Prices of RBN songs

ReygnierReygnier Opening Act
edited March 2010 in The Rock Band Network
Hey guys!

Now that the store is open, can anyone tell me what prices are the song?

I know most should be $1, but what are the exceptions?

Comments

  • Thom1234Thom1234 Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    Apparently a LOT of the songs are actually 160MSP, even songs by the obscure bands.
  • RealMessiahRealMessiah Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    Thom1234;3541097 said:
    Apparently a LOT of the songs are actually 160MSP, even songs by the obscure bands.
    And hence they remain in obscurity.

    I figured there would be a lot of 1 dollar songs.
  • Thom1234Thom1234 Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    RealMessiah;3541104 said:
    And hence they remain in obscurity.

    I figured there would be a lot of 1 dollar songs.
    Nah, because that would make too much sense. If obscure bands are charging 160MSP, nobody will buy their songs. Including me.
  • T-HybridT-Hybrid Washed Up
    edited March 2010
    Thom1234;3541109 said:
    Nah, because that would make too much sense. If obscure bands are charging 160MSP, nobody will buy their songs. Including me.
    Excuses excuses.
  • HeXcodaHeXcoda Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    The difference between $1 and $2 is only $1. I'll pay $2 for a good song regardless of who it comes from.

    Would I PREFER to pay $1? Well, yeah. But I can deal with buying one less Snickers bar and enjoying a good track.
  • ReygnierReygnier Opening Act
    edited March 2010
    Ouch! That freaking sucks!

    Well, which ones are $1 then? Any $3?
  • T-HybridT-Hybrid Washed Up
    edited March 2010
    HeXcoda;3541126 said:
    Would I PREFER to pay $1? Well, yeah. But I can deal with buying one less Snickers bar and enjoying a good track.
    Pretty much this. "It only makes sense that they should charge a dollar" is absurd. Of course it makes sense to the person saying...it would save you money.

    It's people who believe that an "obscure" band should be forced to charge only a dollar that will continue to feed the false mentality that RBN is nothing but indie bands and unknown artists.
  • XenigmaXenigma Opening Act
    edited March 2010
    No $3 songs yet, but a surprising number of $2 tracks, including a number of tracks that I was certain would only be $1. Of course, regular DLC is $2 a pop, and the overall chart quality from what I've seen very, very good, so don't be too put off by the prices.
  • HeXcodaHeXcoda Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    Reygnier;3541137 said:
    Well, which ones are $1 then? Any $3?
    Top Back (the hiphop track) and Flogging Molly were $1. The rest I bought today were $2. No $3 tracks that I see. (I do think $3 is the breaking point; I'd have to SERIOUSLY adore a song to consider paying that much. Like, Led Zeppelin level of adore.)
  • afterstasisafterstasis Washed Up
    edited March 2010
    i'm very glad to see authors and bands aren't afraid to charge $2 for the hard work that goes into this entire process.

    fist-pumps to each and every one of you.
  • HMXaJBcHMXaJBc Harmonix Developer
    edited March 2010
  • T-HybridT-Hybrid Washed Up
    edited March 2010
    Also, unlike standard RB DLC...you are able to play demos of RBN songs, are you not?

    So while there's a $2 price tag on an "unknown" song, you have an opportunity to hear a bit of it and give the charts a try before actually making the purchase.

    "Charge less because I don't know who you are" is not a reasonable argument. Especially if that's the only reason they "should" charge less.

    A good song is a good song regardless of the current notoriety of the artists that perform it.
  • vedisvedis Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    HMXaJBc;3541176 said:
    "The Heist" is $1. :)
    it was 1 dollar
    now its in my collection :)
  • HMXaJBcHMXaJBc Harmonix Developer
    edited March 2010
    vedis;3541200 said:
    it was 1 dollar
    now its in my collection :)
    YOU are awesome. :)
  • RealMessiahRealMessiah Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    T-Hybrid;3541195 said:
    Also, unlike standard RB DLC...you are able to play demos of RBN songs, are you not?

    So while there's a $2 price tag on an "unknown" song, you have an opportunity to hear a bit of it and give the charts a try before actually making the purchase.

