nm

I agree with your thoughts on TERRITORY and PUBLISHING.

A record label / producer / publishers / artist should own - or participate on the income from - as many rights as possible. But it isn

Some really good points here DJ.

I agree; there's nothing wrong with an artiste whose peak may be a global sale of 5000 and - if that can be made to at least break even - there is every room for that (it will probably be the limited goal I expect for my own future music).

Exposure/Press... if it's good it warrants playing and if nobody is playing it; start your own station.
No Tomorrow by Orson would have gotten great airplay on Radio King when nobody else would touch it.

Enough of those and everybody listens to you. Just don't ruin it by playing your own awful tracks - if they are awful!

Hi JK,

Good points regarding the new music business model. I agree 100% with your points and want to respond to the points one by one if i may.

1) HITS. Not easy to find (I only reckon 1% of all tips are actual hits).......

This will inject some excitement into an artist's career and strategy. You aim to release a song every 2 or 3 months and that must include a monster. If you don't get an original, then go and cover one. Past hits are crying out to be covered and given a new spin. Artistes must aim to write a hit by any means necessary which initially might be about covers with an original B side until you can find your own. Incidently by recording many past hits you will soon find it easier to write hits of your own.

2) SALES. Two areas - downloads and physicals.


Downloads for singles and physicals for albums/Coffee table book or magazine. Physicals must be collectibles perhaps a vinyl album complete with gatefold sleeve and magazine which will be bought and kept as collectible with a CDR bundle inside so you can play it on your computer. This can be manufactured on demand as you can make vinyl albums in small quantities. Sell them through Amazon advantage or direct from your own website. The key thing here is it is for die hard fans so the value add is important. I think the album shouldnt change and should incorporate the best of.. concept.

We need a global marketplace for downloads similar to Ebay or Gemm (www.gemm.com). Ebay allows you to sell downloads i think. However maybe Itunes will see the possibility and set up an Amazon style marketplace.

3) THE CHARTS. Except they are NOT key any more.
The charts are a waste of time and should be scrapped. There is far too much music out there and the PR of the charts is not a good measure of success. I think we should have a league table based on cumulative sales or perhaps the yardstick should revolve around gold, silver and platinum discs etc.

4) EXPOSURE. Which brings me to my next point; if the existing radio stations.

In this internet age, press is more important than radio and you should only look at Lily Allen for a good example of how this can work. Radio should now let Djs choose the music, after all thats what they are there for. In this digital age, interactive radio that can select music by profile is the way forward. Check out www.Last.Fm, www.Mercora.com and others like them. Listen to the myhotmusic playlist for example of how radio will soon evolve. JK people like you should set up similar shows which will grow in popularity. With DAB radio this can now go offline and on the airwaves.

See Manutd.com and watch MUTV for how to create your own tv station. Create your own news paper or blog more like it and publish news about your artists and your favourite artists.

Territory is definitely worldwide and as for rights
"get up stand up, stand up for your rights" and don't give them away. Share them with your other co-conspirators but never sell them.

Best and Most up-to-date assessment I've read in ages.
Very good thread guys.
One wonders why the majors haven't thought this through too.
Perhaps they have and fear the consequences.

Gentlemen, gentlemen.

We'll leaving an important element out of the equation: the COST of marketing/promotion, the COST of learning and then running a small podcast/radio station, the COST of becoming a mini one-man or band-enterprise. This is on top of being your own agent, publisher and guitar technician, presumably.

Everything is indeed possible. But I can see artists with reasonable incomes struggling when it comes to finding the extra time to do all that's needed to keep up with the shiny new opportunities.

The result is that they'll end up going through middlemen like The Orchard to get comprehensive digital distribution and marketing companies to get the word out there.

Firstly I must say that this is a very good time for the one person DIY operation.

Producing the tracks, running the label and carrying out the business demands.

I still maintain that being a content partner with
iTunes and other hit online stores is vital because traffic comes to these sites in the truck load all over the world.

The hardest thing in the world is to get traffic to
a web site. Smokey Tims Music Site might get half a dozen hits a day whereas iTunes might get 50 million a day. There's a big difference - that's why it makes sense to piggy back onto a winner.

Second - Covers are cash to a label - people do song searches on iTunes for their favorite songs and stumble onto new versions of previous hits and many will take a punt and buy one if they like it
after auditioning it with the free 30 second
sample play.

As for physical product - CD's / Vinyl I really suggest they be forgotton because it changes
some very real logistics of your label.

If you want to get into manufacturing and selling
CD's and Vinyl then you will have to spend chunky amounts of time and money on the following:

1. artwork for CD/vinyl cover and label
2. manufacturing CD's and vinyl
3. warehousing the stock
4. securing a distributor who will actually try
and shift your product for a nominal fee.
5. Convince high street retailers to stock your product when they would probably much rather have another dozen Britney or Westlife CDs.
6. Hope that the retailers will account back to the distributors and hope that the distributors will eventually account back to you.
7. Remember all stock to the record shops is on a sale-or-return basis.
8. Distributors will usually only carry stock if you
present them with such a compelling business plan and promotional spend itinerary.
9. The retailers will also want proof that this is a sure fire seller before they will order copies from the distributor.
10. Hope like mad that Radio and TV will get behind your release.
11. Try to avoid going broke in the meantime because even if it does sell a few it will probably take 6-9 months to see any financial return on your records.

I don't mean to be a wet blanket about the physical
music market - but I've been there and have lost enough money and had enough headaches with it to know that it's an ugly can of worms and the majors have it all sewn-up anyway.

Most retailers will not carry independent stock
anyway - no matter how hard you try to convince them.

As for the supermarkets .. that's even worse.

