What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Join the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Facebook view!
facebook.com/DragonAgeOrigins - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
51 Comments
- kida101, on 07/07/2009, -0/+48OK Computer
- inactive, on 07/07/2009, -0/+25RIAA has been doing this for ages, they sometimes giving the artists up to 0.8%!
- tj007s13, on 07/07/2009, -1/+19A new media business model? The RIAA/MPAA will not approve! How dare they try to update and improve archaic business practices.
- Residents, on 07/07/2009, -0/+13"How come I end up where I started?"
- b-dizzle, on 07/07/2009, -0/+9How come I end up where I belong?
- luke374, on 07/07/2009, -0/+9I would think you would prefer Kid A for some reason.
- kenhatesemos, on 07/07/2009, -0/+7they've already said that they don't plan to self distribute anymore. so it is possible that they would go for this new label considering they're putting into practice exactly what radiohead have been preaching.
- falafelkiosken, on 07/07/2009, -0/+6I'd happily buy music if the artists got the money instead of RIAA
- linksama, on 07/07/2009, -0/+5Won't take my eyes off the ball again
- solid12345, on 07/07/2009, -0/+5Wait, you want me to give you money for your music, what kind of business model is that!
/s - inactive, on 07/07/2009, -0/+5"There is currently no word on what artists will be signed to Polyphonic."
I'd bet that Radiohead would be the first. - panicoffice, on 07/07/2009, -0/+4Oh man, that ~10% 90% figure was *****. That was released by comScore, a company that gives out free computers to 50,000 people every year, with software that monitors exactly how they use it. They're not exactly a good way to monitor computer/internet use in the general population. These are people that are willing to have their every move monitored for a free computer.
http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/20 ...
http://leisureblogs.chicagotribune.com/turn_it_up/ ... - STPZ, on 07/07/2009, -0/+4Musicians returning to their roots, playing on subway platforms and street corners for all to hear and accepting whatever it is you would like to contribute to them, very nostalgic.
- Zanrook, on 07/07/2009, -0/+4the rain drops
the rain drops
the rain drops
the rain drops
the rain drops
the rain drops
x100 times - zadadka, on 07/07/2009, -0/+3I was peripherally involved in the Rainbows disty (I manage IT for Radiohead's merchanidising arm, which is where those emails came from after you clicked the download links).
Be under no illusions, the costs of setting it all up were penis-shrivelling amounts of money and Radiohead took a big hit on it... if there were any profits from Rainbows' release then they were token, no more ....large numbers of people gave just a few pennies [cents] on the download, and VERY few payed over $7, and the subsequent hard media sales likely only cut the losses from the whole affair.
It didn't help that certain 3rd Party's simply didn't grasp the response it would attract, so insufficient resources were in place, and hence it was swamped within an hour, hugely frustrating for many of you, I know from the email traffic.....but that's all an aside.
As a sometimes pirate and permanent RIAA-hater, I was extremely impressed by Radiohead's motivation to go down this road, and lead-the-way in showing that is IS possible for bands to use online resources to distribute their music and, in the future, there's no doubt that costs will be driven down to the extent that it is feasible for startup bands to do so....that, I suspect, is the reason for the existence of the new label...lessons learned from Rainbows will have been addressed, and technology has advanced, even in just the dozen or so months since.
I think many people assume that just because they can share or download an MP3 on P2P/Torrent/Newsfeeds or whatever, then that is the be all and end all....it's all Hey Presto !
Well, ok, it kinda is, but the Artists have to be paid, so as ever, it's the "backend" stuff that makes or breaks it all in terms of it being commercially viable, let alone successful, both for the bands, and for you the fans.
I guess the bottom-line of what I'm saying is, be patient....there is NO doubt in my mind that in a decade from now (or possibly half that time), what Radiohead has championed in the last year or two will become the de facto standard for music distribution.
Just for the record, I'm not a fan of their music.....to me, they're a four-piece Leonard Cohen act... but hey, they help pay my mortgage, so I love them anyway.....and the street cred from that is nice too.... :)
- appleseed1234, on 07/07/2009, -0/+3First you reel me out and then you cut the string....
- arthursk, on 07/07/2009, -0/+3Anyone else expecting a lot more detail than 3 paragraphs? Could have saved time and just read the title..
- crilen007, on 07/07/2009, -0/+3Can you source this please? I'm actually quite interested to see the evidence.
