Why Selling on iTunes SUCKS!

The $.30/song figure was based on my experience with another iTunes compnay, not tunecore. However, with Tunecore, it's important to keep in mind that they do charge not only a fee to add your CD, but also an annual fee. The $20 annual fee isn't much, but it could add up if you had several CDs, or were selling not many copies.

Also, with any iTunes, amazon service, there are other drawbacks:

Payment is quarterly, so if you were to invest in advertising, you won't see a return for some time.

It takes a long time to add your songs, typically 4-5 weeks for your CD to go live, compared to the hour or so it took me to upload an old band CD to bandcamp yesterday.

Once your CD is live, if you want to edit or remove it, you can, but it'll take a looong time, again. Tunecore charge $20 to remove it, if it's been less than 6 month since you added it.

None of the services lets you set the price. They determine the optimal price, which they can change anytime. They'll still pay you the agreed upon royalty, but you can't do a 'sale' or something to boost sales.

The thing about iTunes etc is that you're sort of sending your music off into the ether, and hoping to see some checks come in maybe 6 months from now.

With direct sales via bandcamp, paypal, etc, you have control, and you can immediately reinvest any money you make into new recordings, advertising, a tour van, whatever.

I'm going to include more info on this in the next revision of the book, along with some ideas on how to boost iTunes sales, if you go that route.

If you download the book as it is, you'll get an email with a link for the new version when I update it.
 
- The artist only makes a small percentage of the song's cost (roughly 30 percent).


I'm not going to comment on whether I think iTunes sucks or not. I just wanted to point out that I'm getting AU$0.99 on AU$1.69 for single song sales, which = 58%
 
itunes sucks?

at songcast account will cost you 72.00 for the year, and 20.00 for each album you upload.

thats 92.00 for a year with one album

you get an average of 65 cents per download, monthly, not quarterly.

(any indie artist had better get acquainted with the ol' calculator)

142 sales a year is the break even number.

a paypal interface is a much better way to go for people that you are already in contact with. i get .93 per sale from a .99 song with micropayments from paypal, but i had to 1. buy the interface software 60.00 2. pay for hosting of it (monthly - varies) 3. if you don't do your own web design, you will have to pay for someone else to set it all up for you.

at the end of the day, it's fun and exciting to say you're on itunes, but if you're not serious and committed and really out there pushing your work, and you're not putting out good sounds, it will be temporary.

Can you sell 142 songs this year? And remember that is the break even number. There will be some here who say, "HELL YES!" and there will be some that say, "gee, uh, i don't know."

the advantage of itunes is that if you are doing perhaps a cover or remix of a popular song, you will get a bunch of listens/perhaps purchases from a worldwide community that would NEVER see your personal web storefront or cdbaby page.

use itunes for the machine it is. some consider it a basic rung to the ladder of success.
 
I agree with what you have to say, Bandcamp.com has a free shopping cart for paypal, it seems to be pretty straightforward. Personally I like it because it can be set to require an email for a free download of the full album (or whatever you'd like.)

Your tactic of doing a cover is one I've thought about, too. The issue for indie bands may be not clearing the rights first, and asking for headaches.

You can also write a song that has the same name as a popular song (song titles are not copyrightable.) Or mentioning a famous artist or person in the title. (Be careful not to cross any lines regarding libel!)

I have been working on another rev to the book, which will include some ideas on promoting your music on iTunes, and other online music sites.

Even though I tend to think that iTunes isn't a great idea for most artists, the fact is a lot of people already have music on it, and many believe that it lends credibility to their work.
 
Your tactic of doing a cover is one I've thought about, too. The issue for indie bands may be not clearing the rights first, and asking for headaches.

Anyone who knows what to do can usually get mechanical rights in less than 24 hours for most tracks. In some cases, it takes several hours. I was dumbfounded as to how fast the process was.
 
Anyone who knows what to do can usually get mechanical rights in less than 24 hours for most tracks. In some cases, it takes several hours. I was dumbfounded as to how fast the process was.


Mechanical rights are quick because its set currently at 9.1 cents per song or 1.75 cents per minute (Physical). It is different for Ringtones & digital material streaming or not. If you go directly through to the material owner, you can fax him back & forth the mechanical license agreements and get it done in less than 10 minutes.
 
The process for clearing rights is pretty quick and easy if you:

a) Do it before you record and release the cover.
b) Make sure to pay the royalty on time.

If you go ahead and release the song before clearing it, you can run into some problems, or so I've been told. I haven't had that experience myself.
 
If nobody has any money, it doesn't really matter if you sell your music on iTunes or at a Dairy Queen in Newfoundland.
 
I think people have money (maybe the economy is doing poorly on average, but people still can spend some money.) The main issue I think is that people have come to expect music to be free. Obviously, there are lots of people who spend money, iTunes claims to have sold 6 billion songs, I think.

The real issue is that people are more likely to spend money on tangible items, like merchandise, or to attend live shows. As a non-major-label act, it's important to be able to let your fans know about your shows and merchandise as easily and affordably as possible.
 
It seems to get harder everyday. I see more and more light at the end of the tunnel with every beat I hear though. Stay positive people.
 
Anyone who knows what to do can usually get mechanical rights in less than 24 hours for most tracks. In some cases, it takes several hours. I was dumbfounded as to how fast the process was.

Perhaps you could start a new thread to talk us through that process? I'd certainly like to know more about it
 
This thread and other research has convined me to not even bother. It's totally pointless to even try selling your shit with no kind of label support.
 
Frankly I have found that iTunes is kind of like the drive through for music...

iTunes just makes it all sync together... We have never spent the money to get up and running on there though... My band recently started using reverbnation as a way to let folks download our music for free.

The nice thing about reverbnation is that while the amounts are small to say the least they do pay you a part of the ad revenue that they make from you being there... Try getting that out of myspace!

Adding the email feature is a great thing to have on tap and that is why we do try and push our list at shows and we will be giving away stickers to folks who sign up for our mailing list this season.

Facebook has been a very powerful tool these days as we can interact with our fans really well!
 
johnsuitcase,

I would like to thank you for your efforts in producing this nice little PDF.

Ironically , a day after reading it I also read this article about the implosion of EMI called "Say Goodbye To EMI"

http://www.mosesavalon.com/mosesblog/


from this article , it is discussed what happened after EMI decided to allow it's catalog to be distributed by I-tunes without DRM( Digital rights management)


I wrote then that this move would be the first nail in the EMI coffin. It was. “Fans” bit-torented and ripped through EMI’s catalog like an eight-ball in a Drew Barrymore cocaine binge


It makes me wonder about the models you presented in the PDF where fans come to ones site and spend any $$ at all. The value of music seems to have been set at $00000000 for a long time to come .
 
I don't know about selling music to fans, etc. I think there will always be fans who pay for music, both to get higher quality recordings (rather than ripped files which may have been doctored or poorly encoded) and fans who pay because they feel it's the right thing to do, to help out artists they actually care about.

A big part of the model I propose is about developing actual relationships with fans, so they feel some camaraderie. It's also about making live performances more profitable by capturing fans' contact info, and keeping in touch with them.

Do I feel bad about copying a song by a major label artist? Not as bad as I would stealing from an artist who I cared about, especially if they were independent. Right or wrong, I think that's how a lot of people see it.

I don't mean to start a moral argument for or against stealing, I'm just saying people are more generous towards their friends. If a fan thinks of you as a friend, he's more likely to buy than to steal.

I'd be surprised if any of EMI's artists have fans that think of them as 'friends'!
 
Back
Top