You seem awfully confident about pricing and sales and profits for a system that's fairly unproven after only being open to the public for about 2 hours.
To us, as true unsigned indies, RBN is a promotional vehicle for reaching people. Unfortunately, price becomes a *hurdle* to reaching people, no matter what we think our creativity and sweat are worth. Given that 70% is already skimmed off the top, I don't anticipate this will be a big money-maker for anyone at our level.
However, looking at the long term, using RBN to build a fan-base is much more valuable. Bringing in new fans allows sales of the other songs in the catalog (that *don't* have 70% taken off the top). More fans bring offers for gigs and house parties. Promotion comes long before the money rolls in, *especially* if you have no label money backing you in the first place.
One thing that authors and bands might not have understood is that you can change the price of your tracks on a quarterly or semi-annual basis. So why *not* offer your work up for $1 initially? You'll get those people who were on the fence, and if it picks up sales by word of mouth, you can make the decision to go to $2 later.
And in all honesty, James and I are old guys with wives, cats, and day jobs. Getting people to *listen* and enjoy the material is what it's about, not the 30 cents on the dollar income. If people listen and share the music, then eventually it can get into the right ears of producers who license for TV/movies, or label reps looking for new bands. And *then* the money might be of interest.
Until then, though, we're proud of our work, and proud to sell it for $1. I don't think it cheapens us any, nor devalues indie artists as a whole. Charging $2 might stroke our self-important egos as "artistes", but we'd be stroking with perhaps half the number of listeners that we could have. To us, that doesn't make much sense.
During the whole Napster debacle, Lars Ulrich said to the press, "You don't expect us to do this for free, do you?"
I could only laugh, because I do music because I *love* doing music.
Producer/author for The James Rocket & James William Roy @ RBN
www.TheJamesRocket.com -- www.markleford.com
The fact that a lot of the lesser known bands put their songs at 2 bucks will definitely benefit the ones who went for 1 buck.
i bet bullet with butterfly wings will be the first $3... cause i'd pay it, and so would anyone needing that and other SP
It's much easier to justify dropping the price of a song than it is to have a good song priced at a $1...and then everybody getting pissed when you decided to try a future release at $2.
If you have to pay an authoring company to produce your content, then you have to at least make that back or you are in effect losing money (not to mention the authoring service is unable to support itself).
Last edited by T-Hybrid; 03-04-2010 at 02:58 PM.
Tiger Uppercut: Platinum Artist | Expert: G/B | Hard: D/V
Song Count: 831 | Newest: "Great Balls of Fire" & "Dog Days Are Over"
i've always sold my stuff really cheap (if not just handing it to anyone who seems genuinely interested in it), but i also can't help but be disgusted when people complain about a smaller band selling their albums for more than $6-8 and then spending twice that much on a major label release without thinking about it.
i've seen countless people turn their noses up at extremely reasonable prices at merch-tables and then go straight to a fancy restaurant with the local scene kids to blow 5 times as much, which is of course their call to make but i just personally don't care to appeal to those people.
the last album i put out on my former record label i decided to do absolutely no free copies, no promos, no trades, and no haggling at the merch-table...
i sold a bit less than normal, but it was nice knowing that the only people who had it actually really wanted it and cared about what i'm doing enough to drop the $8.
You superfans are amazing. You can't see why charging less, at least early on would be beneficial in the long run? This is the same mentality that compares CD sales and MP3 sales to RB songs and uses the first two to show why music games will always have some giant market.
You all think this is just going to take off like a rocket ship drawing in millions of new players, right? Yeah, I happen to not think that is going to happen without another platform GAME release of RB3. (Which I have to believe is coming in the next 6 months...at least by the end of the year if they want this RBN thing to really work)
Again, I say to you...How many people are all of a sudden going to have more money for DLC? How many discs is RBN going to sell to get new people into the series? 12?
Basically the same group of people are going to be buying from a much larger pool of songs...and unless they all get a lot more money they will be buying a lower pct of songs available...hurting EVERYONE putting out songs.
Now, as a "seller" if I charge less and am able to get more word of mouth interest, maybe I drop a few more albums too at regular retail due to more people knowing about my band. Maybe that is not the aim. I dunno.
I just know that with the high volume of songs and not the same relatively higher volume of available Points/Cash coming in to buy those songs everyone ends up failing in the long run.
You see, I really want this to work as RB/GH games are my favorite video genre of all time. I agree that the price of a song should not be based on who the band is, but that is also a naive way of thinking. I have paid 2 dollars for plenty of crappy songs from "big" bands so if you think the charge is based on quality of song, you are being naive.
I bought Lady In a Blue Dress for $2 and I'm satisfied, considering I would have paid the same price from Harmonix anyway
I'm fairly certain that all Vagrant songs will be worth $2
Face it bro, my divinity is unassailable