Slashdot Mirror


Amazon & TuneCore To Cut Out the RIAA Middleman

eldavojohn writes "So you're an aspiring band and you haven't signed with a record label. Maybe you've got a fan base interested in purchasing your stuff but you're not really into accounting? Enter Amazon's partnership with TuneCore, a CD printing and music distribution service. You want to sell a full album on Amazon of you brushing your teeth? $31. And you get about 40% back on sales, so selling nine digital copies of your CD will put you back in the black. There you have it, public availability on one of the largest online commerce sites for $31 — no RIAA involved!" TuneCore's CEO put it this way: "As an artist, you have unlimited physical inventory, made on demand, with no [sic] upfront costs and worldwide distribution to anyone who orders it at Amazon.com."

16 of 291 comments (clear)

  1. Could this do it? by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I could legitimately see this as being the beginning of the end for the RIAA, and I've never thought that before. It makes sense that it would take a big media vendor with a well-established user community, combining manufacturing with sales.

    This would be fantastic if I were a musician. No inventory. No worrying about manufacturnig. And you get a percentage of revenue that you won't see anywhere else. The general Amazon community will make marketing a *lot* easier than it would be otherwise. All in all, it seems to make the RIAA meaningless. I really think indie bands might be able to make this work. I'm looking forward to shopping for music on this and know the RIAA ain't getting a dime.

    1. Re:Could this do it? by Marcika · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Artists already have the ability to self distribute digital copies. So what is the big deal ?

      I think it is a big deal for marketing to have a central platform - nobody would look up an artist's site and key in credit card info etc... unless they know and like the band already. An Amazon "indie" bestseller list, and a centralized storefront gives far more exposure to artists with far less work involved. (Just think of the software equivalent: selling on the iPhone appstore vs. a trying to sell the equivalent application for an equally popular Nokia phone from your own website...)

      As for the marketing bit - the RIAA sponsored artists are also _statistically_ unlikely to succeed unless they are one of the handful that get picked for payola and million-dollar ad budgets... This just makes the non-top-100 album, which was previously pretty much a loss-making proposition for RIAA artists, a viable avenue. And if you look away from M-TV and ClearChannel, there are oodles of niche magazines and subculture sites which could easily push an unknown artist to 2,000 sales - previously not worth the effort, now generating a year's salary.

    2. Re:Could this do it? by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Artists already have the ability to self distribute digital copies. So what is the big deal ?

      Amazon. Now it's being sold through a site (Amazon) that people actually go to, as opposed to some no-name. Another difference is that Amazon has the money to possibly decide "You know what? We want to become the new music cartel, which we will do by actually treating musicians well." If bands get the idea that Amazon could actually market them, that might be more attractive than a label contract. What bands have to do is decide that long-term freedom and profitability are better than the lure of the advance they'll get from the label.

      You're probably right that the CD itself is less important than the distribution, but if this works I expect they'll figure that out.

      We'll see how it plays out, but if they start using their massive data mining capabilities to sell new bands to people the same way they sell new books...seriously, this could get interesting.

  2. Re:At $31 per album by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It was my understanding that the band paid $31 as sort of a "starting fee". After that initial $31, there is nothing more to pay (that is, if I understood what I read correctly). They're not trying to -sell- the discs for $31 a pop.

    You're close, it's $31 a year. Which is why there's no "upfront costs" as the quote says at the bottom of the summary but instead a $31/year. Which is still really really cheap. Interestingly enough, Wired uses "upfront" costs to describe it, from the article:

    Tunecore will charge just $31 a year in upfront fees to handle a 10-track CD from pressing to delivery, passing all other costs through to the buyer. In other words, the service promises to remove nearly all of the risks of short-run CD manufacturing, which can cost musicians hundreds or even thousands of dollars for discs that rarely sell enough to cover expenses.

    I think people are missing the big picture where you don't have to go to multiple services for your music. You'll be able to buy big names like U2 and Weezer right next to little high school rock bands and indie artists. You make that possible so that the people don't know whether they're buying RIAA or not and who knows? Maybe the musician will decide the RIAA route is not really worth it?

    --
    My work here is dung.
  3. Re:At $31 per album by mariushm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...as opposed to getting about 50 cents to a dollar on each CD, and that's if you're lucky to be Madonna or someone already famous...

    I'd say it's a very good deal.

    one obvious drawback to this model is that you canÃ(TM)t sell an on-demand CD at shows, where enthusiastic fans are most likely to pick one up.

    I don't think there would be anyone stopping the band from buying the CDs from Amazon for $9 and selling them at the concert for $15, with an autograph and some booklet, or for something like $25-50 with a signed t-shirt and booklet.

    They'd only lose about 5$ on each CD, but in the end it may still be better than ordering and paying in advance for a 500-1000 batch of discs at a duplication factory.

  4. Hey RIAA by C_Kode · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Don't bite the hand that feeds you. Goodbye.

  5. Re:CDBaby by Daengbo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The problem with their model is that 35 of those newest 40 are recycled from that 10,000,000.

  6. Re:It's missing some elements by slim · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm sorry, but unless you want to be the next Hoobastank or some such nonsense, those things are completely unnecessary.

    If you want to actually sell enough CDs (or novels, or software, or greetings cards, or whatever) to make anything like a living, you need marketing.

