(originally uploaded by factoryjoe)
Trent Reznor just posted the results of the internet-only release of Niggy Tardust:
[...] 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.Of those paying, 3220 chose 192kbps MP3
19,764 chose 320kbps MP3
5338 chose FLACKeep 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.
So, in two short months, Saul Williams was able to sell 84% of the total number of albums he’s sold through traditional channels over 42 months or so?
I’d call that a success. Of course, it probably didn’t hurt to work with a talent like Reznor who has a huge, loyal fan base.
I’ll guarantee you that Williams made considerably more per album this time around than he did with his last release through a label. Based on David Byrne’s Wired interview with Thom Yorke after the release of In Rainbows, I’d bet that it’s a pretty decent haul in comparison:
[...] Byrne: Are you making money on the download of In Rainbows?
Yorke: In terms of digital income, we’ve made more money out of this record than out of all the other Radiohead albums put together, forever — in terms of anything on the Net. And that’s nuts. It’s partly due to the fact that EMI wasn’t giving us any money for digital sales. All the contracts signed in a certain era have none of that stuff. [...]
Reznor’s rich enough to not care about personal profit or loss, so that probably affects this as an experiment for other acts to leverage. But regarding Saul Williams’ success, Reznor hit it on the head; more people are now walking around with Saul Williams blasting out of their iPod earbuds than ever before. All things being equal, that should equate with both increased ticket and merchandise sales.
I still can’t help but to wonder where the tipping point lies for this model to become successful for indie artists.
Don’t get that pondering twisted, though. I advise Molly to give away her album at most shows and certain places online in order to get the same result of more people listening to her music.
It’s the most successful form of marketing for a musician — aside from touching someone’s soul during a live show, of course — and all synthetic marketing has a cost. In our case, it’s the straight cost of producing mass quantities of CDs.
But the question remains: Can a free/donate internet download model ever provide a decent amount of a cold hard cash return for an up and coming act? Or is this world just too big and decentralized for small acts to be able to cash in without traditional channels?
