.

They should make an album available for free download [at itunes and it's likes] for a limited time at first.

Then they go for their typical prices throughout the year, except for another similar giveaway prior to the holidays.

I could seriously see figures double that way. Even though some would argue that it could result in less buying for physical albums,

but i doubt that as itunes files are afterall useless as can be without the iPods, knowing that you can't copy them for your car,

not to mention they are bound to get deleted under some circumstances. So you'd spare yourself the bother and go out 2 purchase the actual CD.

any thoughts?

Like, do you mean to see how many people buy a download vs. buy a physical copy?

I find it weird that iTunes has a monopoly on trackable downloadable albums.

CinisterCee said:

nop, more like to combine the sales of both, download & physical, and give us the final figure.

People tend to immedietly open their kazaa or Limewire and get an anonymous free copy, so why not give a them free copy that is trackable.

ohhhhh I see now.

i still think part of the problem is not everyone wants to use their store.

i don't use mine either, but i did when some lables started giving away free download singles for thier artists (Hollaback Girl & We Belong Together remix for example)

Which resulted in both tracks spending endless weeks at the top after counting those d/l's into the process.

See, that's the concept i'm talking about here, but rather 2 be applied on album sales, too.

It really profitted those lables.

But a free copy isn't a "sale". Cha-know?

that's true, that's why i suggested a limited promo, just to get a porper count out of it

But then they can't point the blame at their own product and channels!

They want to blame illegal downloads as the reason for less consumer traffic.

.

" damned if i do, damned if i don't"

hell, true that man. Esp. for the lables that are barely impacting.

Even though the bigger ones wouldn't even hesitate to flip their artists off in an overnight if they weren't satisfied with their opening week sales.

PricelessHo said:

I'm just thinking out loud too. They would have to try it out on a big artist, because it is risky isn't it?




We mightas well discuss this since there ARE industry rats lurking on the board.
[Edited 2/15/07 14:09pm]

CinisterCee said:

Exactly. Especially, that currently you've got a number of artists that are selling albums like hot cakes:

Idol Compilations/Winners, Mariah, 50 Cent, etc.






i yearn to see some 90's figures

PricelessHo said:

What are you talking about? Of course you can use iTunes songs without an iPod. You can listen to them in your car as well.

AlexdeParis said:

i didn't know about that.

Though there is still the issue of songs getting deleted of the library, which'll require to purchase the tracks again which could be spared by getting the physical CD and get it over with.

PricelessHo said:

...Just like you the original CD could be lost or stolen and you'd have to buy it again. That's why people should make backups. (In iTunes, they remind you to do so after every purchase and it's an easier process.)

It cannot be that 11 million fans who bought one album no longer exist.

But maybe not everyone has a computer.

Maybe there is a problem with less channels (Stores closing).

Maybe the way people are getting music simply isn't tracked (cellphones? not ringtones).

Maybe sales have increased in ma and pa stores who cater to the independent market?