Tweet
Former music label boss: beat piracy by selling albums for £1
By Nate Anderson | Last updated about an hour ago
Would musicians make more money selling more copies of albums at a fraction of the current price? Or does dirt-cheap music simply devalue the product art?
The former head of Warner Music in the UK, Rob Dickins, threw some gasoline onto this burning question last week at a music conference. Dickins suggested that albums should go for as little as £1, or just a bit more than the current iTunes price for individual tracks.
In his view, the key is to make music purchases a no-brainer—an impulse purchase. The idea is that even those with some casual interest in a band might snap up a new release when priced at a buck or two. Keep the price at $7-10 for a digital download, though, and suddenly people have to prioritize; do I get the new Belle & Sebastian album or the new Sufjan Stevens album? At a low enough price, the correct answer is, "I'll buy both!"
Dickins knows the business, having worked not just at Warner but also serving as head of the BPI, Britain's answer to the RIAA. That doesn't mean those still running the record labels think much of this idea, which certainly would redefine the cost of music. On the other hand, who would even bother to pirate music at those prices?
The BBC, which covered Dickins' appearance, interviewed another music manager who complained about downgrading the value of art. "Right now if you buy a bottle of water it's £1," said Jonathan Shalit. "A piece of music is a valuable form of art. If you want the person to respect it and value it, it's got to cost them not a huge sum of money but a significant sum of money."
Paul Quirk, who heads the Entertainment Retailers Association, was aghast, saying that Dickins already profited from high music prices and has only seen the light now that it matters less to his bottom line. "Rob Dickins is part of the generation of executives who benefited personally from the age of £14 CDs and gave the music business a bad name and so it is ironic to hear him espouse the cause of the £1 album. Basic arithmetic indicates that this is a non-starter."
Dickins responded in the comments section of MusicWeek: "Unfortunately Paul is reacting to headlines and rather than serious debate, is speaking in sound bites. My point addressed online albums of which we all know has around 80 percent piracy and by bringing the price down to a 'non-decision' payment, I believe piracy could be countered to a degree but more importantly it would bring in the enormous peripheral buys. This would allow physical albums to be developed to really give the fans something special at a much higher price points as illustrated by Nine Inch Nails Ghosts I-IV which would make the retail experience much more interesting to the consumer and the retail outlook more positive."
By Nate Anderson | Last updated about an hour ago
Would musicians make more money selling more copies of albums at a fraction of the current price? Or does dirt-cheap music simply devalue the product art?
The former head of Warner Music in the UK, Rob Dickins, threw some gasoline onto this burning question last week at a music conference. Dickins suggested that albums should go for as little as £1, or just a bit more than the current iTunes price for individual tracks.
In his view, the key is to make music purchases a no-brainer—an impulse purchase. The idea is that even those with some casual interest in a band might snap up a new release when priced at a buck or two. Keep the price at $7-10 for a digital download, though, and suddenly people have to prioritize; do I get the new Belle & Sebastian album or the new Sufjan Stevens album? At a low enough price, the correct answer is, "I'll buy both!"
Dickins knows the business, having worked not just at Warner but also serving as head of the BPI, Britain's answer to the RIAA. That doesn't mean those still running the record labels think much of this idea, which certainly would redefine the cost of music. On the other hand, who would even bother to pirate music at those prices?
The BBC, which covered Dickins' appearance, interviewed another music manager who complained about downgrading the value of art. "Right now if you buy a bottle of water it's £1," said Jonathan Shalit. "A piece of music is a valuable form of art. If you want the person to respect it and value it, it's got to cost them not a huge sum of money but a significant sum of money."
Paul Quirk, who heads the Entertainment Retailers Association, was aghast, saying that Dickins already profited from high music prices and has only seen the light now that it matters less to his bottom line. "Rob Dickins is part of the generation of executives who benefited personally from the age of £14 CDs and gave the music business a bad name and so it is ironic to hear him espouse the cause of the £1 album. Basic arithmetic indicates that this is a non-starter."
Dickins responded in the comments section of MusicWeek: "Unfortunately Paul is reacting to headlines and rather than serious debate, is speaking in sound bites. My point addressed online albums of which we all know has around 80 percent piracy and by bringing the price down to a 'non-decision' payment, I believe piracy could be countered to a degree but more importantly it would bring in the enormous peripheral buys. This would allow physical albums to be developed to really give the fans something special at a much higher price points as illustrated by Nine Inch Nails Ghosts I-IV which would make the retail experience much more interesting to the consumer and the retail outlook more positive."
Ignoring that you seem to think that industries may be people, shouldn't you write "the recording industry aren't a singular person" following your logic.
Comment