    "Charge less because I don't know who you are" is not a reasonable argument. Especially if that's the only reason they "should" charge less.

    A good song is a good song regardless of the current notoriety of the artists that perform it.
    Let me do some simple math for you.

    Let's say you have 100 people that would be willing to pay 1 dollar for a song from a band they have never heard of before just because...heck it's only a dollar...Now let's say those same 100 people will not pay 2 dollars for that same song, but only 40 of them will...

    100x1=100
    40*2=80

    Congrats, you've just lost yourself 20 dollars in gross sales for a product that is digital and takes no more effort to sell to a thousand people than it does to one person.

    You see, there are going to be massive amounts of songs out there and the people who have been buying DLC all along aren't all of a sudden going to have more money to spend.

    So your best practice would be to charge less to make more if you are not putting out a product that is going to be recognizable to the majority or even more than a tiny minority in many cases.

    I'm not saying they should charge 1 dollar, I'm saying it would be smart business though.
  • vedisvedis Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    HMXaJBc;3541217 said:
    YOU are awesome. :)
    was a great song, something about the sound just had me loving it, so had to get it, i woulda paid 2 for it if it was priced like that

    just how i am, if a song is good, price isnt the issue, gotta have it
    and i can definately jam to that song :)


    my other purchases: fake shark, jonathan coulton, stroke 9 :)
  • T-HybridT-Hybrid Washed Up
    edited March 2010
    RealMessiah;3541228 said:
    I'm not saying they should charge 1 dollar, I'm saying it would be smart business though.
    Like I said, of course it's "smart business" to you. You're the one that saves the buck.

    Meanwhile, you make all kinds of assumptions of sales numbers with absolutely no actual knowledge of how it would play out.

    If the song is good, and the chart is fun (which you can now find out first hand thanks to the RBN demo feature) why should a song be a $1? Just because you have never heard of them?

    It sounds more to me like people making excuses.
  • ethicalpaulethicalpaul Opening Act
    edited March 2010
    RealMessiah;3541228 said:
    I'm not saying they should charge 1 dollar, I'm saying it would be smart business though.
    Unless it wouldn't be.

    Your example is somewhat arbitrary. The same math can be used like this:

    Let's say you are a group of such popularity that if you charged $1, then 100 people buy your song.

    But if you charged $2, then only 70 people buy your song.

    Now who threw away money?

    To make the decision correctly, you have to know the desire of each consumer, which no one can.

    Charging $2 on opening day, and then changing it to $1 after a few months might be the best choice. But that too is just a guess.
  • T-HybridT-Hybrid Washed Up
    edited March 2010
    ethicalpaul;3541263 said:
    Charging $2 on opening day, and then changing it to $1 after a few months might be the best choice. But that too is just a guess.
    Can RBN songs have their price adjusted? The other alternative is release a few songs at $2...and if those don't sell well adjust the price of future releases.

    But if the only reason somebody won't buy a song for $2 is because the band isn't "famous"...forget it. That's a level of elitism that is tough to please, and would likely just make up excuses if the price was at a $1.
  • Casto21Casto21 Rock and Roll Statistician
    edited March 2010
    T-Hybrid;3541272 said:
    Can RBN songs have their price adjusted? The other alternative is release a few songs at $2...and if those don't sell well adjust the price of future releases.
    I believe prices can be changed quarterly.
  • JuiceBoxHeroJuiceBoxHero Unsigned
    edited March 2010
    RealMessiah;3541228 said:
    Let me do some simple math for you.

    Let's say you have 100 people that would be willing to pay 1 dollar for a song from a band they have never heard of before just because...heck it's only a dollar...Now let's say those same 100 people will not pay 2 dollars for that same song, but only 40 of them will...

    100x1=100
    40*2=80

    Congrats, you've just lost yourself 20 dollars in gross sales for a product that is digital and takes no more effort to sell to a thousand people than it does to one person.
    What is this simple math based off of? Where are the DLC sales numbers posted so we can see that $2 songs only sell 40% as well as $1 songs? How do you know that a $1 song won't sell 1,000 downloads and a $2 song won't sell 500 downloads for the same total profit? How do you know that songs won't sell exactly the same in the long run regardless of their pricing?