(not that I don't believe you, I would actually really like to see a source to read) - panicoffice, on 07/07/2009, -0/+3According to Radiohead, they (the band members personally) made more money from the "pay what you want" business model on In Rainbows, than they made on any other album they ever released. On top of that, when the "hard copy" album was released a few months later, it was still #1 on the billboard. So say what you want, but you can't beat people's willingness to pay for GOOD music even if they can get it for free.
- illepic, on 07/07/2009, -0/+3The future.
- inactive, on 07/07/2009, -4/+6But does this provide for mass media streaming from blog sites, fan sites, forums etc? Currently you cannot do that without being forced into paying for a streaming license and that costs big money. Such restrictions are varied depending on location. Australia has very costly licensing and enforcement (APRA) which is why you never see our local bands on the web. They cannot even stream their own music FFS.
This model is good, it has merit but the advertising and promotion can be done in more ways than one. Who do we answer to if we choose to do that? Any guesses?
One day these people will need to get somewhere and they will look at the river flowing fast and it still wont click. - panicoffice, on 07/07/2009, -0/+2wow... I really hope you're right. :)
If there's no more money in music, maybe the monster we've created called the music industry will stop producing cookie cutter sensations like Spice Girls, and BackStreetBoys, and cluttering up the airwaves.
Maybe if there aren't MILLIONS to be made in COMMERCIALISING ART, maybe the only ones willing to do it will be...ARTISTS! And they don't do it for the money anyway! At least the real ones.
And I bet if you ask Drunken Blood Lust, if they want to quit their job at McD's or Starbucks for a record deal, they'll tell you yes. Because they'd be stupid not to. But if you ask them if they're going to quit playing music if nobody wants to sign them in 10 years, they'll tell you HELL NO. They play cuz they love it. It's not an investment. If they say they'll quit, they're not artists. They're peformers.
See, the problem is not that the music industry has too much music. It's that they've created too much bad music. They've invested in what they think will sell. So you release 100 albums, and of them 1 is a hit. But you've spent 100 times more than it cost you to produce that 1 hit, to FIND that one hit. So now, you have to share the revenue with the band, and you have to tell them, we're giving you 10% of the profit. Cuz we spent the other 90% promoting those 99 crappy ass bands! It's not our fault we couldn't tell what the audience would latch on to.
If what you're saying is true, and I hope it is, the recording industry folds out of the picture. And the artists invest in themselves. Now they don't have to sell 1,000,000 records to make some serious money. If you're an independant artist, and you have 100,000 fans, you're GOLDEN. You can play sold out shows in every major city. You can sell t-shirts, and bumper stickers, and DVD's, and so on. You don't need such a huge revenue stream, because you don't need to share it with anybody. Because you invested in yourself, and you don't own anybody jack!
And all those other bands, that don't want to invest in themselves, that can't get a job at McDonalds to make a $1000 EP? Good. They clearly aren't that interested in making music. :) - jaytek13, on 07/07/2009, -1/+3Despite their saying contrary, I still question how successful the "pay what you want" model was, since they were so quick to take it down, and they're apparently not interested in ever doing it again.
I applaud them for trying different things, but you can't beat the pirates. They may claim to be fighting for the "greater good", but in the end they just have an unreasonable expectation for free *****, and no business model is going to change that. It just represents the larger cultural problem of "undeserved entitlement" in this country. - dronkmunk, on 07/07/2009, -0/+2You go forward, and I'll go backward...
- souLLy, on 07/07/2009, -1/+3KARMA POLICE
- BriceHutch, on 07/07/2009, -0/+2look, whether this works out or not, it's good to see someone trying new things for the industry. The more stabs we collectively take at the RIAA the better.
- AdeleMor, on 07/07/2009, -0/+1Is this going to go the way of RCRD LBL?
- FredFredrickson, on 07/07/2009, -0/+1So it's a music label (*gasp* oh noes! horror!), but they follow the universally praised business model of Radiohead's last e-release? People everywhere will love it with every fiber of their being, and hate it's guts at the same time. Heads just might explode.
- dalittle, on 07/07/2009, -0/+1Only buying from labels that appreciate and support artists like Polyphonic is the only way to purchase music.
For other labels make sure to check http://riaaradar.com to make sure what you are buying is not helping the RIAA. The RIAA does not pay their artists for how hard they work and most artists get contracts before they can afford a good lawyer. - Freakzilla, on 07/07/2009, -0/+1Great business model. I hope this catches on.
- jeriqo, on 07/07/2009, -0/+1world*
- borez, on 07/07/2009, -1/+2Why, there's no need.
- jaytek13, on 07/07/2009, -0/+1Like I said, I know they claim it was successful... but then why are they so uninterested in doing it again?