    If you write the Great American Novel, put it up on Lulu, and wait for the income to roll in, you'll sell 20 copies if you're lucky. To do better you've got to send review copies to magazines and web sites, persuade them you're worth interviewing for an article, get some viral marketing going for your product etc.

    The same would go for a CD, even if you're not going for the mainstream. Get a reputation for live shows. Get written about in the specialist press. Get played on specialist radio shows or net radio. Get blogged about.

    The OP's right. Traditional record labels do all this stuff, and that's part of where the money goes.

    Still, it's all stuff you can DIY, or have done separately.

  7. Re:CDBaby by Rary · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No one that knows about this service would sign unless they already have major sales...

    Unfortunately this still doesn't provide a good alternative to one important service the major record labels provide: promotion.

    Just because you put your independent band up on MySpace and SonicBids and your own website and sell your songs on iTunes and your CD on CDBaby doesn't magically make everyone in the world suddenly know you exist and want to buy your stuff. Somehow they still have to stumble across you in the first place, out of the trillions of other bands who have done the same as you.

    This Amazon service is awesome, and it's part of a much larger trend that will ultimately make the major labels obsolete, but there's still more work to be done.

    --

    "You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein

  8. Re:What's misspelled? by m.ducharme · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Generally speaking, you're right, but there's no reason "sic" can't be used in that fashion. Use of "sic" is meant simply to draw the reader's attention to something that the author wrote, and the editor knows is wrong, but doesn't feel justified in correcting. I would think that factual errors are at least as likely to fall into this category as typographical errors, which should just be corrected without comment by the editor, in most cases.

    --
    Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
  9. Re:CDBaby by altoz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Unfortunately this still doesn't provide a good alternative to one important service the major record labels provide: promotion.

    Well, this is the essence of what the future of the Record industry is, isn't it? You have two distinct businesses that are finally getting separated. On the one hand, you have the music sales group which makes money based on sales of the actual music. On the other, you have a marketing/promotion group which makes money off of concerts and the like. The former is a dead business model that'll go away with services like the one mentioned in this story. The latter is something that an agent or a marketing company or a PR firm can do. Really, this is what a record company will eventually evolve to.

  10. Re:No URLs or contact info allowed on artwork?! by DeathMagnetic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The service being offered depends on them taking a 60% cut of any sales. By providing your contact information, it would enable artists to direct buyers to an alternative location (such as their own website), which could offer the CD at a lower price while still giving the artist a larger cut (100% minus production/shipping costs). They're understandably not interested in offering an unlimited advertising service for a flat rate of $31.

  11. Re:At $31 per album by Rary · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think people are missing the big picture where you don't have to go to multiple services for your music.

    Not only does this put indie bands next to U2, but it even opens the doors for a whole new level of artist "below" the indie artist, because you no longer have to drop a couple grand to press a thousand CDs.

    Currently, if you want to sell a professionally made CD (ie. not a CD-R), you pretty much have to order at least 1000 of them. But what about bands who know they're not going to sell that many? Sure, CDBaby will take as few as 5 discs into their inventory if that's all you think you're going to sell, but what do you do with the other 995 you had to manufacture in order to be able to manufacture any at all?

    With this service, if 5 is all you're going to sell, then 5 is all that will be produced, and the total cost to you is only $31 -- which, to most artists, is worth it even if they don't make that money back in sales.

    --

    "You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein

  12. Re:CDBaby by Rary · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Send CD's to radio stations to get air play.

    Most stations won't even open the package. College stations might, but mainstream ones aren't interested.

    Get out and PLAY at better venues.

    That works locally, but what about the rest of the world?

    Get out, play for people, get Cd's in the hands of people that will play it on the air.

    I'm not saying that it can't be done, and I certainly don't advocate bands sitting on their asses and expecting to become instant multi-millionaires because they recorded an album. But marketing music is hard, especially in a world that has as many bands as this one has. It takes a lot of effort to stand out and get noticed, and you have to recognize that just because you may be good at writing and playing songs doesn't mean you're magically good at marketing those songs. Most bands need someone with knowledge and experience to handle that for them.

    --

    "You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein

  13. Re:CDBaby by Chyeld · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So maybe you aren't an instant star. Big Fucking Deal.

    Do you think that the guy behind Portal's Still Alive song was picked for that honor because the Valve devs heard him on the radio?

    Do you think the reason someone gets invited to PAX every year is because he's got an agent behind him doling out the payola to Tycho and Gabe?

    No, you can't find their CD's browsing Best Buy or Wal-Mart. But I bet you they still make enough on their work that they can afford dinner at the end of the day.

  14. Must pull fangs first by Weaselmancer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The latter is something that an agent or a marketing company or a PR firm can do. Really, this is what a record company will eventually evolve to.

    I agree, your post is spot-on.

    The first thing that has to happen though is to get the record companies to not be so damn dangerous. Pull their fangs.

    They killed internet radio because of ideas like this, you know. They still have enough power to get insane laws like this one passed (you actually have to pay the RIAA to broadcast your own unlicensed non-RIAA member music if you can imagine that!) And they'll do anything they can to remain relevant.

    Free money and piles of it - who wouldn't fight for that?

    So good job Amazon (never thought I'd say that) and keep chipping away at these jerks. Eventually they'll go the way of the dodo.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.