Seth Godin: Another View Of Free
We've looked at free music on Hypebot from almost every angle in recent weeks, but leave it to uber-marketer Seth Godin to find a new one: too much. In this post "Too Much Free", which first appeared on his if-you-care-about-marketing-then-you-have-to-read blog, Godin cautions against too much free.
While Godin was not specifically writing about music, he certainly could
have been. Giving away a free track or even an album is no longer a
"breakthrough" idea. Givng music away is "sample-this" free, but with so much free (legal and otherwise) available, will more free music- your free music – have any impact? If not, how can you change, add to, or (gasp!) maybe even charge for music in way that makes it matter.
SETH GODIN: If you want to know who’s a newbie on a film set, just watch what happens at lunch. Major films have huge buffets laid out for cast and crew, and the newcomers can’t resist. It’s FREE! Over time, of course, the old-timers come to the conclusion that it's just lunch, and the crew gets a bit more jaded and learns some self-restraint as well.
The first time a previously expensive good or service is made free, we’re drawn to it precisely because of the freeness. The fifth time or tenth time, not so much.
Free online has two distinct elements, then…
Breakthrough free, like the first free ebook or the first free email service, and sample-this free, which decreases the cost of trial and lowers boundaries of the spread of an idea.
But they shouldn’t be confused. As the market for free gets more crowded, we’ll see more and more people promoting their free products, stuff that people used to have pay for. A complete shift from ‘you will pay’ to 'it is free' to ‘I will pay for ads to alert you it’s free' to ultimately, 'I will pay you to try it'.
Free by itself is no longer enough to guarantee much of anything. (Here's Kate's take, which I just discovered.)
Reprinted with permission from Seth's blog.
HYPEBOT: Follow Godin's link to Kate Bradley. She's asking all the right questions:
1. What’s the effectiveness of your free? To lure in new fans? To solidify current fans?
2. What’s the strategy of your free? Is your free creative? Why do I want it over someone else’s?
3. What’s the bottom line of your free? To get me to pay for something else?
Free can’t be JUST free anymore. And how the hell can you beat free?
Virtually any successful promotional or marketing idea in music will be copied by a majority of artists/bands. So you either have to be one of the first to do it, to generate some buzz, or you need to focus on those promotional/marketing ideas that really make sense for you.
The issue with free music is no longer whether it works for you but that it has become the norm. When planning how you are going to make money in music, you need to assume that either you’ll have to provide some or all of your recorded music for free to generate interest or that people will be able to get it for free anyway. That doesn’t mean you can’t sell it, but that you have to make a plan which takes into account that a certain percentage of potential fans may not buy the recorded music but might by a T-shirt or buy tickets. Free music has become part of the word-of-mouth package for music marketing. It’s a business card for many bands.
Ultimately the issue isn’t whether “free” will work, but whether ANYTHING will work to help you stand out from the crowd. No matter what you are doing, so are thousands of other bands/artists.
Re Kate’s comment “how the hell can you beat free?” just ask the bottled water companies. Tap water is free and just as healthy but people waste resources by buying bottled water…
When it comes to music I’d say never underestimate the power of a free MP3 if you’re a band or artist. No need to up sell as that one gesture creates goodwill and community.Obviously if you’re a business looking for the up sell then you’ll have to be consistently creative in the marketing and messaging of the notion of why the MP3 is free.
Music can’t really be compared to a lot of other industries because many people in music will do it for free and will even go so far as to pay people to listen to their music.
Music isn’t a scarce commodity. Talent is relatively scarce, but “music” is everywhere. So the reason free has crept into the music world is that a lot of it is being freely offered. People want to share what they create.
Even we get to a point where no one buys recorded music, no one pays for tickets, and no one buys music-related products, there will still be music. People will continue to create music even if there is no money in the endeavor.
Suzanne Lainson is talking nonsense.
“Music isn’t a scarce commodity”
But it isn’t substitutable. An Eminem fan who must have the new Eminem record isn’t going to choose James Taylor instead. It has to be Eminem.
“People want to share what they create”
Yes, but they should also be rewarded for the value and pleasure they give. You don’t seem to have room for that in your world.
“Yes, but they should also be rewarded for the value and pleasure they give. You don’t seem to have room for that in your world.”
The music creators are free to charge, and their fans are encouraged to compensate them.
I’m all in favor of it. But some music creators are willingly giving their music away, and that’s why “free” music will continue to happen.
I’m a writer and all professional writers would like to get paid for their work. But the Internet is full of writers who do it for free. That has kept prices down.
Similarly, graphic designers would like to get paid top dollar. But now there are websites where people in Eastern Europe and Asia bid for those jobs and are willing to do them for much less.
