Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: Why there is no new model...
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
DJKZ |
Sensible response DJ. I would add that the new model is about building relationships
with fans (now called friends). It is a system that sort of works with churches and even porn.
Haha churches and porn in one sentence. The strategy is long term perhaps 5 years in mind and
would require a decent amount of investment perhaps funded by VC.
The primary goal is to build a genuine relationship with fans which can then be monetised.
Once fans exist then campaigns to "smash and grab" the charts should be employed.
Youtube/PR/Ads should be used to build the audience but not with saturation marketing.
If an investor invests $150,000 the aim is to return a profit and then some in 5 years.
A fantastic response would be to make $1m in that term.
This can only work with a 360 deal or with management and investment can come from fans or from
traditional Venture Capitalists.
Speaking of which, what do you think of www.mymajorcompany.co.uk/
Very interesting I think. |
|
DJones |
For me, the "new" model is NOT about the tools used (YouTube vs. MTV etc.) but about the goal:
Old model (short term thinking, maximising first week sales, heavy spending on marketing): throwing sh*t against a wall, hoping something will stick - 1 hit pays for 9 flops.
New model (long term thinking, not charts orientated, no need for saturation marketing): each release should make (at least a little bit of) money. |
|
Jaded and Bored |
I hear you JK but the problem is that people don't know how online works and as such
are thinking in an archaic way. The internet is not meant to be a vehicle for sales until
you have formed a relationship with your fans. Dare I say porn stars get the internet, music people don't.
There is as much porn online as there is music, and there is no reason for anyone to pay for it but people
do and they pay well for it.
There are 4 ways to turn your content into dollars online:
1. Monetise the curious with ads.
2. Interact with your fans in a subscription based model
3. Endorse products people cannot pirate and need. The more expensive the better.
4. Sell your CD/DVD/Download as normal.
We should stop trying to sell music online and in its place use the internet to make dollars that can be
used as a leverage for radio/tv/mags which have a better CTS ratio.
Mind you JK you seem to have changed your mind about the internet though but good points all round.
We need a debate on this. |
|
JK2006 |
And my reply to you J&B was meant to say - those basic ones are not enough on their own but neither are a larger collection. The problem is - not reaching millions but persuading millions that they want something enough to actually pay for it. And these days music is so available free that it is rarely enough on its own to attract enough sales to avalanche. |
|
Jaded and Bored |
Now I am convinced that people really do NOT read messageboards.
I was not arguing against the old model I was merely arguing about all the online
activities listed in the video. But seeing that you guys really want to MISS the point
I will actually address your replies.
JKCB said: "Er, you're forgetting needing the funds to promote what you do. It's more important than ever. You're being far too naive".
Like any sort of business you need the capital to promote your wares. Nothing new there. Now are you
trying to tell me that the only way you can raise money is by signing up to all the sites in the video ? Or signing
with a major ? On the other site someone mentioned typical major label deals at the bottom end. The top end deals usually
come once in a year and to only ONE person. So across the majors that would be probably 4 to eight acts a year getting major
money behind them. Your alternative ? Play the lotto or the pools. One person a week wins a million plus. So that makes you
more likely to win the lottery than to get a major label deal with telephone figure advances and a promo budget to match.
More typically you will be spending in the region of 2000 quid to work a record. So with 3 singles that makes it 6 grand and
without a hit with the 3 singles you better not be making an album. If you invested 6 grand online you can make your money back.
Sure you may not be on MTV but hey what's more important ?
JK wrote: Message
JK2006 No J&B, we have seen that online exposure does not break artistes or tracks - even hit ones. They need more; online provokes curiosity, not sales. And yes, big money backing helps, but not much and it's still only the old model.
The fundamental flaw with this argument is the goalpost shifting that you have written into it. Online can work on its own but
to really make it online (on its own) you need to be outside of the chart system and as a result you won't be on the radar for many.
However, there is no such separation of state between the online and the offline world so that renders your argument useless.
A savvy person will use online and offline in tandem and make it work for them.
But that was NOT the point of my post. It was merely to point out that ONLINE you DON'T need all the sites in the world and the
ones I mentioned are the only ones you need, everything else is optional. |
|
|
|
