Is Radiohead blazing a trail for monetizing youth and music?

It still didn’t get me to download there album, because in short I don’t like them and I find their music depressing.

But their name is plastered across every broadsheet and business masthead globally, and of course they are $10 million better off.

So, does my opinion matter?

What I have to admire RH for is the bravery demonstrated in offering their album on a pay-as-much-as-you’d-like download basis.

Here are the stats:

• According to comScore, a firm given permission to study downloads from the British rock group’s website, only 38% of album “buyers” opted to pay the band for the new record, handing over $6 on average.
• Radiohead themselves say the stats are out of whack, presenting a more positive spin. $10m in royalties, most of which the artist’ll pocket.. Doesn’t get much better than that.

In short, what was good about the marketing strategy?

1) After so many years of labels suing their own customers and damaged trust, here was a band that said “we trust you enough that you won’t rip us off”. Almost like the honest boxes you see by the roadside fruit & veg sellers who are never there. Seems that the 20% that will freeload is offset by a stronger relationship with the remaining 80%.

Some fans, it appears, are more trustworthy than others. 36% of fans from outside America volunteered payments, averaging $4.64 per person. By contrast, 40% of Americans paid for the album, delivering an average sum of $8.05.

2) It was undoubtedly a great PR coup. Why else would I be talking about Radiohead after all?

What won’t work going forward:

1) Now everyone is going to bandwaggon. Right Said Fred will be offering their album for free download. Not quite RSF, but nearly… Oasis and Jamiroquai are considering the option. Will they pay us to download the album?

Free download will become the byword for tired has-beens who aren’t deemed popular enough to feature of Celebrity Big Brother or “we were big in the 80s” type shows.

But the party won’t be spoiled by the has-beens. Bands with strong fan advocacy such as Nine Inch Nails are already experimenting with the format having “liberated” themselves from long term recording contracts and public spats with their label.

2) It smacks of “million dollar homepage”. First mover claims the credits, everyone else fights over the crumbs. Many bands will fail to make this work, but those that have the loyal base, such as NIN and Radiohead will only further reinforce the emotional bonding between their consumers and the brand. It’ll take a leap of faith and no doubt many bands will fake it, offering free downloads (but only of their crap albums - the ones they can’t sell anyway). Consumers will smell the rat. As NIN lead singer Reznor says “the only way to choose is to jump ship from old truths and trust dolphins as we swim through changing ways”

What does this mean for the music industry?

The music industry has known for a long time that the real money is not in the music. It’s in the merchandise, live tickets, sponsorship. Radiohead giving away their album is no different from the mass-marketing strategies labels engaged in back in the 80s to get their artists to number 1 in the singles charts. 7 inches never cut it financially, they were a vehicle for PR.

As soon as singles died out and along with them their established distribution channels, labels became less effective at marketing their portfolios. Furthermore, they had less control over the IP as few were able to secure all encompassing licensing deals that controlled every piece of the artist.