DarthMarino

I think Trent is being a bit silly about the sales numbers. He's acting like every single person who downloaded it is currently listening to it and enjoying it. Surely there has to be a large amount of people who got it just to check it out because it was free. It sold about the same as Saul's last record so what's the problem?

Rogue588

Yeah, I mean it's not like Saul's...oh, say, RADIOHEAD. Heck, regardless of the fact that Trent produced it, it's not even NIN.

Let's hold off on the naysaying until it's NIN that puts up those kinds of numbers..

mndtrp

The distribution was posted at Digg, which means a lot of those members would have downloaded it to check it out. That alone would have massively inflated the download numbers, as opposed to what they would be if it would have just been Saul/Reznor fans.

Personally, I didn't like the album. Therefore, I didn't pay for it. I think the model is a good one, at least for now.

CKMorpheus

I'm more curious to find out what Radiohead's numbers were for In Rainbows.

snowy

more than a million fans downloaded it; 40% paid at an average of $6 netting nearly $3 million - Wired Jan. 08

mndtrp

Another nice thing about this method, is artists retain their rights to the music. I don't know how prevalent it is any more, but I remember artists having a big problem with doing what they wanted with their music.

Chaza

I downloaded it for free, and ended up liking it enough to buy the FLAC. $5 for a lossless album is a pretty good deal.

MBoyd

He is in Dallas on March 31. I might just venture out of my lair and see the show. Anyone seen him live or going to the Dallas show?