Username: Password: lost p/w?
home | help | subscribe | search | register
Music Downloads-Pirates-or Customers?
Posted by FolkTom Barger in on June 22, 2004 at 1:14 PM



http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item.jhtml?id=4206&t=leadership
Music Downloads: Pirates—or Customers?
June 21, 2004

by Sean Silverthorne, Editor, Harvard Business School Working Knowledge

Internet music piracy not only doesn't hurt legitimate CD sales, it may even boost sales of some types of music.

Those were the counterintuitive findings released in March by Harvard Business School professor Felix Oberholzer-Gee and his co-author Koleman Strumpf, of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Their paper, "The Effect of File Sharing on Record Sales," caused a ruckus in the music industry not seen since the British invasion of the Beatles.

Many recording executives were not singing "Yeah, yeah, yeah," however. Convinced that illegal downloading and file sharing has robbed them of billions of dollars after four consecutive years of falling music sales, they criticized the team's methodology, which consisted of monitoring 1.75 million downloads over 17 weeks in 2002, scouring through server logs from OpenNap (an open source Napster server), and comparing the sales of almost 700 albums as reported by Nielsen SoundScan. Oberholzer and Strumpf concluded that there was almost no relationship between the two.

How could this be? The researchers believe that most downloading is done over peer-to-peer networks by teens and college kids, groups that are "money-poor but time-rich," meaning they wouldn't have bought the songs they downloaded. In that sense, the music industry can't claim those downloads as lost record sales. In fact, illegal downloading may help the industry slightly with another major segment, which Oberholzer and Strumpf call "samplers"—an older crowd who downloads a song or two and then, if they like what they hear, go out and buy the music.

Interestingly, the first half of this year saw the release of numbers seemingly supporting this theory: The number of illegal music downloads continued to increase—but so did music sales.

If in fact the research is correct, the strategic implications for the music industry are profound. Instead of conducting a high-profile campaign against pirates, should the industry instead target "samplers" to encourage them to buy more music? Should the industry consider peer-to-peer services as marketing tools rather than the enemy? Should online pricing be different from in-store pricing? What happens when broadband makes it as easy to illegally download an entire CD as an individual track or two? HBS professor Feliz Oberholzer-Gee recently spoke to Working Knowledge about these issues.

Sean Silverthorne: The draft of your paper with Koleman Strumpf came out almost three months ago, and caused quite a stir both inside the entertainment industry and out. What are your impressions of the reactions so far?


Felix Oberholzer-Gee: Two recent developments are important. Our study provides the first serious evidence that file sharing cannot explain the decline in music sales in the last couple of years. In addition, in the last two quarters, music sales increased while file sharing has become even more popular. BigChampagne.com, an Internet monitoring firm, estimates that there are now up to 9 million simultaneous file sharers, up from about 4 million in early 2003.

In view of our evidence and these new trends, even the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) now states that file sharing is only "one factor, along with economic conditions and competing forms of entertainment that is displacing legitimate sales." The industry is rethinking its position, although change occurs slowly.

Q: Let's talk strategy. What have been the recording companies' strategies to date for combating their loss of property rights via illegal downloading? And how effective has that strategy been? For example, is it a good thing to sue potential customers?

A: Suing potential customers is not exactly a standard entry in the book of good CRM. More importantly, the RIAA's legal strategy is hopeless and smacks of short-sighted panic.

Our research shows that only 45 percent of music files downloaded in the United States come from computers in the U.S. More than 100 countries supply files to the U.S. file-sharing community, and many of these countries do not have strong records of protecting copyrighted materials. The RIAA does not stand a chance to implement an effective legal strategy in all these countries.
The RIAA's legal strategy is hopeless and smacks of short-sighted panic.

Those who dream of legal solutions do not recognize the truly global nature of the peer-to-peer (P2P) phenomenon. Even worse, the RIAA's legal strategy does not even seem to work here in the United States. Despite the lawsuits—the RIAA has sued about 2,000 individuals to date—file sharing is more popular than ever.

Q: Assuming your conclusion is right—that there is no evidence that illegal music downloads erode CD sales—and in fact might help top-selling record sales—what are the implications for the recording industry in terms of strategy?

