Sea Legs

Pay-What-You-Want Model of Business

6 Comments to “Pay-What-You-Want Model of Business”

1. 
   David
   April 23, 2010 at 4:00 pm

   Only works if you’re Radiohead.
   Plenty of other bands have done this, before and after them, and have been less successful.

   That being said, it’s pretty much industry standard these days to “leak” a few tracks, i.e. release them before the full album comes out. People listen, and if they like it, will either support the artist by buying the record, or download one of the bootleg copies that immediately proliferate the interwebs, often before the physical release..

   Reply
2. 
   samparvin
   April 23, 2010 at 4:10 pm

   That’s true. I have some friends who are launching a business that works on this model and is a portal for hundreds of bands to “sell” their music. On a scale like that, it might work better. One reason Radiohead succeeded is they had already cultivated a huge, loyal following of music lovers, makers, and consumers. Their fans, obviously, value their music and will pay for it.

   http://www.mavaru.com

   Reply
3. 
   samparvin
   April 23, 2010 at 4:17 pm

   This is interesting. Ready what Ian Astbury of The Cult has to say about this: http://www.hypebot.com/hypebot/2010/04/the-cults-ian-astbury-giving-away-music-is-selfish-and-irresponsible.html

   Reply
4. 
   Harrison
   April 26, 2010 at 9:27 am

   I decided to post on this one. Ian Astbury is an idiot. The music industry has been struggling with this issue since the introduction of Napster and the problem still exists today. How to keep music a profitable industry in order to encourage musicians to take risks in a musical career and reward those who offer a quality product (same as any industry really)? What Radiohead did was nothing more than experiment with a new model that works well with their name value. Who is Ian to call this irresponsible just because the Cult could never pull this off (because they blow). He sould also understand a very simple economic concept… if this doesn’t make money for artists then then the model won’t last. If it does work then whats the question?

   Reply
5. 
   samparvin
   April 26, 2010 at 9:39 am

   Thanks for commenting, Harrison. I agree. This model has worked well for Radiohead and other artists (and non-artists who are also using this model) who are truly offering a valuable product. I think any smart consumer recognizes what a product is worth and is willing to pay that. I understand where Ian is coming from b/c he thinks that allowing people to have his music for free is devaluing the product, but the price one pays should be a result of the quality of the product, not the other way around. And by not knowing how much money people are going to pay for your work, hopefully that will put more emphasis on making GOOD music, not on making money. It drives the artist to put out a better product, and in return the consumer rewards the artist monetarily.

   I’d like to hear more from any artists who are trying to sell their music now and what (s)he thinks about how this model of business drives artists and consumers’ habits. Any takers?

   Reply
6. 
   David
   April 26, 2010 at 10:13 am

   It worked so well for Radiohead because the entire music blogosphere hangs on their every action. And it didn’t hurt they their record company spent millions over the decade and a half before In Rainbows came out on advertizing and marketing. The wonderful thing about the internet is that it’s democratized music to such a vast and immediate extent that creativity and risk-taking is much more common now. You don’t have this blah late-90′s everything sounds like a bad Creed rip-off like 99x turned into. Now they play Arcade Fire on the regular even though it’s FM radio which, in all honesty, since XM and satellite radio came out, I am surprised still exists. (on a hilarious side-note, Kicks 101.5 was on at work when I got here this morning, and their catchphrase is, “One Nation Under God — One Station Under God Kicks 101.5″ W. O. W.)

   Loyal music fans will still buy physical albums, especially if good album work is present. I bought Joanna Newsom’s last triple album ($19.98) not only because I adore her, but because of what you get with the physical release — photographs, and the full lyrics (18 songs @ 8 minute average per song = mini-novella). That being said I noticed how many albums at the record store were no longer in plastic cases, but smaller, cardboard ones — perhaps a cheaper way of producing? The problem the internet has created is that it’s much harder to make money off selling albums — bands have to tour much more because the internet has destroyed (mostly for the better, but in this case, not) traditional colossal record companies.

   Reply