http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,2114557,00.html

Katie Allen, media business correspondent
Friday June 29, 2007
The Guardian


The eagerly awaited new album by Prince is being launched as a free CD with a national Sunday newspaper in a move that has drawn widespread criticism from music retailers.
The Mail on Sunday revealed yesterday that the 10-track Planet Earth CD will be available with an "imminent" edition, making it the first place in the world to get the album. Planet Earth will go on sale on July 24.

"It's all about giving music for the masses and he believes in spreading the music he produces to as many people as possible," said Mail on Sunday managing director Stephen Miron. "This is the biggest innovation in newspaper promotions in recent times."

The paper, which sells more than 2m copies a week, will be ramping up its print run in anticipation of a huge spike in circulation but would not reveal how much the deal with Prince would cost.
One music store executive described the plan as "madness" while others said it was a huge insult to an industry battling fierce competition from supermarkets and online stores. Prince's label has cut its ties with the album in the UK to try to appease music stores.

The Entertainment Retailers Association said the giveaway "beggars belief". "It would be an insult to all those record stores who have supported Prince throughout his career," ERA co-chairman Paul Quirk told a music conference. "It would be yet another example of the damaging covermount culture which is destroying any perception of value around recorded music.

"The Artist Formerly Known as Prince should know that with behaviour like this he will soon be the Artist Formerly Available in Record Stores. And I say that to all the other artists who may be tempted to dally with the Mail on Sunday."

High street music giant HMV was similarly scathing about the plans. Speaking before rumours of a giveaway were confirmed, HMV chief executive Simon Fox said: "I think it would be absolutely nuts. I can't believe the music industry would do it to itself. I simply can't believe it would happen; it would be absolute madness."

Prince, whose Purple Rain sold more than 11m copies, also plans to give away a free copy of his latest album with tickets for his forthcoming concerts in London. The singer had signed a global deal for the promotion and distribution of Planet Earth in partnership with Columbia Records, a division of music company Sony BMG. A spokesman for the group said last night that the UK arm of Sony BMG had withdrawn from Prince's global deal and would not distribute the album to UK stores.

Oh my... what next? An artist who chooses what to do with his own work? This is absolutely absurd. Boycott the stores who are kicking up a fuss. They should have seen this coming years ago. And while I'm not a huge fan of Prince-- more power to him. His work, his money on the line. Since when do they have a right to tell him what to do with his own work? GO PRINCE GO!!!

One would think prince was an artist big enough to manage to get away with these things, guess not.
Well since im all into this whole freedom shizzle ive heard so much about i have to quote Shadowmom "GO PRINCE GO!!!"

In the public eye, this is a plus for Prince and a minus for the music industry. The record stores are sounding churlish and whiny. First the major record companies shoot themselves in both feet. Now the music retailers are following suit.

Music fans, however, will have an ear to ear smile. BTW, I give Prince credit. He is an awesome performer. I even liked one of the songs from his last record.

"Boycott the stores who are kicking up a fuss."

Not necessary. Read the last sentence. They won't be getting any copies to sell.

True, George! I meant boycott them for everything. It's time they catch up... the internet will close them down if they don't. When did it become good business to tell the customer what they want and how they want it? I always assumed it was better to deliver what they wanted in the manner in which they wanted it. Trying to force people to patronize a business just makes so little sense.

And I hope this is the first in a long string of artists to realize-- they don't need the labels as much as the labels need them. Power to the music, not the industry.

"Shouldn't an artist be able to give away his own music if he wants to without fear of industry retaliation?"

Of course, if the artist is an indie.
Otherwise (if he's an indentured servant of a big label): A direct response to this question might be to consider what issue in his contract might be impacted by giving away his music -- assuming he's not doling out copies he had purchased himself.

wow.... suddenly I Like Prince

"Trying to force people to patronize a business just makes so little sense.
"

Uh, that has been the Industry's business model for over 100 years.

(And I am not exagerating one bit!)

I love it. Sweet. Go Prince!

Prince works for Columbia, which is part of Sony/BMG. Unless they are just handling distribution, in which case they work for him.