A: Our research shows that people do not download entire CDs. They download a few songs, typically the hits that one would also hear on a Top 40 station. This suggests that P2P is much like the radio, a great tool to promote new music. The music industry has of course long recognized that giving away samples of music for free over the airwaves can stimulate sales. The same seems to hold for P2P.

The problem with radio as a promotional tool is that it can be quite expensive for labels to get radio stations to play their music. P2P networks are promising because they make the market for music promotion more competitive. From the perspective of the music industry, the more competition among P2P services, the less costly it will be to promote music.

Q: Apple's iTunes has seemingly validated the concept that people will purchase music online. But it seems the recording companies themselves have done little on their own to experiment with models here, such as tiered pricing (hits cost more) and bundling.

A: The classic business model was a teaser model: The music labels provided one or two hit songs for free by promoting them on the radio and on MTV. If consumers liked the samples, they purchased a dozen songs at a price of $15. We now have gone from one extreme to the other. While inflexible bundling was the rule, services such as iTunes now completely unbundle CDs and offer all music by the song. The difficulty with this approach is that the economics of producing music are characterized by significant fixed costs. It is not much more expensive to promote an entire album than to promote an individual song. With complete unbundling, the revenue streams generated by a new album are likely to be much lower. How many consumers will pay a dollar for song number thirteen?

Clearly, there is a profit-enhancing role for some type of bundling even with digital distribution. For example, consumers might be willing to pay full price for the core songs on an album if they get the rest at a discount. We need systematic experiments to find out which types of bundling are economically most attractive.

Q: What's the current state of your research? Where does it go from here?

A: A key uncertainty relates to our finding that file sharers do not download entire CDs. We do not know why they sample only a few songs. One possibility is that the current patterns of file sharing reflect consumer preferences. Consumers do not know the quality of new music and sampling one or two songs is good enough to assess quality and make a purchasing decision. If this view is correct, the radio model is well and alive, and P2P offers great opportunities to promote new content.
Clearly, there is a profit-enhancing role for some type of bundling even with digital distribution.

However, it is also possible that the observed behavior is due to technical difficulties. In our data, only one out of three downloads is completed successfully. File sharing is fairly cumbersome for many consumers with poor Internet connections. If this is the reason for highly selective sampling, we can expect consumers to download entire CDs when broadband connections become more common. This is a less rosy scenario for the music industry because downloads of CDs are likely to be closer substitutes for CD purchases.

If poor Internet connections explain file-sharing patterns, general access to broadband would have profound strategic implications, suggesting that music companies ought to pursue a strategy of selling complements to recorded music. We see some examples for this strategy even today: Apple sells songs to promote its iPods. Prince gives away his most recent release to promote his concerts. We need careful continuous monitoring of the effects of P2P to know which strategies are most appropriate in the digital age.



User Comments

DMembereaglesniper
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 1:34 PM
"The industry is rethinking its position, although change occurs slowly."

Sure it is. And change does come slowly, like at a drunken snail's pace.
Advancedcarla60626
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 1:45 PM
I am sick to death of Sherman and Valenti talking about lost revenue. I wasn't going to buy it anyway, Cary Sue and Count Jackula!
Intermediateboggieman
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 1:53 PM
The music and movie industries are barking up the wrong trees! Stupid dogs!
DMemberlimefan913
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 2:16 PM
lol. wow we have some comments that i cant top. but its not a drunken snail. its a snail high on pot. or maybe the speed you can teach my grandfather how to use windows (eg. 7yrs and counting). something like that.
DMemberExhumator
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 2:24 PM
Looks like BS to me. I usually download whole albums, zipped or rared.
DMemberSkippyQSB
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 2:41 PM
"Internet music piracy not only doesn't hurt legitimate CD sales, it may even boost sales of some types of music."
How much you wanna bet that the RIAA is going to sue him for this research. It probably violated their copyright to say the word music.


"The RIAA's legal strategy is hopeless and smacks of short-sighted panic."
And Ghestapo tactics.


"How many consumers will pay a dollar for song number thirteen?"
It's not just that, ya dork. I'd pay a dollar for track thirteen, but the RIAA is wanting us to pay over $20, when all we want is track thirteen.


"We do not know why they sample only a few songs"
Could it be that the other 12 tracks are CRAP?!?!


