
Michael Jackson is the First to Sell 1 Million Downloads in a Week - theforay
http://thenextweb.com/2009/07/02/michael-jackson-sell-1-million-downloads-week/?awesm=tnw.to_UN&utm_campaign=thenextweb&utm_content=twitter-publisher-plugin&utm_medium=tnw.to-twitter&utm_source=direct-tnw.to
======
phatboyslim
Does anyone know where I can find more Michael Jackson news on the internet? I
have been searching all over for hours and haven't found anything.

~~~
access_denied
Just bing it.

------
SamAtt
The irony is that Michael Jackson is the ideal artist for digital
distribution. EVERYONE likes at least one Michael Jackson song. Or at least
everyone I’ve ever met. So though his prime was well before the iTunes era his
broad appeal shows how digital distribution can help an artist sell more music
by giving the consumer the ability to pick and choose what songs they want.

~~~
physcab
If that's the case, then who is buying this music? Isn't everyone's libraries
already saturated with the songs they enjoy?

~~~
scott_s
No, actually. As many people who own, say, Thriller, I bet there are even more
who like songs off the album but don't own it. Then he dies, they realize
they'd like to hear those songs again, realize they don't actually own it, and
download the one or two they remember.

~~~
paulgb
Not to mention people who have his music on records and tapes but not CDs or
MP3s.

~~~
zandorg
The Thriller 12" album on the other hand, is probably the best-mastered record
(or CD) I've ever heard.

------
ulf
This is kind of ironic, if you consider that digital distribution can empower
the artist to sell without a whole bunch of intermediaries and therefore
benefit more from the sales...

~~~
josefresco
That's because the empowerment you speak of is only in theory ... the reality
is that even though it's _possible_ to sell on your own, you can't make it big
(or even a good living) without getting your way into a very closed, selective
and exploitative market controlled by a handful of big media companies (Apple
included).

------
kingnothing
I noticed that the site linked to, thenextweb.com, is ripping off our comments
here. What's up with that?

~~~
zeedotme
been through all this before. It's a backtype wordpress plugin, ironically a
YC startup and we're not changing it. Although it would be great to see the
threaded comments (which i believe are coming), the comments are all relevant
to the story and we link right back to where they came from.

------
theforay
Apple are the big winners.

~~~
maukdaddy
No the labels are the big winners. Apple doesn't make much of anything per
song.

~~~
paulgb
Interesting. Do you happen to know what the breakdown is for the major
companies?

I always assumed Apple was like Wal-Mart, having the upper hand in negotiation
and knowing how to use it. Maybe that's only the case for independent artists?

~~~
josefresco
Apple isn't quite in the same position of power as Wal-Mart. Without inventory
(which in this case is _unique_ ) Apple wouldn't have a store. This gives more
control to the labels who can 'hold out' until they get the deal they want. If
Apple says "screw off" to Sony/BMG or any of the big boys that's a huge gaping
hole in their inventory that can't be replaced.

Wal-Mart on the other hand can stock underwear or TV's or food from pretty
much anyone, so they hold all the cards and can pretty much write their own
deal.

Still, Apple has _some_ control as they basically own digital music market so
I would imagine at this point, the labels don't have a viable 'plan b'.

------
fnord23
As someone said of Elvis, "good career move".

------
dcurtis
And that's only 1 million dollars revenue. Which is nothing.

~~~
vaksel
not really, apparently he sold 750 million records, and only made 700 million
during his career. And most of that money came from Beatles rights ownership
and concerts.

~~~
josefresco
Good point, even with a $15 or $20 CD the artists 'take' is probably only
slightly higher (maybe even lower) than their cut of an iTunes sold track. All
that 'missing' money is why the recording industry (mainly the big labels) are
hurting and not the artists (they were always getting reamed).

MJ probably had different deals throughout his career, but I would guess that
even $700 million is a low estimate of his earnings.

------
philjackson
Oh cool. Has he released a new track, or something?

------
tybris
That's why/because he is the king of pop...