The newspaper is paying for the CDs.

Bob Lefsetz says:

This is HYSTERICAL! Is the pint-sized rocker truly going to get the
last laugh?

Oh, you remember, when he changed his name, and painted "Slave" on his
cheek. The big bad record company wasn't allowing him to do what he
wanted, which was to release more MUSIC!

For those who've forgotten, that was Warner Brothers, run by Mo Ostin
and Lenny Waronker, the most respected, the most credible label in the
business.

But Mo was an accountant. This didn't make BUSINESS sense! Releases
had to be staggered, marketed and promoted, the public just couldn't
devour that much music.

But what about artistry, what about FANS!

So, Prince ultimately got his freedom and went on his own personal
hejira. A walkabout. A journey in the desert.

He used the newfangled Internet to form a club.

Well, that didn't work.

Prince was a joke, a has-been. Someone off the grid, that you no
longer paid much attention to.

And then Prince executed a masterstroke. He decided to display his
still prodigious skills on national TV, and then go on tour and GIVE his
new album away!

Hell, the concert tickets were so expensive anyway (albeit cheaper than
those of most long in the tooth rockers), what difference did it make
if he threw a few pennies away if it got his new music in the HANDS OF
THE FANS!

Yes, just a few pennies. Hell, the value of a plastic disc declined to
almost zero, just like its cost, when AOL flooded the market with
them.

Getting the music in the hands of fans. That's what technology allows,
cheaply. This is what has been driving the record labels INSANE!
They've got a model. Not any different from the one Mo employed back at
Warner Brothers in the nineties. You craft an album, run up the
publicity and sell it for in excess of fifteen bucks. But is this serving the
ARTIST, never mind the FAN!

A true artist desires one thing more than any other. To get his music
EXPOSED!

Oh, the labels will say it's all about the money. Well, maybe it is to
the execs, who are sans talent and sans mission, that's probably why
they said that Napster would kill music. Maybe their PROFITS were
threatened, but music would live on just fine. Because the people who make
it, THEY'VE GOT TO MAKE IT!

Lindsay Lohan, Hilary Duff and Paris Hilton wouldn't make music if it
were free, but Radiohead would, and so would Coldplay.

So, if you're a heritage act, and radio will have nothing to do with
you, how do you get your message out there, how do you get people to hear
your new music?

In one fell swoop, Prince has trumped McCartney. The "Daily Mail" is
going to deposit TWO MILLION CDS in the hands of old fans and potential
new ones, AS A PREMIUM, essentially COMPLETELY FREE TO THE CONSUMER,
the disc comes with the newspaper. What's even BETTER, Prince is getting
PAID FOR THEM, by the "Mail"!

Win-win, wouldn't you say?

Not if you're a music retailer. Or a record label.

The retailers, they're dropping like flies. The Fopp chain suddenly
bit the dust in the U.K., and you've heard of Tower Records, haven't you?

Think about this. Prince is going to reach MORE people, and ultimately
make MORE MONEY, leaving traditional CD retailers OUT OF THE LOOP!

And what does he need the label for? He's rich enough to record the
music on his own, and who needs all the services they charge for, getting
discs in the store, paying the retailers to stock them, trying to get
tracks on the radio unsuccessfully, when he can accomplish ALL THIS BY
HIS LONESOME AND KEEP ALL THE MONEY!

It took more than ten years, but the game finally caught up with
Prince. He's suddenly at the FOREFRONT!

Wal-Mart? The Eagles should have made a deal with a media company TO
GIVE THE ALBUM AWAY! A fucking bidding war, what's a new Eagles disc
worth as a promotional tool?

And suddenly, everybody's got your music and you've gotten paid.

Radio didn't play "Hole In The World" that much, it's not like you can
count on radio this time around, but maybe all the hoopla of giving the
album away will CAUSE radio and TV to embrace new Eagles tracks.

I don't want to beat Irving and his band up too badly. They were at
the forefront LAST YEAR, when this deal was MADE! If Henley wasn't such
a perfectionist, the album would have been on sale MONTHS ago and they
all would have looked like geniuses.

