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.
New Model, Old Model or best of both? 17 Years, 6 Months ago
Whilst flicking around the web earlier I read that Leona Lewis has gone to number 1 in New Zealand this week with "Bleeding Love", hitting the summit after just three weeks (which is apparently obscenely quick over there, the Kiwis not having a penchant for the premature ejaculation we have with singles).
Given this is off the back of not a single minute of promotion for the single in New Zealand, from an artist who has never released anything before there, and has never appeared on TV over there (the X-Factor has only ever be shown in the UK and Ireland due to the Idol/X-Factor pre-court agreement) is it:
a) a proof of the Old Model: great song sung brilliantly will always sell as long as the music company is halfway competent in its organisation of copies for radio and the supply chain?
b) a proof of the New Model: word of mouth via MySpace, YouTube and Facebook generates an unstoppable buzz?
c) the reality nettle that all music companies and artists have to grasp - to be successful now you need both to be competent in both areas and neither should be neglected?
Re:New Model, Old Model or best of both? 17 Years, 5 Months ago
Whilst supping a coffee with Richard Griffiths the others day (Modest Management looks after all the reality contest entrants) he told me that all the countries which released the Paul Potts album the moment You Tube views exploded, sold millions.
The ones that waited for the old model bricks to be in place had huge problems.
Re:New Model, Old Model or best of both? 17 Years, 5 Months ago
My research has revealed to me how important Youtube and other video sites are to marketing any product today.
The irony is that the internet space is morphing into a super TV station. Add to that the proliferation of digital channels and that means only one thing.
Direct sales. Youtube linked to iTunes = Sales.
Or Youtube linked to your own site = Lots of money.
It is overwhelming all this information but the Paul Potts example hit the nail on the head. They laughed at Guy Hands when he said EMI marketing should consist of just Myspace and Youtube.
But when the cost of gaining 300,000 eyeballs on Youtube is $0 v Advertising to get that many impressions cost $1000+ I bet no one is laughing now.