Trent Reznor Does Not Want You To Pay A Lot For This CD

May 14th, 2007 // 10 Comments

trent-reznor.jpgWe’re pretty sure that Trent Reznor will be parting ways with the entire major-label structure the millisecond his contract says he can. The latest piece of evidence pointing to this theory comes from his blog:

As the climate grows more and more desperate for record labels, their answer to their mostly self-inflicted wounds seems to be to screw the consumer over even more. A couple of examples that quickly come to mind:

* The ABSURD retail pricing of Year Zero in Australia. Shame on you, UMG. Year Zero is selling for $34.99 Australian dollars ($29.10 US). No wonder people steal music. Avril Lavigne’s record in the same store was $21.99 ($18.21 US).
By the way, when I asked a label rep about this his response was: “It’s because we know you have a real core audience that will pay whatever it costs when you put something out – you know, true fans. It’s the pop stuff we have to discount to get people to buy.”
So… I guess as a reward for being a “true fan” you get ripped off.

* The dreaded EURO Maxi-single. Nothing but a consumer rip-off that I’ve been talked into my whole career. No more.
The point is, I am trying my best to make sure the music and items NIN puts in the marketplace have value, substance and are worth you considering purchasing. I am not allowing Capital G to be repackaged into several configurations that result in you getting ripped off.

We’re guessing that Trent’s run-ins with his label have resulted in this “consumer advocate” side of him coming out even more fiercely. Perhaps once he breaks free from Interscope, he can turn into the David Horowitz of the music world, taking an army of crusaders to the racks in order to fight the music industry’s worst tendencies.

Updates From Trent [nin.com]

  1. ghostyhead

    @kiteless: He DID sign with a smaller indie: The first NIN album was on TVT, who were paid a shitload of money to release Trent from his deal so that Interscope could pimp him to the masses.

    Seller’s remorse, Mr. Reznor?

  2. Ed Corcoran

    No Euro Maxi-Singles? Does that mean there won’t be a bunch of terrible remixes by buzz artists of 2 years ago for me to download on Soulseek and laugh at? Oh noes.

  3. chrisb

    Every NIN release I’ve bought since Broken has come in fucked-up, foldable, cardboard packaging with slide-out liner notes… all of which I have no doubt costs more than standard plastic jewel cases. There’s your unnecessary price increase, Trent.

  4. punkybunky

    I thought any extra packaging costs came out of the artist’s profits, anyway. (?) Either way, Year Zero was cheaper than Lavigne’s CD almost everywhere I saw them (in the US), so it’s probably safe to say it’s not the packaging’s fault in the case of Australia.

  5. RedMetal

    I paid $9.98 for Year Zero at Best Buy the week it came out after streaming it about four or five times the week before. (The disc my friend copied fron the internets – not so good. Perhaps the tubes were misaligned.) The heat sensitive coating on the CD – way cool. The price Aussies pay for music – not cool, and on top of the drought and the coming price increase on wine there . . . time to pull up the stakes in the ol’ former penal colony. But didn’t they get the last U2 CD a week before we did here in the World’s Last Superpower?

  6. Falconfire

    @chrisb: Considering that a CD actually costs about 69 cents even factoring in production costs and advertising… pretty sure Interscope can eat it.

Leave A Comment