Church of the Customer Blog
« “Idol” audience size vs. sales | Main | Buzz marketing does not a referral get »
January 29, 2007
“Idol” audience size vs. sales
Audience growth doesn't necessarily mean sales growth.
That's one lesson we could take from the perpetual growth machine that is "American Idol," as the above chart from Forbes illustrates.
As the audience for Idol has grown, as has the number of votes cast for its contestants, album sales of winning performers have not kept pace. First-season winner Kelly Clarkson is still the show's reigning sales champ. If we divide the number of albums she's sold against total number of Idol viewers for season one and call it a conversion ratio, Clarkson scored an impressive 65%.
The disparity between Idol's viewership and albums sold is most pronounced in year three. That year, Idol's viewership increased 16% from the previous year, and the number of votes cast increased 22%. Yet season three winner Fantasia Barrino sold 69% fewer albums than previous winner Ruben Studdard. Barrino's conversion ratio was a paltry 9%.
Compare year one to year five and the numbers are even more dramatic: 12.7 million viewers in year one vs. 30.6 million in year five. That's a 141% increase. But look at album sales: year five winner Taylor Hicks was no match for the petite yet powerfully voiced Clarkson: His album sales were four times less than Clarkson's. Hicks' conversion ratio? He's in the basement at 7%.
That's not to say Soul Man Hicks and the other Idol winners haven't done well. Selling one million of anything is remarkable, much less two or five million. Idol remains a potent hitmaker for aspiring amateurs. No other program comes close to popularizing a pro-am approach.
But what's at the root of this sales disparity? Why are Idol's winners selling fewer albums even though more people are watching the show? Was it because Clarkson was the very first winner, making her the beneficiary of outsized attention and curiosity and giving credence to the belief that being first gives you the best advantage for having the biggest hit?
Or is it because no one has matched her talent or appeal?
Or is it that Idol has squandered its musical credibility and become more of a circus act, a la "The Apprentice?"
Or does it have something to do with behind-the-scenes fulminations about the handcuff agreements each Idol entrant must sign with show creator Simon Fuller and his production
company? Instead of taking 15% as most managers do, Forbes says Fuller takes a 50% cut of all sales. Several past winners have subsequently fired Fuller's management group.
If you're an Idol fan, tell us what you think.
Update: More sales disappointment (in the grand scheme of big numbers) for Idol winner Taylor Hicks.
Other blogs that reference “Idol” audience size vs. sales:
» Safety in numbers from thinks
How solid are your math skills? How about statistics? Increasingly, marketers do their best work, not with creative and copy, but with spreadsheets and segments. Mike Moran - who you should read if youre not already - provides the case of E-... [Read More]
I think it's a classic first to market.
When something is new we're curious enough to participate. When something is mature we morph into spectators & experts.
Or maybe we learnt our lesson after buying the first Idol winner Album?
The thing to remember with the chart here is the asterisk: This is album sales to date. Clarkson has had four more years to sell albums than Hicks has.
A better metric would be first year sales of individual albums, rather than cumulative sales.
Since the sales are a total to date you have overlooked a relevant fact--sales per year. Since a new season is about to start Clarkson has had 5 years worth of sales and Hicks only one. On a per year basis Underwood has 2.80 million per year, Hicks 2.30/yr., Studdard 1.75/yr., Clarkson 1.66/yr., and Barrino 0.73/yr. So while Barrino may be a disappointment, the sales figures per year for the others nearly match the growth in viewer participation.
I think it's interesting that the number of votes per viewer has gone from about 10-to-1 to about 20-to-1. I wonder what that means.
Most albums typically have a short lifespan. Like movies, sales of albums typically decay rapidly after weeks, not years.
Research by Song Hui Chon and Jonathan Berger at Stanford and Malcolm Slaney at Yahoo found that, at least for jazz albums, sales have a median lifespan of about 10 weeks. Here's a link to their paper (PDF):
For R&B and rap, there's some evidence that album sales decay dramatically. Sales of Jay Z's new album dropped more than 80% after its first week. The standard drop-off rate for rap after the first week is usually about 70%.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070106/music_nm/rb_dc_1
I think the evidence indicates that album sales are very temporal. The sales lifespan is short -- weeks, maybe a few months. Granted, Idol is a marketing machine, but I would bet money that Taylor Hicks won't come close:
http://blogs.usatoday.com/idolchatter/2007/01/taylors_prematu.html
Of course, there's always exceptions, like Pink Floyd's "Dark Side of the Moon" and just about anything from the Beatles. But they of course are the exceptions.
