Reygnier;3541137 said:Well, which ones are $1 then? Any $3?
HMXaJBc;3541176 said:"The Heist" is $1.
vedis;3541200 said:it was 1 dollarnow its in my collection
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.
HMXaJBc;3541217 said:YOU are awesome.
RealMessiah;3541228 said:I'm not saying they should charge 1 dollar, I'm saying it would be smart business though.
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.
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.
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=10040*2=80Congrats, 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.
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.
Casto21;3541297 said:I believe prices can be changed quarterly.
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.
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.
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.
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.
RealMessiah;3541355 said:You superfans are amazing.
RealMessiah;3541355 said:You can't see why charging less, at least early on would be beneficial in the long run?
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.
Pereira;3541367 said:Do you have stock in these indie bands or something T-Hybrid?
Pereira;3541380 said:I love how you say that and the very next two words of my post (that you didn't quote) are "I agree"
cherokeesam;3541385 said:Similarly, you could jack up a $1 song to $2 if it's selling like hotcakes.
There's definately a MUCH bigger risk than going from $2 to $1. I could see a larger label trying it out since they could afford to take any negative blowback much easier than an indie band/author.