|
Discussion: Gaga's 99c deal - Smart business move vs. cheap tactic.
Member Since: 3/15/2013
Posts: 25,504
|
Gaga's 99c deal - Smart business move vs. cheap tactic.
To this day I still can't get how can people drag Gaga for such a huge deal, that probably no one will ever get offered again.
It's like dragging Adele for her grammies.
A huge retailer offers Lady Gaga, her label and managers to sell album copies (of Born This Way) for 0.99c to promote something (I don't recall what was it) and then PAY FULL PRICE FOR EACH AND EVERY COPY THEY SOLD FOR 0.99c and you people find this a cheap tactic ?
This is like someone offering to give you shitload of money just so they can use your name/brand to promote their own product (it's actually quiet similar to franchise if you think about it, but of course done in a totally different way).
With that deal, Interscope are not only getting money, but also reaching new consumers (people that wouldn't have bought the album at full price, but decided to do so for 0.99)..
Why are people dragging her for that ? The only one I can see getting a deal as big as this one is Adele, but she'll probably not get it.
Interscope is the kind of label that won't discount a struggling album just so they sell it at full price, let alone discount a SMASH ALBUM for 99c. Why aren't people here using their brains, or are they just pretending ?
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/18/2013
Posts: 40,566
|
Some poor girl in my class couldn't afford BTW and after the 99c deal she was really happy, it was so cute to see a smile on her face singing Yoü & I in maths. Not only is it smart but it's charitable
Help the helpless today
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/25/2011
Posts: 41,661
|
Cheap tactic.
I'd rather sell 50K albums at 12.99 = 650k USD
than 300K albums (the number the Monsters say were bec of the Amazon deal) for 0.99 = 297K USD
I'd rather sell little and profit more than sell a lot at a loss.
And with that, I know those 50K albums sold were all about my music than those 300K who bought the album at an impulse.
Contrary to Gaga's statement, it's all bout the bling. If not, then she wouldn't promote it everywhere
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 31,020
|
She was desperate for that 1M+ opening which she would have never had if it hadn't been for that cheap tactic. No wonder people are dragging her. That additional 400k sold may sound nice but 0.99c will haunt her till the end.
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/15/2013
Posts: 25,504
|
Quote:
Originally posted by jomarr
Cheap tactic.
I'd rather sell 50K albums at 12.99 = 650k USD
than 300K albums (the number the Monsters say were bec of the Amazon deal) for 0.99 = 297K USD
I'd rather sell little and profit more than sell a lot at a loss.
And with that, I know those 50K albums sold were all about my music than those 300K who bought the album at an impulse.
|
Sis Selling 400k albums for 0.99c and getting paid FULL PRICE and Selling 400k albums full price is THE SAME
I can't believe people still don't understand how that deal worked
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 3,688
|
You can word it whatever way you want but deep down all the label wanted from that 0.99c deal was to get the #1 spot with "exceptionally high" first week sales. Sure it might help some people access it that couldn't have ordinarily, but the main purpose was for Lady Gaga to have an impressive sales run to her name.
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/7/2011
Posts: 7,679
|
Neither. It was just a thing that happened which forever put an asterisk on the Born This Way album. It was a stupid business move for Amazon, and there was nothing tactical about it so I couldn't describe it as a Cheap tactic.
Did Amazon ask Intercopes permission to discount it? It could be argued that it was a smart business move for her record companies earnings if they did, but it also damaged Gagas brand with it's constant "Sold 1 Million * (*Boosted by an Amazon Deal)" tagline, so may not have been a smart move in the long run.
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/8/2011
Posts: 5,392
|
People still talk about this?
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/3/2014
Posts: 6,577
|
Selling your album for 0,99$ is a cheap tactic ofcourse. You just try to sell more copies of your album. But it wasn't illegal ofcourse, anybody has the right to do it, but still...it's a cheap tactic.
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/15/2013
Posts: 25,504
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Stantasea
You can word it whatever way you want but deep down all the label wanted from that 0.99c deal was to get the #1 spot with "exceptionally high" first week sales. Sure it might help some people access it that couldn't have ordinarily, but the main purpose was for Lady Gaga to have an impressive sales run to her name.
|
The deal was offered by AMAZON, not by Interscope to AMAZON.
And BTW would've opened with 800k+ NO matter what.
BTW single opened with 420k in 2.5 days. . . she already had impressive sales behind her back. 1 year into her career, she had 2 albums with 150-200k+ sales in top 5 on BB200 .. Like how hard is it to grasp
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 4,321
|
the haters are still bothered i see
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/20/2011
Posts: 26,993
|
She paved the way for other artists to copy that same Amazon deal (Coldplay, Drake, Katy Perry, etc). Such a trendsetter
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/28/2012
Posts: 11,237
|
Quote:
Originally posted by jomarr
Cheap tactic.
I'd rather sell 50K albums at 12.99 = 650k USD
than 300K albums (the number the Monsters say were bec of the Amazon deal) for 0.99 = 297K USD
I'd rather sell little and profit more than sell a lot at a loss.
And with that, I know those 50K albums sold were all about my music than those 300K who bought the album at an impulse.
Contrary to Gaga's statement, it's all bout the bling. If not, then she wouldn't promote it everywhere
|
Girl have you even read the OP or do you fail at logic?
Amazon Cloud paid the full price for the sold albums to Interscope
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 7,974
|
Quote:
Interscope is the kind of label that won't discount a struggling album just so they sell it at full price, let alone discount a SMASH ALBUM for 99c.
|
It wasn't even out for a week when it was discounted, to call it a SMASH ALBUM
In my view, it did look cheap. It looked like, despite whatever the actual reason might have been, she was trying to sell 1m+ a week at whatever cost. And she did it, but that astericks will always hang over her record
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/15/2013
Posts: 25,504
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Benjamin
Neither. It was just a thing that happened which forever put an asterisk on the Born This Way album. It was a stupid business move for Amazon, and there was nothing tactical about it so I couldn't describe it as a Cheap tactic.
Did Amazon ask Intercopes permission to discount it? It could be argued that it was a smart business move for her record companies earnings if they did, but it also damaged Gagas brand with it's constant "Sold 1 Million * (*Boosted by an Amazon Deal)" tagline, so may not have been a smart move in the long run.
|
No one outside the stan world, cares about that tho. It didn't damage her brand, not even in the slightest She just reached more consumers and erned more money. I don't see anything dragable about that
If I was a CEO at Interscope, I would've said YES.. unless I was retarded or hated my company.
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 6,504
|
Back when Music Not The Bling is not yet the thing
--
I'd rather have or do what Gaga or her team does tho, at least I have 1M copies sold first week under my belt
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/24/2012
Posts: 6,501
|
Quote:
Originally posted by jomarr
Cheap tactic.
I'd rather sell little and profit more than sell a lot at a loss.
|
I'd rather spread the message that Born This Way embodied for free
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/1/2012
Posts: 15,843
|
still talking about things happened 3 years ago
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/15/2013
Posts: 25,504
|
Quote:
Originally posted by lousaysthings
It wasn't even out for a week when it was discounted, to call it a SMASH ALBUM
In my view, it did look cheap. It looked like, despite whatever the actual reason might have been, she was trying to sell 1m+ a week at whatever cost. And she did it, but that astericks will always hang over her record
|
BTW sold 300k+ in its first day. How is that not a smash album ? It was the most anticipated album of the last decade.
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/25/2011
Posts: 41,661
|
My second statement still stands.
People bought it because it was cheap not because it was worth a listen.
Who wouldn't buy an album at 99 cents? No wait, I didn't.
|
|
|
|
|