But who's gonna be the first classic act that's gonna give away their
record in the U.S?

A new Police record?

The Stones would have been better off giving their album away, shit
they barely sold any copies of "A Bigger Bang" and the band's records
never sold that well anyway!

Now if you want to get on the radio, if you want to build an act, this
paradigm doesn't look too good. You need the traditional label, with
its infrastructure and ties to radio and other media outlets.

But do you really need THEM? Or, in the future, will you be able to
OUTSOURCE these functions?

Better yet, let's say you don't make music that CAN GET ON THE RADIO!
Which is seemingly everybody but rappers or pop airheads these days.
Where does this LEAVE YOU?

Well, music shouldn't be free, people should pay for it. But until the
labels wake up and authorize new modes of acquisition, allowing more
people to own more music at a cheaper price, should free be a part of
YOUR STRATEGY?

It already is. Even at the most basic level, the ability for the
audience to hear four tracks on MySpace.

Every band has a MySpace site. You have to. The public EXPECTS IT!
They just put your name and "MySpace" into the Google field and presume
you'll come up. You're THRILLED IF PEOPLE WANT TO LISTEN! That's the
HARDEST PART, getting people to LISTEN! That's what the labels have
fucked up, the ability for people to HEAR the music. The old bait and
switch, one good track that has to be purchased as part of an album of
dreck, that paradigm is history, that's done, the Net killed that.

And now the Net seems to have killed record stores.

And despite the long arm of the government, trying to kill small Web
stations, the Internet is killing terrestrial radio.

And that free music, traded P2P and hard-drive swapped, it ends up on
iPods, many people never even TOUCH the radio dial.

Right now, at the halfway mark in 2007, the revolution has finally
begun.

EMI making a deal with SnoCap? Selling by track is economic death,
never mind at $1.30. But notice they're unprotected MP3s, UNTHINKABLE AS
RECENTLY AS 2006! You see, EMI is DESPERATE!

Retail is fucked.

Are the labels fucked too?

It seems so. Their cash cows are going to do it themselves, like
Prince and the Eagles, or extract heinous terms. And, if you've got no
guaranteed sellers, HOW DO YOU MAKE YOUR NUMBERS?

By not even being in the new music game, by ceding that business to
newcomers, functioning at a much lower economic level, and by selling the
assets you already POSSESS!

Yup, trying to sell EVERY LAST ZEPPELIN track to people. Lower the
price, and give people more.

Otherwise, the way we're going, people are going to EXPECT, like with
Prince, that the music be FREE!

Time to monetize P2P. Time to throw the long ball. Because the acts,
and labels are always dependent on the acts, are getting RESTLESS!

In other words, the lunatics are taking over the asylum.

WHAT A GREAT FUCKING MOVIE!

"The Stones' records never sold that well anyway!"

Huh? Where were you during the sixties?

Sometimes Lefsetz has too much flair for the dramatic.

""It would be an insult to all those record stores who have supported Prince throughout his career," ERA co-chairman Paul Quirk told a music conference. "It would be yet another example of the damaging covermount culture which is destroying any perception of value around recorded music."

Really? More insulting than OVERCHARGING for a CD in the first place, making sure royalties for these overpriced CD's never reach the artists hands, and putting small CD shops out of business by getting into bed with stores like Best Buy and Circuit CD to sell your music? And you wonder why Prince wants to give his music away??? It's his music now anyways.... get over it. Morons....

"Well, music shouldn't be free, people should pay for it."

Really?...I disagree. Get a job and do music as a side project..and if you don't want to do that then starve.

"Well, music shouldn't be free, people should pay for it."

People are willing to pay for high quality music on CD, for example. They aren't willing to pay for a whole CD for one song. Since the industry killed the single, what other choices did people have?

Music shared at 128kps on P2P networks should only be valued at 1/10th the CD cost, since you are only getting 1/10th the product. Let's see, a 10 song CD on an overpriced $15 CD at 1/10 of 1/10 equals about $0.15 a song. You didn't want to accept that, did you RIAA?

It's amazing to consider how much money the labels could have garnered from file sharing networks if they had licensed their vaults for only a few cents per download.