    You seem awfully confident about pricing and sales and profits for a system that's fairly unproven after only being open to the public for about 2 hours.
  • MarklefordMarkleford Opening Act
    edited March 2010
    T-Hybrid;3541139 said:
    Pretty much this. "It only makes sense that they should charge a dollar" is absurd. Of course it makes sense to the person saying...it would save you money.

    It's people who believe that an "obscure" band should be forced to charge only a dollar that will continue to feed the false mentality that RBN is nothing but indie bands and unknown artists.
    As an RBN author and band member/producer for James William Roy, we went with $1 for our tracks because it was the cheapest possible. If we could have, we would have given them away for free.

    To us, as true unsigned indies, RBN is a promotional vehicle for reaching people. Unfortunately, price becomes a *hurdle* to reaching people, no matter what we think our creativity and sweat are worth. Given that 70% is already skimmed off the top, I don't anticipate this will be a big money-maker for anyone at our level.

    However, looking at the long term, using RBN to build a fan-base is much more valuable. Bringing in new fans allows sales of the other songs in the catalog (that *don't* have 70% taken off the top). More fans bring offers for gigs and house parties. Promotion comes long before the money rolls in, *especially* if you have no label money backing you in the first place.

    One thing that authors and bands might not have understood is that you can change the price of your tracks on a quarterly or semi-annual basis. So why *not* offer your work up for $1 initially? You'll get those people who were on the fence, and if it picks up sales by word of mouth, you can make the decision to go to $2 later.

    And in all honesty, James and I are old guys with wives, cats, and day jobs. Getting people to *listen* and enjoy the material is what it's about, not the 30 cents on the dollar income. If people listen and share the music, then eventually it can get into the right ears of producers who license for TV/movies, or label reps looking for new bands. And *then* the money might be of interest.

    Until then, though, we're proud of our work, and proud to sell it for $1. I don't think it cheapens us any, nor devalues indie artists as a whole. Charging $2 might stroke our self-important egos as "artistes", but we'd be stroking with perhaps half the number of listeners that we could have. To us, that doesn't make much sense.

    During the whole Napster debacle, Lars Ulrich said to the press, "You don't expect us to do this for free, do you?"

    I could only laugh, because I do music because I *love* doing music.

    - m
  • Casto21Casto21 Rock and Roll Statistician
    edited March 2010
    The fact that a lot of the lesser known bands put their songs at 2 bucks will definitely benefit the ones who went for 1 buck.
  • mantrasmantras Opening Act
    edited March 2010
    i bet bullet with butterfly wings will be the first $3... cause i'd pay it, and so would anyone needing that and other SP
  • mantrasmantras Opening Act
    edited March 2010
    we need another pepsi promo before i go broke
  • T-HybridT-Hybrid Washed Up
    edited March 2010
    Casto21;3541297 said:
    I believe prices can be changed quarterly.
    Then there you go. You set the price at $2. If the song doesn't sell as you hoped you drop it down to a $1.

    It's much easier to justify dropping the price of a song than it is to have a good song priced at a $1...and then everybody getting pissed when you decided to try a future release at $2.
    Markleford;3541312 said:
    As an RBN author and band member/producer for James William Roy, we went with $1 for our tracks because it was the cheapest possible. If we could have, we would have given them away for free.
    Thanks for providing that perspective, but by that same token you have to consider that not all bands are self-charting.

    If you have to pay an authoring company to produce your content, then you have to at least make that back or you are in effect losing money (not to mention the authoring service is unable to support itself).
  • afterstasisafterstasis Washed Up
    edited March 2010
    Markleford;3541312 said:

    Until then, though, we're proud of our work, and proud to sell it for $1. I don't think it cheapens us any, nor devalues indie artists as a whole.
    Markleford;3541312 said:

    During the whole Napster debacle, Lars Ulrich said to the press, "You don't expect us to do this for free, do you?"

