Jesus of Cool: eMusic is Dead! Long Live eMusic!

Christmas, for me, traditionally comes on the 28th. Of every month. That’s when I flip open my laptop, check the calendar, and get the rush that comes from remembering that eMusic has automatically refreshed my 100-download “Connoisseur” subscription. Awaiting me on the site is the comfort of knowing there’s plenty of stuff I want – starting with the 134 albums that (as of this writing) constitute my “Save for Later” list – and the excitement of knowing there must be oodles of stuff I don’t even know I want. And because the downloads come so much cheaper from eMusic than they do from Amazon or iTunes … and because I never look closely enough at my credit-card bill to notice that the site has been making my bank account 25 bucks lighter every month … I can grab that Sarabeth Tucek album I’d never heard of until just now, listen to it once or twice before filing it away on my external drive, and still imagine that I’ve gotten something for (practically) nothing.

That convergence of low cost and a sense of discovery – i.e., the willingness to take a chance on something new and unknown because the financial risk is relatively low – traditionally has been a big part of the lure for eMusic’s subscriber base. But that equation has changed over the last couple of weeks, as the site has significantly raised its subscription rates as part of the deal it recently struck with Sony Music Entertainment. The agreement is the first that eMusic has been able to reach with a major-label conglomerate, and on July 1 it resulted in a massive infusion of well-known music to the site’s catalog – just in time for subscribers to join the dogpile on Michael Jackson recordings, which quickly shot toward the top of the site’s download charts.

Those downloads, however, now come at 40 to 48 cents a (king of) pop, depending on the subscription, rather than the 25 to 35 cents they did just a month ago. (In order to soften the blow a bit, eMusic has instituted a new “album pricing” system that enables users to download some – but only some – full albums at rates cheaper than the site’s former track-by-track policy would have allowed.) This shift inspires a certain ambivalence; it’s nice, for example, to think that indie labels and their artists will receive higher royalties now, because what has traditionally been a “steal” for eMusic subscribers has also been something of a steal from those acts.

Still, for me, the pricing change threatens to transform my entire concept of eMusic and the way I use it. Traditionally I have been keen to troll the site for recommendations from other users who like some of the same music I like, and to take chances on artists I end up loving (the Guggenheim Grotto) as well as disliking (sorry, Julie Doiron). I have come to consider eMusic the perfect (that is, perfectly interactive and inexpensive) way to keep my tastes current and expanding, rather than calcifying.

But I’ve gotta say, the idea of paying $4.40 for that aforementioned Sarabeth Tucek album today is a lot less enticing than the $2.75 I paid for it last year. If I’ve got 100 downloads a month (and most eMusic subscribers buy far fewer tracks than I do), how many of them am I going to be willing to burn on artists I’ve never heard of – particularly when I now have the option of using those credits to complete my Springsteen or Leonard Cohen collections?

That’s a question I have not yet answered for myself. But while I’ve been thinking about it – and while I’ve been staring down the fresh 100 credits in my account – I asked eMusic CEO Danny Stein for some answers on the Sony deal and the site’s plans for dealing with malcontents like me who are afraid of having too many choices.

How did the negotiations with Sony proceed to the point of agreement? Was per-track pricing the major sticking point, and what other issues blocked a deal until recently?
We’ve been talking with Sony for a long time, since we bought the company in 2003. eMusic was one of the first sites to sell unencrypted MP3s, and the DRM-free format was an issue for all of the major labels until 2008. The next issue we had to agree on was pricing. The major labels continue to find new ways to grow their businesses, and eMusic has become a sizable retail account. We paid our independent labels more than $35 million in revenue in 2008.

What is the structure of the agreement? What limits has Sony placed on providing content to eMusic?
Our agreement with Sony Music Entertainment covers the entire back catalog from every Sony label. We will receive any Sony label record that is more than 24 months old. It is possible that we will begin selling music released inside the 24-month window from emerging artists that our customers may be interested in.

How does the agreement with Sony fit into eMusic’s original business model? I would guess that your editors & marketers have made choices over the years related to website features that were aimed specifically at pushing less well-known (and therefore harder-to-sell) indie acts; are there adjustments to be made when Michael Jackson and Bruce Springsteen are suddenly available?
Our goal has always been to offer our customers as much music as possible in a universally compatible format, at a great value and within some editorial context. Recognizing that customers wanted a quality user experience, independent labels were the first to be willing to experiment with DRM-free formats and pricing. eMusic’s editorial team has always highlighted the music we thought would appeal to our audience, and presented that music with as much context as possible. This goal doesn’t change with the addition of Sony. In fact, the addition of Sony allows us to use some of the better-known artists to shine a spotlight on the lesser-known artists, and provides an opportunity to explore some of the influences of today’s up-and-coming artists.

