What is Digg?176 Comments
- PennFarmer, on 10/15/2008, -2/+226Did I miss the part of the article where they actually gave details of how successful it was? The only hard figure mentioned was 100,000 boxed sets sold. Not a great figure. A more informative article would have involved the actual averages for the downloads. I understand the company isn't releasing the information, but without it, the article's headline is very misleading. This doesn't actually reveal much.
- Pvisi111, on 10/15/2008, -6/+106Great album..one of their best.
- shempey, on 10/15/2008, -0/+80I agree, the real data can be seen here (http://www.comscore.com/press/release.asp?press=18 ...
To summarize, 2 out of 5 ppl paid for it. The average price they paid was $6. - AanaknSkywalker, on 10/15/2008, -0/+79Well that was a pretty vague article...
- RizenBB, on 10/15/2008, -0/+56I fail to see "Statistics" in this article, just confirmation of information that everyone had already pretty much guessed - most people would pay nothing and it was more popular on BT anyways.
I'd love to see actual hard statistics and financial numbers. This is just fluff. - Morghin, on 10/15/2008, -3/+58That's pretty damned impressive. I'm not a fan of their music, but I definitely am a fan of their guts.
- JordanM85, on 10/15/2008, -0/+33This article doesn't reveal anything....
- chicagojack, on 10/15/2008, -1/+34Think they would call this a success
- inactive, on 10/15/2008, -1/+32RADIOHEAD > RIAA
- JM0ney, on 10/15/2008, -0/+29Author: "We have very little to say about In Rainbows, and what we have is vague at best, how do we make an entire article about it?"
Editor: "I know, make the font size huge" - btschul, on 10/15/2008, -1/+28Anal leakage > RIAA
- Coreyinprogress, on 10/15/2008, -0/+26The dj Girl Talk also released a pay-what-you-like album with great success.
It is possible this is the start of a chaning business model? - broseas, on 10/15/2008, -0/+24I think that radiohead got the best possible result out of this, but it think this can really only be done ONCE. if they did it again i bet the results would be much worse because there wont be as much hype and the people who paid well over an average albums price probably wont pay much more than what an album is actually worth the next time around. BTW this album was worth paying for.
- FunyGirl, on 10/15/2008, -2/+21I was trying last year to access to In Rainbows download when they launched it but servers were down for a long time :) that is enough to know about great success of this action
- boneit, on 10/15/2008, -1/+19Other than the bit that said:
However, it still generated more money before it was physically released (on December 31) than the total money generated by sales of the band's previous album, 2003's 'Hail To The Thief'. - appleofdischord, on 10/15/2008, -0/+17Maybe a lot of their fans can't afford more. The fact that they made more total money than the previous album is, I think, the key factor.
Honestly, I think the recording industry should take a hint from this and reduce their prices to $6 per cd. They'd probably make more money. - Sparkster185, on 10/15/2008, -1/+16That album kicks ass.
- gardnmi, on 10/15/2008, -0/+15This article 100 percent blows. Where are the stats?!
- inactive, on 10/15/2008, -0/+14Definitely. 'In Rainbows' and 'Kid A' are my favorites of the bunch, but I do like them all in their own special way.
- cadmiumpaint, on 10/15/2008, -1/+14no actual sales numbers? who needs proof or facts when you have vague-ness?
this was a cute gimmick experiment, but there are only a few bands with large groups of superfans that could pull this off. Anyone else who tries this will be called a copycat so its a damned if you do damned if you don't. - Snoosy, on 10/15/2008, -0/+13I chose to pay $5 for the album, just to support the change in distribution style for music. That $5 for a download is more than I've spent on CDs in the past few years.
- meamog, on 10/15/2008, -0/+12most things > poop
What's your point exactly? - tdogg241, on 10/15/2008, -0/+12At $80 a pop, I'd say 100k copies of the boxset is *really* impressive.
- pradaaddict, on 10/15/2008, -2/+14I didn't pay for the download, i got it off BitTorrent... However I did buy the vinyl and saw them live and bought a few tee-shirts. I'll support the band, i just wont support a major label.
- Pfkninenines, on 10/15/2008, -1/+12And what does this boil down to? ***** the RIAA! We're better without you, and so are the groups you are 'protecting'.
- shempey, on 10/15/2008, -0/+11Further summary:
According to ComScore's numbers, 1.2 million people worldwide visited inrainbows.com from October 1 to October 29, and 38 percent of them paid for 'In Rainbows,' despite having been presented with the option to download the album for free.
Among the 456K people worldwide that ComScore says paid, the average price was exactly $6. If ComScore's sample is 100 percent accurate, that would mean Radiohead netted $2,736,000 in digital sales. US users (40 percent) were slightly more likely to pay for the album than users in other countries (36 percent). However, when they did pay, they paid nearly twice ($8.05) what their international counterparts did ($4.64). - inactive, on 10/15/2008, -0/+11I would definitely say so. They offered the fans a pay-what-you-want download and then when the album was physically released it was #1 both in the US and UK. I think this was a totally brilliant move on their part.
- norbiu, on 10/15/2008, -1/+11* > RIAA
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 10/15/2008, -0/+9If my memory serves, they only produced 100,000 box sets and they sold out the day they were made available. It's strange to think this all happened a year ago now.
