King of Hits.co.uk - Tipsheet Messageboard

IMPORTANT NOTE:
You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.

Home

Forums

	Messageboards	Categories Show latest posts

Welcome, Guest
Please Login or Register. Lost Password?

Messageboards

Tipsheet

Tipsheet Messageboard

Post a new message in "Tipsheet Messageboard"

Name:

Subject:

Boardcode:

Message:
(+) / (-)

Emoticons





More Smilies

[b]JK2006 wrote:[/b]
[quote]I admire KZ's ability to think out of the box, agree with some of his ideas but not all.

I do believe we have foolishly burned our bridges on the old model; the majority do (wrongly) think music is for free, so let's accept that and move on.

Whilst money can still be made from purchases (the majority of our income comes from deals globally for back catalogue CD's and from decent five figure monthly cheques for download sales), we need to construct a totally new model which involves PARTNERSHIP.

Artistes, producers, writers are going to have to accept giving away a chunk of the BRAND in return for work on finding, polishing, exposing, distributing, selling, managing, building, developing and making the most of the BRAND.

That goes from one off hits and TV commercials and instant topical properties to long term careers.

Yes, it IS the 360 model so sneered at by the old model managers and the old model label bosses.

But it has to be constructed intelligently and with involvement of all parties.

And I think it will apply to more than just music. Films, books, TV, radio - all types of entertainment.[/quote]

Enter code here

Topic History of: Moving on from Midem, QTrax, McGuinness and the NEW MODEL
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)

Author	Message
Agnes	Been going over this at gearslutz www.gearslutz.com/board/music-studio-bus...dem-speech-full.html
zooloo	I certainly agree that everyone should work to their strengths, do their job and do it well. What comes to mind is a broker, someone who farms out the various aspects to independent specialists. The monolithic "do it all" type of business has disappeared in many areas, especially since the 1980s, what makes the Majors an exception? All the aspects of the industry can be sub-contracted to specialists and costs reduced/contained because this creates competition. Manufacturing industry adopted a Just-In-Time ethos which works well for them - although I may be comparing apples with oranges I hope the principle is relevant. I feel the monolithic Major is too big and slow to survive. The New Model isn't about changing the contracts offered it's changing who/what offers those contracts. To somewhat over-simplify it, who needs the Majors anymore, what do they offer than cannot be found elsewhere?
JK2006	Ah the reason I disagree Zoo is that the 360 model accepts there are certain vital talents needed which are NOT simply the obvious musically creative ones. You need someone to make the most - financially and promotionally - of the music. You need someone with the business ability to work the brand without exhausting it; stretch it without cheapening it; safeguard it whilst enlarging it. And those a jobs that are as essential in the new world as they were in the old. Whether it's downloads or vinyl, huge venues or little clubs, TV ads or online messages... the creative team needs to concentrate on the art, the business team has equally important but different purposes. Any band or star or writer or singer who thinks he or she or they can do it all themselves is making a big mistake - unless that is the limited way they want to go. Trying to expose and market your music drains the creative process. Look at the awful collapse of the Prince brand. Great, great music when others were doing the spade work; shit and crap since he stopped being a "slave" (and became a slave to his own ego - an appalling master).
zooloo	Cheers JK a very interesting point. Two things come to mind, if MADAMMA becomes MEDEMME it'd be a costly legal argument about "passing off". IRC some years a go somebody who had been a/the Ronald McDonald turned his coat and became involved in an anti-McCampaign. The US courts decided he had a right to portray himself as Ronald as he'd established the role... or something like that. It's going to fun to watch the first 360&deg; battle in a few years time. With a caveat that I'm not a lawyer it seems to me the 360&deg; thing is a clumsy attempt to keep things "as they are" and postponing the necessary fundamental changes.
JK2006	360 and the law Zoo... My personal feeling is that it has to be a BRAND not a PERSON to be legal. So, if Eva Bloggs is "hired" as singer and actor to be MADAMMA and gets 25% of ALL income from the brand including gigs, sponsorship etc and the producer and music supremo gets another 25%, the manager and all business organiser a further 25% and the fourth member of the partnership the last 25%. EVA is allowed to go solo or take other jobs but she is exclusive as MADAMMA and cannot use that tag in any other capacity. She is therefore free to become EVA if she feels she can (after a few years) but MADAMMA and all back catalogue etc belongs to the partnership and she continues to get 25%. And ANOTHER (younger) person can be employed to fill the role if needed. That would be legal, I believe, and MADAMMA would be a fool to become Eva Bloggs, giving up the MADAMMA oersona. Would Miss Ciccone be worth it on her own today?