Regardless of your long-term plans for the site, over the years eMusic has developed the reputation as the place to find indie music on the web, and I assume that a large number of your subscribers have developed loyalties to the site based on that reputation. Do you sense a need to retain that type of indie-based loyalty, and what efforts are you planning to maintain that focus?
Independent music is an integral part of eMusic, and part of our DNA. We will always promote independent music to our customers over the commercial mainstream top 40 which dominates every other major music service. We’ll use some of the better-known artists to help expose independent artists. You can see those efforts in our new “Six Degrees” editorial feature, where we explore the similarities between six seemingly unconnected records.

How do you expect the infusion of major-label acts to alter eMusic’s charts, its “Dozens” features, and its interactive content (user lists, etc.)? So far, apart from the expected surge in Michael Jackson albums, the best-sellers chart does not seem to have been overrun by major-label content. What is your expectation for the future, in terms of sales of Sony catalog vs. the site’s traditional indie content?
So much of what sells on eMusic, as is the case everywhere, is new releases, so we’ll definitely see new indie releases continue to dominate the chart save for a few exceptions here and there. Editorially, we’re treating Sony as we treat any other label on the site – we’ll heavily feature the parts of their catalog that we think our users will prefer. To us, it makes just as much sense to do a feature on the Stone Roses or the London Suede as it does Sunset Rubdown.

How has your agreement with Sony affected your policies with indie labels and artists, in terms of royalty rates, marketing commitments, etc.? Has the response from key partners at indie labels been positive or negative, and what are their concerns?
The reaction from our independent labels has been very positive. Many labels have been asking us to raise prices for years. All our labels have to pay royalties to support their artists and their own costs, so this was a collaborative effort to build a business together that had long-term viability and still maintained our prices as being roughly 50 percent cheaper than iTunes and Amazon. By adding a greater selection of music to the site, we’ll attract more customers and ultimately expose their artists to a larger audience, which is good for everyone. Independent labels will benefit enormously from a larger, more successful eMusic, with more subscribers buying more music and increasing the royalty pool for everyone.

How did you arrive at your new pricing structure? What comments have you heard from longtime subscribers about it? Do you expect a short-term drop in subscribers who cannot or will not pay the new fees?
We’ve been listening to our customers about pricing, and we appreciate that people have such a strong connection to eMusic and are as passionate about it as we are. The price change is a necessary move for us to get to where we want to be as a business. We haven’t yet seen a rise in subscription cancellations due to the new price plans. This is something we’re monitoring very closely.

How does the influx of Sony content enable you to market the site in new ways, or in new places? Alternatively, is there any expectation that the addition of major-label content will make eMusic LESS appealing to certain markets or constituencies, simply because of its impact on the site’s “hipness” factor?
The addition of music from Sony artists certainly broadens our appeal and makes us a more attractive partner for some of the companies we have marketing agreements with, such as SanDisk, Toshiba and Netflix. And we believe that this broadening will allow us to more aggressively feature lesser-known artists that don’t get a lot of exposure elsewhere.

Having Sony music will not change the eMusic sensibility. We think most of our existing subscribers enjoy a wide variety of music and will appreciate the chance to get this catalogue at lower prices than other stores. We hope they will all stick with us and see what we do with the Sony catalogue and other labels we may be able to offer in the future.

Is there any concern that, with only one major conglomerate on board, eMusic may come to be seen as an online version of the old Columbia or RCA record clubs? In other words, can the site (for marketing purposes) afford for very long to treat the addition of the Sony catalog as an achievement in itself — or does it make it necessary, in the near term, to redouble your efforts to get other majors on board, lest eMusic come to be seen by newcomers as an arm of Sony?
We are in active conversations with the other major labels and hope to offer our customers as much music as possible in the future. Our customers will never have to worry about eMusic becoming an arm of Sony Music Entertainment, as we singularly run eMusic for our members. We hope to one day carry all the music in the world, but to merchandise this music through the eMusic lens. That’s what makes us different.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

  • I canceled my long-running “Connoisseur” subscription in June. I suppose I'm a bit childish and grumpy when it comes to these things, but I was provoked when they tried to make it sound as if they were doing me a favor by increasing their prices and cutting down on my monthly downloads.

    If they hadn't tried so hard to make the new deal sound so sweet I wouldn't have canceled my subscription because their prices are still reasonable. But it turns out eMusic would've thrown me out anyway -- as of July 1, the service is "no longer available" in my country. Which is appalling, of course, and it would have been even more appalling if I was still a paying customer. But I'm not. So there, eMusic.
  • MC
    I appreciate the timeliness of this piece.

    I just had a disappointing interaction with eMusic, I responded to their latest "come back and we'll give you 50 free downloads" email... to which I found out later I was 1 day late in responding. (BTW, when you click the link to "reactivate" there's no confirmation at all - your credit card gets charged immediately).

    I wrote a nice email asking for either a) an extension granting me the 50 downloads, or b) a refund of the $12 that they charged my credit card. About 18 hours later I got an email telling me I was SOL, the fine print clearly states how right they are and how wrong I was... and so on. So now we both lose.