- WiretapStudios, on 10/15/2008, -0/+9I chose to pay nothing and went to see them on tour.
- kiwiboyus, on 10/15/2008, -2/+11Great album, I bought the box set :) Loved this tour as well, just soooooo good live.
- shempey, on 10/15/2008, -0/+8http://www.comscore.com/press/release.asp?press=18 ...
- LedgerFangirl, on 10/15/2008, -0/+8that is ***** up
- ZachTorpy, on 10/15/2008, -5/+13OKC >= The Bends >= Kid A >= In Rainbows >= Hail To The Thief >= Amnesiac > Pablo Honey.
- inactive, on 10/15/2008, -0/+7Like you pointed out, there are some other artists who are doing this now (NIN is another) and are achieving success without the help of a major record label. Meanwhile, the recording industry is not doing as well as they once did. You keep releasing crap and people will not pay for it - very simple.
My hope is that this will change everything as artists learn to embrace this way of distribution vs. the conventional means of the past. Reminds me of the old punk DIY movement of the 70's to mid 80's and why I hated corporate music to begin with. - sodade, on 10/15/2008, -0/+7I gave them $20 because I downloaded all their CDs and finally had a chance to give my money to the artist instead of a RIAA label.
- groo68, on 10/15/2008, -0/+7That's what they did, they didn't release the statistics, saying "it was a great financial success" isn't releasing statistics.
- verynegative, on 10/15/2008, -0/+71. Make good music
2. Profit. - inactive, on 10/15/2008, -0/+7I think they're "okay" with a CERTAIN percentage of downloads not being paid for. If they weren't, they wouldn't have taken the "pay whatever you want" route in the first place.
Also, I think many people who wound up paying, for example, $2, are people who would otherwise not have bothered to buy the album in stores. In this way, they're reaching a bigger audience as well as making money - however little it may be - from places where they would otherwise have made none. - JRW5061, on 10/15/2008, -0/+7dude In Rainbows is one of their bests, right up there with OK Computer. Simply amazing. If you're a radiohead fan I dont see how you could give it anything less than an A.
- HisTumness, on 10/15/2008, -0/+6You fail at trolling.
- inactive, on 10/15/2008, -1/+715 steps, then a sheer drop.
- inactive, on 10/15/2008, -1/+7Very true, even Thom Yorke already said that they won't do this kind of release again.
He joked about maybe having the new album in a little bag
on the corner of a street with a sign that says "here it is". haha - bpoteat, on 10/15/2008, -1/+6Ugh. As an audiophile and someone who has a vinyl collection, YOU ain't up on things, so I'll let you in. *****.
No, vinyl is NOT the best way to listen to music. Of course, you COULD say that, but it just as valid an opinion to say the best way to listen to music is with some ambient static playing in the background and pillows sitting on your head. FACT: sound cannot be reproduced by vinyl as well as CDs on equivalent systems. Blind tests show listeners overwhelmingly prefer digital reproduction. Mixed systems that play CDs but use some type of analog tubes to introduce noise are even picked by most supposed vinyl lovers.
The technology of vinyl records got replaced because it is a really poor technology. Actual albums are not easily portable and are fragile. Every time you play a record it loses quality. Every time. Any defects at ALL in the physical production introduce audio defects. CDs absolutely dominate reproduction of sounds than vinyl in every measurable way. And most mp3s's are even WORSE quality than CDs, but they are free to copy so that puts them up above CDs in distributers eyes who can charge nearly the same thing for something much cheaper to produce.
If you like vinyl over CDs, it isn't because they are better than CDs, it is because you have an emotional attachment to albums and/or you like the audio noise introduced by vinyl.
The only reason to collect vinyl albums is emotion. I know because I do. As a listener I would NEVER trade CDs for vinyl and don't see how anyone could possibly want to. I guess you could come back with the ***** argument that "Well, with CDs just lose the soul". Yeah, that's it. Vinyl has a soul. - KampfGherkin, on 10/15/2008, -1/+6@ groo68: my sentiment exactly.
Where are the true statistics and why are they not being openly laid out?
If this were a success, ya'd think you'd wanna tell everybody about it. It's not like there's some strategic advantage to keeping that info for yourself, is there.
It's vitally important to know just how things exactly went, what with all the hullapaloova going on about money being lost to piracy. - caralosm, on 10/15/2008, -1/+6yeah, i was expecting some sales figures.
- bipolarruledout, on 10/15/2008, -0/+5Except in the case of Girl Talk it's kind of hypocritical if he doesn't offer it up for free.
- athinnes, on 10/01/2009, -0/+5W.T.F.?
- bjs3171, on 10/15/2008, -0/+5it is an album. the word album does not mean "vinyl".
- merreborn, on 10/15/2008, -0/+5"that is enough to know about great success of this action"
No, it really isn't enough. Their goal wasn't just to get people to download the album. It to test the financial viability of the "pay what you want" model.
This article, although incredibly vague on details, confirms that it was in fact a *financial* success:
"However, it still generated more money before it was physically released (on December 31) than the total money generated by sales of the band's previous album, 2003's 'Hail To The Thief'."
It'd be really interesting to see the actual statistics. -
Show 51 - 100 of 179 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is