This article has been imported from chorus.fm for discussion. All of the forum rules still apply. Colin Stutz, writing at Billboard: Moving forward, in order for an album sale to be counted as part of a merchandise/album bundle, all the items in the bundle must also be available for purchase concurrently and individually on the same website. In addition, the merchandise item sold on its own will have to be priced lower than the bundle which includes both the merchandise and the album. Further, merchandise bundles can only be sold in an artist’s official direct-to-consumer web store and not via third-party sites. Expand - View Original
Speaking of the acts, I ordered two copies of The Dear Hunter's Act V on vinyl just so I could get two different bundles of cool merch to go with it. Casey was gaming the system with my two album sales!
Very interesting! I always thought it was so strange that I’d go to buy a band shirt but it would always automatically be the “bundle” with the album included even though it was the same price as what just the shirt would be.
I was going to say hopefully this means the most exclusive vinyl variants will now be dis-coupled from having to buy the most expensive bundle, but I think this is more aimed at Taylor Swift including a "free" digital download of her album with every single piece of merchandise.
Not meant to single her out, she's the only "major label artist" I happened to have shopped with recently and saw it all over her stuff the last few months. Plus she's one of the few with actual volume to where this really makes a massive difference.
I think she’s actually an example of one this is not as big of a deal for. She will move a lot of units regardless of if it is bundled or not. This “loophole” helped out a lot of “smaller” bands. Fall Out Boy comes to mind - this was basically the reason MANIA went to #1.