The Internet has fostered competition and that has kept down prices.
As for music, while to some extent music isn’t substitutable, at another level, we are now exposed to so much more that if one artist is too expensive, we can be turned on to lower priced alternatives, who, in some cases, may be better than the megastars we thought we wanted to hear.
I’ve been encouraging fans to support their local music scenes as an alternative to high priced touring shows.
that won’t be music. it will be drivel. the rich will have music… the poor will have rap.
there are more cars now than there ever were… more styles and designs and amenities yet the prices are not dropping there… “you get what you ask for” and in an age where there are so many wannabes cluttering up the market, one has only to request their price to as many potential customers as possible (like bottled water).
Someone WILL pay… it may not be who you expect but they will spend money where money is deserved. I think you are talking about wannabes who are in no position to ask for anything for their creative efforts which amount to more or less personal exercise…. or learning. myspace is FULL of this crap.
Give me a solution, then. How do you stop P2P? How do you stop friends from sharing songs with other friends?
I have a number of musician friends, all of whom are very talented. They would all love to be getting $15 a CD, like they used to. Some still set that price and are able to make sales. Fans who buy these CDs are supporting the artists, and I am very grateful that they are doing so.
But others have given up trying to sell their CDs and are making the songs available for free, usually in exchange for an email address. These are talented performers, too, some of whom are touring the country nationally, getting media attention, etc.
Suing fans to get people to pay hasn’t worked. Pressuring artists not to lower their prices hasn’t really worked. The “give-what-you-want” system has worked for some.
What do you suggest as a solution to help musicians make a living at this?
You can read our article on how giving away your tracks for free can actively increase your sales as an independent artist… One of our artist’s is earning more money doing it this way than they ever have before…
http://www.mymusicsuccess.com/feature_free.html
We’re not selling the albums, which is what Godin and Bradley both assume in those posts. What we’re selling is experience, or community, or identification. When we give music away for free, we’re not giving away our product. We’re giving away the tease for the product, even if we give away the whole album.
Case in point; the new Danger Mouse “CD.” You can download the album anywhere. But the only way you can “own” it (and by own, I mean identify yourself to your friends as an owner) is by purchasing it.
Suzanne,
“What do you suggest as a solution to help musicians make a living at this?”
Here is a novel idea. Why don’t we as a society protect intellectual property rights the same way we protect other property rights? If someone broke into a Virgin Megastore and stole $10,000 worth of CD’s, we would never expect Richard Branson to track down the criminal and then sue for compensation. Why do we force record companies to do this to protect their property?
I know it isn’t popular to speak up for the “evil” record companies, but the law has to protect everyone equally. The law needs to protect the rights of artists, songwriters, composers, producers and everyone else involved in the creative process so they can be creative and not be bogged down trying to keep people from stealing their work.
What does it say about our society when no one even suggests this as a solution? Let’s face facts, if you steal $10,000 of music, whether its captured on physical media or in a digital file, you’re a FELON. You should be treated as felon. You should be arrested, tried, convicted and punished through either a punitive fine and/or jail time. Will this eliminate file sharing? Probably not, but the threat of a felony conviction would certainly cause the casual P2P’er to think twice before downloading.
?Why don’t we as a society protect intellectual property rights the same way we protect other property rights? If someone broke into a “Virgin Megastore and stole $10,000 worth of CD’s, we would never expect Richard Branson to track down the criminal and then sue for compensation. Why do we force record companies to do this to protect their property?”
People are being sued. It’s a subject that has been discussed at length within the music industry.
The question is how much more effort should we as a society put into this. It isn’t the most pressing problem we have to deal with right now.
My take on Godin’s piece; a perspective from the free music underground:
http://www.ektoplazm.com/journal/free-is-not-enough-quality-matters/
Suzanne,
“People are being sued.”
Precisely my point. Copyright owners are forced by our society to track down and prosecute those who steal their property. What other group of property owners are forced to do this? The answer is none.
“The question is how much more effort should we as a society put into this.”
This is the question. We have seen throughout history what happens when the rights of one group are sacrificed by a society. That may be too esoteric for you to grapple with, so consider this. Music is a multi-billion dollar industry which employs hundreds of thousands of individuals. If society continues to ignore the wholesale violation of owners’ right, it will surely reap a whirlwind.
“It isn’t the most pressing problem we have to deal with right now.”
It is certainly one of them. We are talking about the rampant theft of property. It is so widespread and people have gone to such lengths to defend it, a large segment of the population doesn’t even see it as being wrong. If society can be so easily convinced to ignore the rights of one group, who is going to be next.
I am sorry you seem to be so unconcerned about the rights of others. I only hope when your rights are violated, you aren’t treated with such disregard.