodge at this point. Bad deals and ideas from the past carried forward atop the iTunes/iPod platform for another 20 or 30 years? Fuck.
So, all this cause on one fine day at Apple someone had a slightly bad latte most likely and couldn't muster up a teensy bit more imaginatiion. Surely, the major content holders, who are all apart of the RIAA, who were suffering from Napsteritis and a case of boneheaditis around what to do to stop "DIGITAL" distribution saw this as a stop gap measure - being the limited thinkers they are. Did these content owners ever successfully stop cassette mix tapes? No.
More imagination or a thought to include all artists in a way that could allow them the benefit of easy digital distribution in a single place (like iTunes) -and- allow a new type of "royalty" deal that would allow small or unknown or new artists to take the majority or larger portion of a single track sale or full album download sale - and - therefore allow a dedicated artist musician or singer/songwriter or band to launch themselves into a sustainable creative force with independence, yet a top the iTunes/iPod platform. Boy, that woulda really been great, somehow. Like the mouse. Or the graphical user interface. Imagine if we were all still using command line prompts on the computer? Boy, thanks Apple. WANT PROOF? And I quote David Byrne (from Wired Magazine: Issue 16.01):
So what happens when online sales eliminate many of these expenses? Look at iTunes: $10 for a "CD" download reflects the cost savings of digital distribution, which seems fair — at first. It's certainly better for consumers. But after Apple takes its 30 percent, the royalty percentage is applied[from the old slavery deals between the major content owners and artists]the artist — surprise! — is no better off. His words not mine. David Byrne is a former member of a little band called the Talking Heads, a former label owner and solo performer who makes music to perform and sell.
What is funny about the article by David Byrne in Wired is he uses a $13.99 price point for the entire article and then without much mention, he switches to being ok with a $10 a cd price point. A price point instigated by Apple's amazing math machine and cost dismantling based on what they could cheapen out (cause digital distribution is cheaper... I guess by a whole $4 per unit cheaper!).
That is the touche here frankly, in all of this all artists works were reduced to a value of .99 cents a song, no matter how many people buy it, and without care of what the perceived value of the song is to individuals or the universe.
Imagine if you all had said to Apple: "Ehhhh, yeah, this iPod thing is worth about $14 dollars. Parts $4, Malaysian labor $1.13, Ammortized r&d costs $3.75, ammortized cost of lattes with extra foam drank during design about $2.82. What is that? Like $13 bucks, fuck, whatever here is $10." Apple to you potential buyer of iPod: "But, what about the perceived value and added value to your life and a change for the better in how the iPod does this and how it might save your life one day?" Your answer: "Fuck you here is $10 dollars for it." Boy, that woulda been great.
So, a cd of music or art or sound is now valued at $10 on the open market all because it made for easy math that one really bad day a few years back in Cupertino at Apple's HQ. Artists everywhere got screwed (again) and David Byrne, a legend is handing you the artist and music buying consumer the fucking proof. Will you believe it now?
Yet, artists new and old everywhere, and mini-record labels think iTunes is their potential savior and the way forward. You folks are as bad as the in a trance Radiohead fanbase!
Speaking of which, if I see that RADIOHEAD TELEVISION COMMERCIAL again with the mime's hands "trying" to fold up the DIY packaging of the physical cd released which was released today 01.01.08 to the physical earth I think I will fall over in hysterics as Radiohead fans want to tell me they are not still part of the big hit major record label machine?? WHO THE FUCK PAID FOR THOSE TV COMMERCIALS blasted around the universe last night on a pretty expensive night to buy tv ad time? THOM YORKE? Sure.
And now, full circle, we await what the deal will be between the geniuses at the Radiohead business empire and the Apple iTunes controlled distribution empire. Stay tuned. Someone should send in David Byrne to mediate that discussion.
Recent Comments