Myspace to sell music online using paypal

D84

Well-known member
It looks to me that this is something they're going to tack onto the site.

Are they really stumped for ways to make money off myspace? Not that I want to give News Corp any good ideas...
 
Last edited:

blunt

shot by both sides
When the online store opens this fall, it will allow bands and labels of any size to sell songs online for whatever price they want.

For the independent-label bands and unsigned artists who have found MySpace to be an effective and inexpensive way to spread the word about their recordings and concerts, a store on the site will be an important outlet.

Surely this is a good thing, people? Surely this is just the thing that we've all been waiting for? The fact that News Corp will take their cut has got to be the least interesting thing about this development - this is a direct revenue stream into the pockets of the people what made the music.
 

Gabba Flamenco Crossover

High Sierra Skullfuck
Surely this is a good thing, people? Surely this is just the thing that we've all been waiting for? The fact that News Corp will take their cut has got to be the least interesting thing about this development - this is a direct revenue stream into the pockets of the people what made the music.

I agree 100%, well said.

It'll be interesting to see how successful it is. A major label bod was quoted in the guardian today saying that today's kids just don't like paying for music - but they might have less of a problem if they knew the majority of it was going to the artist. We'll see.

Anyway, if the majors are sending people out to talk it down in the press they must be worried, which points to it being a big deal.
 
I think the problem is that kids are broke and don't have the money to spend. Most would rip the streaming audio straight off myspace or if it's released go to any mp3 site and download it for free. I think it's the oldies that will appreciate buying obscure tunes off myspace and giving the groupie love while they're at it.
 

blunt

shot by both sides
I think the problem is that kids are broke and don't have the money to spend. [...]

Yeah, that's right: Western youth is living in penury. Every time I see them in their indentically distressed jeans, with nothing but a DVD-MP3-rumblepack-guitar to their name, the tears just start streaming down my face...
 

Rambler

Awanturnik
If the price is right (ie, reflects the fact there's no recording company/distribution/marketing/sales overheads involved) then this sounds like a wicked idea.

And of course, NO DRM...
 

Freakaholic

not just an addiction
How will they stop people from creating a site for a band they like, uploading some songs they have, and then selling them?

I couldnt read the articlle, unfotrunately, in case thats in there. I also dont have a Myspace music page.
 
Yeah, that's right: Western youth is living in penury. Every time I see them in their indentically distressed jeans, with nothing but a DVD-MP3-rumblepack-guitar to their name, the tears just start streaming down my face...

you too ? you think maybe they stole them jeans and beat up some other kid for that mp3 player too or am i just stereotyping ? so do you also think kids are stupid enough to pay for something they can get for free ?
 
^I can see that, so let me break it down for you. Most of them don't give 2 shits about time or trouble or paying for something. If they can get it for nothing they will.
 

blunt

shot by both sides
^I can see that, so let me break it down for you. Most of them don't give 2 shits about time or trouble or paying for something. If they can get it for nothing they will.

Handbag ;)

I'm not naive; I know there are certainly lots of people out there that fit the above description. And it sounds like you might be one of them. You're the one, after all, that described the process of paying for music as "stupid".

But I suspect that was just a slip of the keyboard (at least, I hope so). I think we're coming from pretty much the same place.

The facts speak for themselves - iTunes (European) music store sold close to a million tracks in its first week of business alone, and announced only last month that it's gone on to sell over 200 million tracks since then. All this in spite of its various shortcomings as a service.

Meanwhile, the last financial quarter saw Napster make $28.1 million dollars out of a fairly paltry 512,000 subscriber-base.

Significantly, all these figures show a massive year-on-year increase. So there are lots of people who are prepared to engage in an old fashioned quid pro quo relationship with musicians (and, indeed, other artists).

In the case of both iTunes & Napster, I think there is still a degree to which the artist is getting shafted by The Man. If, in the case of MySpace, the artist really does get to set their own pricing structure etc, then it really would be the motherlode. At least artists would be in an entirely consensual relationship with Murdoch.

It kind of sounds to good to be true, doesn't it? But let's not forget that he had a bust of Lenin in his student dorm :)
 
I'm not saying it's stupid to pay for music, but that kids who have no respect for time, effort or property with regards to artists producing music would think it stupid to pay for it, if they can get it for free.