    Just seems like short-sited, rigid, money-grabbing tactics. They got their $12 but file it under "bad profit". That doesn't work for me. There are some good deals at Amazon.com, too.
  • laserdanger
    I did the same. Nowhere does it state you are going to be billed immediately. In my case I had gotten a new credit card so they couldn't charge me, phew.

    sneaky, sneaky Mr. Stein
  • I've been loving a few of the cheapo mp3 deals at amazon.com. I got a Merle Haggard album for 99 cents, and the new A Camp album for $1.99. But I can't get over the fact that they're mp3's.

    For any music I really, really care about, mp3's are like dirty underwear. They just don't have much retail appeal for me. The ones buying mp3s, if some day they should ever become audiophiles, will have to purchase their music collection all over again. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, saith the prophet.

    That said, I hope Sony will now be open to negotiating a similar deal to return their catalog to yourmusic.com, now that BMG music service has gone tits up. Physical product. Yum.
  • Russ
    Is there any concern that...eMusic may come to be seen as an online version of the old Columbia or RCA record clubs?

    It was already an indie-label music club, so what's the diff really?
  • claudewc
    I was an emusic subscriber back in the early oughts--when there was a $14.45/month all-you-can-download format. So, for instance, I downloaded all the Carter Family and Jimmie Rodgers it had one morning and still had time to download about fifteen discs of Coltrane that afternoon.

    So you can see why the recent pricing structure did nothing for me. $2.40 to find out how Sarabeth Tucet? How about <.$25 to try out Mogwai? $.10 for a Bill Laswell album or five?

    One thing that emusic is still doing it appears: Cutting the service down RADICALLY and then sending out we-haven't-boned-you emails to the loyal customers it just boned. Worst. Customer. Service. In. The. World.
  • laserdanger
    Blockbuster Online's customer service is pretty bad too. They do the same PR bull. They pul the rug right from underneath your feet, then try to spin it as a positive. Sometimes it is necessary to stay a viable business, just don't lie to me or tell me half truths. Like promising to honor grandfathered plans.
  • slappyfrog
    For me the deal breaker was when I was trying to find that one song I liked by a band or was trying to fill in my collection only to download the track and find out it was a live or acoustic version but with no indication that it wasn't the actual album track.

    Sad to see such a good idea go down the tubes.
  • steve
    I can't speak for the customer service as I've been w/them for 4 years and never needed it. And I'm not the happiest w/the 'fewer songs, same monthly price' trend either. To play devil's advocate though, I'm not a full music snob - I'd like to finish my Springsteen collection while I still get ultra-obscure stuff, so I was happy to add Bruce and Simon & Garfunkel to my wish lists. Bottom line, I think it's still the best site out there - tons of indie, some classics, DRM free, and a decent site. Yes, things go up over time. But if there's a better bargain out there, please tell me.
  • eMusic had pieces of the Universal library (Island, I think) for what seemed like a few weeks earlier in the decade. I also remember that they terminated the membership of my friend Neil, who rightfully thought that unlimited downloading meant unlimited downloading.
  • claudewc
    I received a "Stop doing what you paid for" warning from them when I was downloading my unlimited limit. They had some point about how they didn't really mean unlimited, you know, and really they meant unlimited (if they did at all) only for people with dial-up. So I hit 3000 downloads in one month and they went batshit and said, "Sure, you can download all you like, but we will cancel your service if you do."

    When they changed over from all-you-can-download to eensy-weensy limits, they actually shut down their forums so customers could not get hold of each other and ask WTF is going on. That is, they let their loyal customers hang.

    emusic is not charitable, is not a bunch of nice music lovers, is nobody's friends.
  • Great article, Jon. It's a shame Stein had his lawyer answer most of the questions.
  • JonCummings
    Harsh! Well, there may have been some concern about divulging proprietary information, but I was actually pleased that Stein kept things at a relatively low boilerplate. I certainly think he might be well served to borrow one of the Guggenheim Grotto's bowler hats.
  • Ted
    You asked some wonderful questions, Jon. Alas, Stein didn't bother answering them. Instead, he didn't the politician shuffle and gave you a lot of vagaries and marketing-speak. Or maybe like Jason said, he had his lawyer answer for him.
  • laserdanger
    That man has answered the same questions a million times over. None of these questions are new to him and I bet he has it all perfectly scripted. I really hope the man doesn't normally speak this way. Boring answers, never gives a decent answer regarding royalties.
  • sharxfan
    "We haven’t yet seen a rise in subscription cancellations due to the new price plans. This is something we’re monitoring very closely."

    This is the most ridiculous flat-out lie this Danny Stein has told yet. Let's recap.

    1. They doubled the price per download without making any concessions to their longest-term subscribers.

    2. They tried to bury this monumental shift in service in a blog post, not in an e-mail or site alert.

    3. They did all this amid the biggest economic recession in 50 years.

    4. They instituted an "Album Only" limitation on many of the most popular Sony tracks so that subscribers can't grab just the singles they want.

    5. They lied about Album Pricing, with many albums actually costing more credits they did before the change.

    And none of this caused an increase in cancellations? I canceled last month after being a happy subscriber for 6 years, and I know I'm not alone.
blog comments powered by Disqus