Ben, you might be overlooking the obvious here.
How many albums has Kelly Clarkson released?
But the real point, IMHO, is one of genre. Clarkson's bubble-pop is trending more toward a contemporary adult remix of the gyno-angst reminiscent of Alanis and Tori. Translation? Wide audience, lotsa crossover.
Ruben? Pigeonholed.
Fantasia? Pigeonholed and mismarketed.
Carrie? Pigeonholed.
Hicks? Pigeonholed by the weak release, still trying to recover.
Of the five winners, Kelly hits the broadest market with the most product over the longest period of time. Winning Grammies tends to boost sales too.
"Musical credibility"?!?!?!?
Record sales may be down, but doesn't the company profit handsomely from the votes cast by text message?
Another question is how do these album sales numbers reflect downloads? Downloading music is dramatcially bigger now than it was during the first season.
Just some thoughts. Interesting post.
Was Idol EVER dedicated to fostering the best musical talents? If it was, there would be no audience participation: large, large audiences can be fickle and herd-like at times.
Maybe we're looking at the wrong relationship. The ratio of real interest to Fuller and the other companies involved is viewers/ad prices.
They're in the marketing business, and albums offer little opportunity for direct sponsorship. In the music industry, residuals for airplay largely go to the composer, not the producer.
The outrageous cut that Fuller & Co. take for managing talent is just another way to take a final squeeze from the lemon.
Ike is right (as he usually is!) ... it's the genre that makes the difference.
Of all the Idol winners, Kelly Clarkson is the artist most firmly planted in the "sweet spot" of rock and pop.
To me, the remarkable sales figure is Carrie Underwood's.
You're also discounting a lot of sales of more recent competitors, via what I think is AI's segmentation strategy - in recent seasons it has been the case that the top 2 or 3 'Idols' go on to sell well, but in very different markets. Chris Daughtry, #3 last season, has had the top-selling Billboard Album this year.
As a marketing organization, Idol seems to be segmenting and targeting more effectively. Carrie Underwood is the best example in Country, but Ruben Studdard sells well in R&B, Daughtry in rock, McPhee doing Broadway-type numbers etc. Expect a top 3 Idol this year in the Latino/Hispanic market.
"Or is it because no one has matched her talent or appeal?"
Not only has she not been matched on American Idol, but she is also unmatched in mainstream music in general. Kelly is the best artist out there at the moment and I believe that will continue for many years.
And for the record... I do not consider myself an "Idol Fan," but I do live in the city that has completely owned the competition since the 2nd season (Birmingham).
You can't help but absorb the kibitzing in the local news and the watercooler talk.
Credit the local Fox affiliate, which is owned by the network, posts the strongest news ratings for a Fox affiliate, and does more news per week than any other Fox affiliate. This time of year, they set the agenda, and once that gets rolling the juggernaut doesn't stop.
You want "Customer Evangelists?" I suggest you start rummaging through closets in metro Birmingham, and start counting up the people who spent their hard-earned money on "205", "Bice Squad", or "Soul Patrol" shirts. (It would make for one hell of a case study.)
I'm not much of an Idol fan either. It blurs the distinctions between advertising and content far too much for my tastes.
It is, however, a curious study on the effects of the cultural conversation.
Behind-the-scenes wrangling between Simon's company, though it may be way out of line, wouldn't have an effect on what customers out here buy. I see a drop in talent as having the most direct effect on sales and the show's evolution to more of a circus side show hasn't helped musical credibility. But I'm thinking when it comes to music, people buy exactly what they like and other factors take a back seat.
This chart provides compelling proof that "it's better to be first than it is to be better". Ultimately time will tell how American Idol will write a chapter in music history. My guess is that, over time, Kelly Clarkson and Carrie Underwood will continue to reign as the two most successful Idol winners. Clarkson because she was the first winner and she has gained and sustained critical acclaim and innovation over time. Underwood will be remembered because she gained praise and acclaim as well within the country music genre. Carrie Underwood is the first legit country music star to come out of Idol. She's first in a new category that just happens to be country music.
In reality, AI is demonstrating exactly what Al Ries and Jack Trout wrote about in their book, The 22 Immutable Laws of Marketing.
The question now is: will any of the new Idol winners offer something so incredibly refreshing or innovative that will appeal to mainstream America? Time will tell.
Iain hit the nail on the head.
Compare what the top three have sold in the last couple of years to what the top three sold in year one and two.
Or look at the success of Jennifer Hudson.