I wonder what the largest demographic of music buyers is on i-tunes and would honestly be surprised if they were kids. Do you know if they have a tracking system available to the public to see who bought what, where and what their biggest sellers were?

I do think selling tunes of myspace was inevitable and a good thing but I just cant shake the feeling that we're being setup like a proverbial fly in the web. Maybe it's just my deep mistrust of Murdoch but something just doesn't feel right. Like you I feel that it seems too good to be true.
 

Gabba Flamenco Crossover

High Sierra Skullfuck
Truth, that line is too cynical. I dont think most people have an objection to paying for music so long as it's realistically priced & there's a visable pathway for the money to get back to the artist. If you want evidence, look at gig attendence which has risen dramatically over the last few years.

Myspace has emerged as a really good way for unsigned artists to develop a close, real-time relationship with thier fans - lots of artists I know use it for publicising gigs, and say it is a godsend for taking the guesswork out of booking venues, promotion etc. I think that maybe there's a tendency for electronic musicians to underappreciate myspace, because gigging isnt as central to what they do as it is in acoustic music. But if myspace add the ability to sell music onto the package and they can make it work, I think we might suddenly see a lightbulb going on above the heads of a lot of electronic musicians.

Re murdoch owning it - I'm not crazy about it either but I think it's the least worst option. I would love to have an international, cross-genre, not-for-profit collective of indie labels big enough to exploit the power of the net for the benefit of small artists on a scale comparable to myspace - like an early-years Rough Trade gone global. But we've had the net for a decade now, and nothing like that has happened. For whatever reasons, Myspace has emerged as the killer application and someone needed to come up with the funding to take it to the next level - if that's murdoch so be it. I dont think he's any worse than other media/technology conglomerate chiefs: i dont like his political meddling, but I think he's sincere in his vision for the future of media and I think he's bought myspace as a central part of that, not just as a cash cow. Maybe that's naive but we'll see.

These's loads of electronic musicians selling thier stuff on the web, but they're all doing it in isolation because there's no overall structure - Warpmart is the closest thing, but that's the tiniest of minnows compared to myspace. If this works it'll will be a massive shot in the arm for electronic music.
 

bassnation

the abyss
According to Hypebot DRM is a possibility, and artists may be stung by a 45 cents per transaction handling fee. :(

quelle suprise!

i find it ironic and amusing that people seem to regard murdoch as the great new hope for music. least bad option? what the hell are the others like?

a burgeoning network of DIY music, and the next minute its been commoditised with both artists and consumers getting ripped off. a big step forward, i think everyone can agree.
 

matt b

Indexing all opinion
yeah, murdoch's the worse worse option surely?

i read myspace will take 45% of takings, which is better than (major) record companies, but they have far higher costs e.g. manufacturing, marketing etc.

to say that "he's sincere in his vision for the future of media and I think he's bought myspace as a central part of that, not just as a cash cow" goes against his whole history in business too.
 

blunt

shot by both sides
a burgeoning network of DIY music, and the next minute its been commoditised with both artists and consumers getting ripped off.

2 questions from me: Why shouldn't a DIY scene benefit from commoditisation? And how is the artist being ripped off?
 

Rambler

Awanturnik
Well, 45 cents/45 % (whatever the truth is) is a fat cut for the middle men, and totally disproportionate considering it'll all be automated. I'd have thought that a more attractive model for unsigned artists would be something along the lines of 50 cents/download, with about 5 cents of that going to MySpace/SnoCap (the software people who will be handling all this), rather than vice-versa.
 

blunt

shot by both sides
Well, 45 cents/45 % (whatever the truth is) is a fat cut for the middle men, and totally disproportionate considering it'll all be automated. I'd have thought that a more attractive model for unsigned artists would be something along the lines of 50 cents/download, with about 5 cents of that going to MySpace/SnoCap (the software people who will be handling all this), rather than vice-versa.

If you consider that iTunes (in North America, seeing as we're talking in terms of US$) charges 99 cents per tune, should the artist in question choose to sell their tracks out at a comparable rate, that would mean they'd be making a darn sight more than they've made in the past.

And as for it being fully automated - unlikely. Most of Google's services are 'automated', as is eBay, but they still employ thousands of people, without whom the 'automated' side of their business would be useless. There'll still be A&R functions to fulfill, artists to promote; those aspects of the music business are unlikely to disappear.

And even if they did, should not the people that wrote the software that supports the transactional process be rewarded for their efforts?
 
Top