News Free Radiohead album distributed by pirates

Greetings!

The question is how much less money they did over going with a record label.

Castle offered an educated guess about what the British band was earning at the label. He figures that in every year a Radiohead album was released, it was EMI's top-selling record. The band likely negotiated a larger royalty rate than most performers earn.
He guessed that when royalties were combined with money earned from publishing, Radiohead saw between $3 and $5 for every album sale.

And, for the $2.26, they still have to pay the costs.

Radiohead made the best marketing esqueme of the year, by far. They still need a label to produce/distribute the coming hard copy of the album, yet they caught everybodys attention being the "man against the machine".

 

Ah, but isn't $2.26 misleading? How many of the 62% who didn't pay for the album would actually have bought the physical CD? Also, I have downloaded the album (paid) at home, and (free) at work. If that counts as two separate copies, then it is misleading, because I obviously wasn't going to buy two copies of the CD. I'm sure many others have done the same.

The marginal costs of this exercise are negligible - 100MB of bandwidth per download is pretty cheap these days, and they also build a valuable list of e-mail addresses of those who downloaded this album for use when their next album/tour needs to be marketed.

 

Greetings!

Isnt this all experience misleading?

Radiohead only got so much publicity because they are a known band (via label marketing department), a new band starting with this distribution model has no chance. This album got P2Ped as much as the others have, maybe more since it was more known.
They still need a label to produce/distribute the coming hard copy of the album.

Its marketing, original and successful marketing.

PS:
And check the hard copy details:
http://www.overclockers.com/tips01225/