    I could only laugh, because I do music because I *love* doing music.
    though i'm totally supportive of everyone choosing their own prices regardless of their popularity i totally agree with the above.

    i've always sold my stuff really cheap (if not just handing it to anyone who seems genuinely interested in it), but i also can't help but be disgusted when people complain about a smaller band selling their albums for more than $6-8 and then spending twice that much on a major label release without thinking about it.

    i've seen countless people turn their noses up at extremely reasonable prices at merch-tables and then go straight to a fancy restaurant with the local scene kids to blow 5 times as much, which is of course their call to make but i just personally don't care to appeal to those people.

    the last album i put out on my former record label i decided to do absolutely no free copies, no promos, no trades, and no haggling at the merch-table...
    i sold a bit less than normal, but it was nice knowing that the only people who had it actually really wanted it and cared about what i'm doing enough to drop the $8.
  • RealMessiahRealMessiah Road Warrior
    edited March 2010
    T-Hybrid;3541272 said:
    Can RBN songs have their price adjusted? The other alternative is release a few songs at $2...and if those don't sell well adjust the price of future releases.

    But if the only reason somebody won't buy a song for $2 is because the band isn't "famous"...forget it. That's a level of elitism that is tough to please, and would likely just make up excuses if the price was at a $1.
    Hey smart guy. How much DLC do you own? I own it all, so please don't try to jump to conclusions about who is being an elitist.

    You superfans are amazing. You can't see why charging less, at least early on would be beneficial in the long run? This is the same mentality that compares CD sales and MP3 sales to RB songs and uses the first two to show why music games will always have some giant market.

    You all think this is just going to take off like a rocket ship drawing in millions of new players, right? Yeah, I happen to not think that is going to happen without another platform GAME release of RB3. (Which I have to believe is coming in the next 6 months...at least by the end of the year if they want this RBN thing to really work)

    Again, I say to you...How many people are all of a sudden going to have more money for DLC? How many discs is RBN going to sell to get new people into the series? 12?

    Basically the same group of people are going to be buying from a much larger pool of songs...and unless they all get a lot more money they will be buying a lower pct of songs available...hurting EVERYONE putting out songs.

    Now, as a "seller" if I charge less and am able to get more word of mouth interest, maybe I drop a few more albums too at regular retail due to more people knowing about my band. Maybe that is not the aim. I dunno.

    I just know that with the high volume of songs and not the same relatively higher volume of available Points/Cash coming in to buy those songs everyone ends up failing in the long run.

    You see, I really want this to work as RB/GH games are my favorite video genre of all time. I agree that the price of a song should not be based on who the band is, but that is also a naive way of thinking. I have paid 2 dollars for plenty of crappy songs from "big" bands so if you think the charge is based on quality of song, you are being naive.
  • HeyRilesHeyRiles Besse's Girl
    edited March 2010
    I bought Lady In a Blue Dress for $2 and I'm satisfied, considering I would have paid the same price from Harmonix anyway :)

    I'm fairly certain that all Vagrant songs will be worth $2
  • T-HybridT-Hybrid Washed Up
    edited March 2010
    RealMessiah;3541355 said:
    Hey smart guy. How much DLC do you own? I own it all, so please don't try to jump to conclusions about who is being an elitist.
    So you aren't an elitist, but somehow the amount of DLC I have comparred to you somehow makes your opinion...what...more valid? Hmmm.
    RealMessiah;3541355 said:
    You superfans are amazing.
    Wait wait wait. You buy every DLC song that comes out...and I'm the superfan? Not insulting you, just trying to follow your logic train here.
    RealMessiah;3541355 said:
    You can't see why charging less, at least early on would be beneficial in the long run?
    To your pocketbook, yeah it makes perfect sense. But since neither you or I have much in the way of insider info regarding all of the bands/authors/labels involved, it's tough to make that same assumption about theirs.
    RealMessiah;3541355 said:
    I have paid 2 dollars for plenty of crappy songs from "big" bands so if you think the charge is based on quality of song, you are being naive.
    Well see, now I'm just confused. You would gladly spend $2 on a crappy song from a famous band but you wouldn't spend $2 on a quality song from a lesser known artist?

    You really aren't doing anything to help sell your point right now.
Sign In or Register to comment.