Music Industry Blog » In Rainbows

Is Direct-To-Fan Working For You?

Lior Shamir — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 09:57:40 +0000

Five months ago, I began working with Audiolife, an exciting company at the forefront of the Direct-To-Fan revolution.

Direct-To-Fan is a popular business model adopted by independent artists. As the name suggests, artists cut out the middlemen (labels, distributors, retailers etc.) and promote and sell their music directly to their fans.

Radiohead’s release of In Rainbows and Nine Inch Nail’s release of Ghosts I–IV are popular examples of the Direct-To-Fan paradigm.

There are many benefits to Direct-To-Fan. There are many challenges too. Audiolife provides both the technology tools and the product fulfillment solutions to make Direct-To-Fan possible and affordable.

There are a handful of other companies with a Direct-To-Fan approach, including Topspin, Bandcamp, and Nimbit.

I want to ask you this:

If you’re doing it, is Direct-To-Fan working for you?

If you’re not doing it, what’s stopping you?

Please add your comments here.

Radiohead abandoning the album format

Lior Shamir — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 09:17:18 +0000

In an interview with The Believer, Thom Yorke stated that Radiohead would not follow up on In Rainbows, the infamous pay-what-you-want release, with another full-length album, opting instead for single and EP releases, All Things D reported.

“None of us want to go into that creative hoo-ha of a long-play record again. Not straight off.. I mean, it’s just become a real drag. It worked with In Rainbows because we had a real fixed idea about where we were going. But we’ve all said that we can’t possibly dive into that again. It’ll kill us.”

Smirp

Lior Shamir — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 09:17:41 +0000

Duncan Freeman of Indie Music Tech uncovered an interesting startup over the weekend. Smirp, in spite of its long-winded and confusing ‘how it works’ page, is a remarkably simple and practical service, allowing artists and music promoters to sell their MP3s at a customer-determined price point directly via email. The set-up is brilliant: use your existing Google, Yahoo or other OpenID username and password to log in instantly, link your account to your Amazon account, upload your content to your Smirp ‘name-your-own-price’ page (example), and promote this page by embedding Smirp buttons on your website or social network profiles. Your customers will click, enter their email, name their own price (or select the minimum price you establish) and receive a link to download your MP3s via email with a 12 hour lifetime [for security reasons]. At face value, it’s similar to Twitpay, the Twitter-dedicated payment solution.

Smirp’s two-tier pricing is more than fair: $6/month for unlimited use or Free in exchange for 20% of your proceeds. On concept, inspired by Radiohead’s In Rainbows campaign, and ease-of-use alone, this is one of the hottest digital music distribution solutions I have come across. Perhaps an alliance with CreateSpace, Amazon’s flexible print-per-order CD distribution service will position Smirp alongside the current indie titans, namely ReverbNation, CD Baby and TuneCore?

Radiohead against the RIAA

Lior Shamir — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 09:34:55 +0000

Whatever your position on file-sharing may be, it will most certainly be skewed when you learn that a mega-band such as Radiohead, who famously distributed their last record with a pay-what-you-like model, are taking the stand against the RIAA.

In the case of file-sharer Joel Tenenbaum, a Boston University student, versus the RIAA, Radiohead will testify against the RIAA as part of a protest against unnecessary preying on filesharers, according to Tenenbaum’s legal team which consists of Harvard Law professor Charles Nesson and student members of his class.

Radiohead has publically spoken out against the major labels’ agenda to profit from questionable sharing of music in the legal arena, and specifically the lobby groups that represent them such as the RIAA and IFPI. In fact, Radiohead is one of several A-list artists that have embraced file-sharing culture in one way or another to propel their independent marketing of their music and, to a certain extent, have proven that the very labels that made them what they are today have been rendered obsolete.

All this comes to a head just after the founders of The Pirate Bay, a BitTorrent search platform, were found guilty in a landmark file-sharing case spearheaded by Swedish anti-piracy lobbyists, preceded by the public crackdown of the popular music streaming service, SeeqPod, which was forced to close.

Linking the decline in music sales to illegal filesharing carries very little water in this day and age as there are so many other contributing factors to the manner in which music is consumed and the availability of media to the public in general. The fact is that, for the major labels, going to court is profitable. In the cases where it’s not, it sets a precedence for future cases that will turn over handsome settlements. The attitude toward file-sharing, and the laws around it no less, will not change until the investment in the judicial system will no longer yield rewards for the copyright holders, the majority of which are represented by only four corporate institutions worldwide.