"Prince gives away his most recent release to promote his concerts"
I always thought he had class, now there's more reason to think so.
This is like the Greatful Dead. They didn't care if you recorded and SOLD the recording of their concerts. They even set up special areas, at all their concerts, for people to bring gear in to do so. Even with the legal bootleg of their albums and concerts, they still made millions and lasted for years.

Get a hint, RIAA and all it's a**hole members...R-E-S-P-E-C-T. That's makes money faster than anything else.
Advancedmroop
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 3:24 PM
If you sold Grateful Dead recordings and they found out they would bust your ass and quick. They also regularly seized the merchandise of people selling t-shirts and bumperstickers and that kind of stuff that utilized their copyrighted images. I was there and I saw it happen.
Advancedmroop
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 3:30 PM
Judge Allows Grateful Dead to Seize Bootleg Merchandise: A federal judge in Denver granted the Grateful Dead authority to seize counterfeit items bearing the band's name or its members' likenesses. "In view of the importance of trademark law in this country, the plaintiffs would suffer irreparable injury if this order were not granted," said Judge Zita Weinshienk in her November, 1994 decision.

http://www.relix.com/archive/22-2-Fragments.phtml
Intermediateautodidact
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 3:49 PM
mroop, you're a Deadhead? :-) (Smile)

Personally I can't see the appeal, but I do like their song Box of Rain, as long as it isn't The Dead singing it. Still, they did have a great relationship with their fans. Obviously someone trying to sell unauthorized recordings or T-shirts would not be a fan.
Advancedmroop
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 4:04 PM
"mroop, you're a Deadhead? :-) (Smile)"

I wouldn't go that far. : ) Even if you don't like the Dead you should still check out their albums "American Beauty" and "Workingman's Dead" which were the high points of their recording career. But the people selling the counterfeit goods were fans, I guess they figured it was an easy way to make some bucks to pay for gas and repairs on the VW bus and tofu sandwiches and patchouli oil in lieu of showers.
Advancedpepe512000
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 4:08 PM
"Workingman's Dead" great stuff!
Advancedmroop
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 4:15 PM
Btw, a Deadhead friend of mine came up with a great idea at Dead concerts in the 80's. Everybody was selling domestic beers in the parking lot for a buck or two. He decided to sell Heinekens and Becks and high quality imported beer for 3 bucks. He made enough money to go across the country for free and make a profit. I helped sell beers in the parking lot in Philly. It was a lot fun. We were selling tons of beers!
Advancedcaptdunsel
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 4:35 PM
bullshit. everybody knows that suing 12 year olds is more profitable. :) (Smile)

Advancedcarla60626
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 4:50 PM
and speaking of dead, they killed that south korean. so depressing. damn george bush and his pandora's box of evil.
DMembertds67
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 4:56 PM
The RIAA is suing again.
Advancedcarla60626
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 5:01 PM
damn them too, same thing, terrorist activities. they won't win in the end. they just cause suffering. miserable bastards.
Advancedpepe512000
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 5:04 PM
mroop

Interesting, selling beer in the parking lot, but highly illegal in Canada, at least my part of Canada-you would have been arrested on the spot!
AdvancedTheSherminator
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 5:49 PM
"We do not know why they sample only a few songs"

Because you sell albums with one good song on them.

"and speaking of dead, they killed that south korean. so depressing. damn george bush and his pandora's box of evil."

Talk about displacing blame.

"...a statement confirming that businessman Kim Sun-il (search) had been killed by his Al Qaeda-linked kidnappers"

I love how a South Korean hostage being killed by thugs associated with Al-Qaeda is somehow Bush's fault. If you want to talk about pandora's box, then talk about al-qaeda (or did you already forget 10/13.. 8/3.. damn what day was it again?), since they're the ones who opened it.
Advancedgoldenpi
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 5:51 PM
As Ive stated before, p2p may or may not be partially responsible for the current drop in sales. But it will definately be responsible in future.
Intermediatesurfside6
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 6:01 PM
Wow, the riaa sues 482 people and doesen't even get a news item on this website. The first time they sued we got over 100 comments. Now it doesen't even get a comment. See:http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=domesticNews&storyID=5484693

Boy things have really gone downhill.
Advancedpepe512000
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 6:22 PM
surfside6

Actually, I sent in the news story 18 minutes after it was posted on netscape..but it's still sitting in limbo here.... :) (Smile) guess I should have posted BREAKING NEWS at the top of the item...
AdvancedTheSherminator
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 6:31 PM
"Boy things have really gone downhill." - Yup.
AdminCodeWarrior
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 6:51 PM
"LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A U.S. music industry trade group on Tuesday said it has sued 482 more people for copyright infringement in a continuation of its anti-piracy campaign."