If I recall, they never actually released how much money they made off of the "pay what you want model", and only said that ~10% of the people made up 90% of the money paid. - panicoffice, on 07/07/2009, -1/+2Dugg for mentioning radiohead. :) Bonus points if anybody can decipher my handle (username for you kids)
- bringitontimx, on 07/07/2009, -0/+1Fitter. Happier. more productive.
- zadadka, on 07/07/2009, -0/+1@ thejackel
lol....all it demonstrates is how little a fan I am, nothing more.
@panicoffice
As for the pretty penny, you again think it's all about P2P...and have no idea of the costs of setting up that first excursion into online direct global distribution from scratch....go on GUESS how much it cost to set up iTunes or similar..
Donations?....ha-ha. - zuiquan, on 07/08/2009, -0/+1OK 2 things:
Thing 1. Radiohead is the ***** and their manager is also the *****. They just do not give a *****. Except about music. And that is the way it should be.
Thing 2. Paste Magazine is the best ***** music magazine there is. Period. If you want to hear awesome bands six months before some ***** down the block is rocking the ***** out of it, this is the place to get your music fix on. - thejackyl, on 07/07/2009, -1/+2I don't know what band you're talking about, there are 5 guys in Radiohead.
- panicoffice, on 07/07/2009, -0/+1And i'm pretty sure they made a pretty penny. They sold ALL 100,000 of the box sets for $81 each. That's $8.1 mil right there. :) Plus all the "donations" on top of that.
- panicoffice, on 07/07/2009, -0/+1your bonus points have been mailed to you via the United States Postal Service. Please allow 0-∞ days for your package to arrive.
- acknotSW, on 07/07/2009, -0/+1Given that there is no need to produce a physical product, given that there is no need to ship a physical product, and given that the supply of their product is infinite, I would consider 5 to 10 cents per song and 2 to 5 dollars per movie a good value.
- KloroFormd, on 07/07/2009, -0/+1Don't forget MagnaTune. They've been doing nearly the same thing as Polyphonic for years.
I'm totally unaffiliated with them BTW.
http://www.magnatune.com/ - thejackyl, on 07/07/2009, -0/+1Cool. Hope this plays out well for the band and the new label.
- klipseracer, on 07/07/2009, -1/+1Pay what you want? I think this could be a very good thing. I can see people paying a few dollars for a cd they would have never bought, to have it legally distributed to them(likely electronically). We should push this on digg with digg powah! Because we all know it IS stealing, although i'm not a hypocrite, i know its wrong. I still download music, but I don't tell other people not to do it. But a REASONABLE legal way to aquire music should be a positive thing for everyone. 1 penny tracks here i come! woot. Thats 1 penny more than they were going to get anyway. Maybe I could counter that expense by watching a few ads online :-D. I can see a ticket office being willing to advertise tickets for said band for a concert, prior to a consumer listening to said artist.
- acknotSW, on 07/08/2009, -0/+0panicoffice, it's always nice to see someone else that truly gets it.
You nailed on the head about what these companies do. They spew out 99 pieces of ***** hoping for that one major hit. This was a very smart strategy when they were the only ones who could make someone famous. As the gatekeepers, they had first crack at ALL new talent. You didn't get famous unless they let you through the gates.
The good news is that it is coming to an end; the only question is how long it will take and how far they will go to try and protect their old business model.
I am not a fan of radiohead and I don't really like their music, but I have a lot of respect for them for seeing where this business is going and trying to find new a model that can provide a good income for bands without raping the public. - solid12345, on 07/07/2009, -2/+2Still more information than Obama's plan to fix healthcare.
- acknotSW, on 07/07/2009, -1/+0Like it or not, trying to sell a digital copy of something you give away for free over the airwaves is not going to be a viable business model for much longer.
The bottom line; bands are going to make less money because the gates to success are being torn down and nothing except the total destruction of the internet is going to be able to put them back up. Bands don't need the capability to mass produce their product and they don't need access to an expensive distribution system in order to get their music to the masses. With the death of the gatekeepers, the amount of available content will explode like never before. New bands will give consumers their music for free in an attempt to undercut established bands in an effort to sell concert tickets and merchandise.
A band like nickleback may not be interested in continuing in the music business if they can’t bring in millions of dollars per year, but I bet Drunken Blood Lust who practices out of my neighbor’s garage would love the chance to quit their jobs at McDonalds and Starbucks for the chance to make a few hundred thousand per year. -
Show 51 - 54 of 54 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is