Hey, finally they quit suing them for "piracy", now they are suing them for what they are alleging...copyight infringement...
AdminCodeWarrior
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 6:55 PM
AdvancedTheSherminator
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 8:03 PM
Not only did they not say piracy, but a local news story actually mentioned that:

"While some surveys have shown the number of people engaging in file-sharing has declined since the RIAA began its legal assault, other data shows millions continue to share music, movies and software online." - www.ksdk.com

the only statistics on the face of the earth aren't those spewed forth by the RIAA. Yes, that's right folks, other data is contrary to what the RIAA says.
AdvancedTheSherminator
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 8:07 PM
I may as well mention the full address of the article: http://www.ksdk.com/news/business_article.aspx?storyid=62560

by the AP. I am sure it's nothing too different than anything else.

Advancedpepe512000
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 8:08 PM
CodeWarrior

See, told ya you'd be missed :) (Smile)
AdvancedTheSherminator
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 8:17 PM
and my earlier quote was courtesy of foxnews.com . Don't sue me.
AdvancedSfolivier
Date: June 22, 2004 @ 8:34 PM
"Wow, the riaa sues 482 people and doesen't even get a news item on this website."

Surfiside, I'm sure the news got submitted many times, it's difficult to miss. Just give some time to the "moderators" to go through.
Chief Op OfficerShadowMom
Date: June 23, 2004 @ 12:21 AM
Still waiting........
Alternativeronnie71
Date: June 23, 2004 @ 2:31 AM
on the yahoo news.. wahts really cool to my left will be related links onne is for the RIAA site and one for the boycott site... yes and at the bottom is the RIAA and our rolling stone will soon be coming down so fast the hill they will not be able to stop us!!!
DMembermooiamacow
Date: June 23, 2004 @ 3:07 AM
i buy all the cd's i like, ALL the cd's >_
Intermediatesurfside6
Date: June 23, 2004 @ 6:03 AM
Pretty good discussion on the latest round of suing at:http://p2pnet.net/story/1737

Question for Schmoo, who copyrights your music, you or the label?
IntermediateBufo
Date: June 23, 2004 @ 10:27 AM

Excellent article! Very insightful.

There is one more point which might have been made: it is very likely that the RIAA lawsuits have had much more of a deterring effect on 'samplers' than on those poor starving students with little money but more time (heck, many high schoolers could care less about lawsuits). In addition, lawsuits encourage more P2P users to share independent music (not a bad thing at all) If these two postulates are true, then the lawsuits may in fact be doing the RIAA more harm than good.
AdminCodeWarrior
Date: June 23, 2004 @ 10:31 AM
lol...Pepe...at least they can't say it's my fault for "liberalizing" the board anymore :) (Smile)
Advancedpepe512000
Date: June 23, 2004 @ 1:36 PM
CodeWarrior

Can't say it was boring around here with your "rants and raves" either... it (is) was always interesting. Knowing how busy you are at present, glad to see you still come around when you find some time.
AdminCodeWarrior
Date: June 23, 2004 @ 3:50 PM
:) (Smile)...thanks Pepe...you're the best...the site can survive me leaving...but if you ever left...that WOULD be a blow...in all seriousness!
~Code
IntermediateBufo
Date: June 23, 2004 @ 4:01 PM

leaving?
Advancedpepe512000
Date: June 23, 2004 @ 4:19 PM
Bufo

More like changing... (if that pesky little br shows up, just type the address in)

http://codewarrior.mvhosted.com/

Code Somehow I really doubt that, but thank you anyway...You are such an old softie!!! :) (Smile)
You must be logged in to post replies to news articles.
Log in or register with the form at the top of the page.

 

 

 

search

news tree


advertising



 

 
© DMusic LLC - Advertising | Employment | TOS | Subscribe