Digital distribution is the only way
in my books unless of course you have
a way-in to the big major major labels.

There's not that many left -

Universal
Sony-BMG
EMI-Virgin
Warner

Of course you could just sell your CD's via mail-order through your website.

(Yes I've done that too !!!)


Regards,

David

Ah David; some very good points but I would suggest - it all depends on the product.
For example; I persuaded Doug Morris to take Tubthumping by Chumbawamba.
It was a superb single but a crap album.
So he broke the single and deleted it when it was so big US radio had to play it (or lose listeners).
Retail then HAD to stock and sell the album - fans could not buy it any other way.
Result: a one hit wonder became a 6 million album seller.
If you have a huge hit, I'll bet supermarkets WILL carry it (from YOU if nobody else has it) and will buy copies NOT on SOR (if there is no alternative).
If the product is right and you know how to expose and promote it, everything is possible.
Especially these days.

Hi Jonathan,

What you achieved is remarkable with that track
("Who Let The Dogs Out"). Mind you, in fairness
you had a number of aces up your sleeve - first
one is that you are on record for being
a serial hit maker and had the scores on the board
to prove it. So there was plenty of influence
to be had on your side which is a good thing.

Also you had cut a version of this track already
which caught the attention of some high-end key players. And the final ace was having the right contacts - you knew where to channel the track
so that it's end realisation could manifest -
which of course it did.

Not all of us are blessed with such wonderful
and fantastic attributes.

In regard to getting product into supermarkets
and high street retailers I know Michael Stock
had an awlful time when he was trying to run his
label (Love This) everything seemed to work against
him and in it's later years 97/97 it was problem
after problem with retailers,the BPI, TOTP and
airplay.

Many retailers just wouldn't carry the labels stock
and getting airplay was fraught with difficulties.

Now it's even more difficult because the players
in the physical CD market have merged into just a handful.

Same goes for the high street retailers - their shelf space for recorded music has shrunk with more emphasis on DVD's and other consumerables.

And because of the shrinking shelf space devoted
to recorded (audio) music, the shelf space now is
regarded as premium real estate for only the
rich end of town (the majors).

It's a tough racket now .. I agree with your
premiss however that "if the quality is there and
the product is right" that anything can be achieved.

But you sure need a healthy dollip of luck on
your side and a damn good set of "golden ears"

Regards,

David

david wrote:
Hi Jonathan,

What you achieved is remarkable with that track
("Who Let The Dogs Out"). Mind you, in fairness
you had a number of aces up your sleeve

(snip, snip)

But you sure need a healthy dollip of luck on
your side and a damn good set of "golden ears"

Regards,

David
Good points all, and I think they should be taken on board when considering a "new" business model. Don't take this badly, JK, but it certainly is easier for someone like you than a band/small label from the sticks. You know who to ring at the right time. That person will know your name and most likely take the call. That makes a huge difference. Many moons ago, I did some research on the so-called "captains of industry" - the self-made millionaires of the Victorian era. Strangely enough, they all had one thing in common. Even if they were miner's sons etc, they all had access to an amount of capital at an important stage in their careers. The self-made part didn't actually involve bulding an empire with two and sixpence. Subsequently, they had brighter ideas, more commitment and all the rest.

The Internet regenerated this idea of "with a bit of hard graft and a few bright ideas you can also be a millionaire". Just look at Mr Napster or the obscene amounts of money thrown around eMusic and Liquid Audio back in the day. They omit to mention luck, access to capital and access to the right skills to bring the whole thing forward.

In the movie world, "Blair Witch Project" is often mentioned in the same way. What they don't tell people is that when the film actually got some interest, it cost a small fortune in post-production and then went through exactly the same marketing route as Harry Potter.

All this to say what, exactly? That yes, the tools are there. But they still require lots of hard work, commitment and luck to make them work (and a fat piggy bank is more than helpful).

David,

Good question. I would leave physical product to the internet and there is a system you can use that will enable retailers to stock it should they wish to do so.

Remember physical product is for fans as the digital version will exist. I do agree to keep your products in Itunes etc but as a backup have a DIY solution using www.mediapal.com or www.artists-first.net or even www.ebay.com.

With physical products, if you go the vinyl/CD/Mag route then you only manufacture the barest minimum and ship them to Amazon or even CDbaby (CDs only of course). You can warehouse them yourself or indeed find a distributor to carry it. Dont forget you would have already had a digital hit with it and so negotiating with distributors etc will be easier.

To address Michael's points let me say you are right to bring up the question of costs but as far as i'm concerned the costs of marketing can be controlled especially when you have a hit on your hands.

Let me suggest the following:

Word of mouth marketing is your friend and you should read up on this. There are a few books out there in Netland that explain the process. For example "Marketing without Advertising" which if you google it you will find out who wrote it.

The artist has to look at the challenges they are facing and build the infrastructure in a way that you can plug in the staff easily. You do not need to have to hire 'experts' but professionals who can do a job. Use a simple growth strategy and let things happen. I would suggest that one can hire 'virtual assistants' on an hourly basis to do some of the dirty work such as outbound sales, follow up etc. Oh by the way i consider everything you do as per marketing as sales and adopting that approach is crucial.

Most important of all is that each artist must approach this as a small business and the challenges involved affects all small businesses. Also dont forget this is not a model you can adopt if you want, it is a model you HAVE to adopt to survive. What are the alternatives ?

david wrote:The hardest thing in the world is to get traffic to a web site. Smokey Tims Music Site might get half a dozen hits a day whereas iTunes might get 50 million a day. There's a big difference - that's why it makes sense to piggy back onto a winner.[/quote]

Very interesting discussion. I have often ranted on the subject myself. This point is worth pulling out. Let me ramble a bit...

The music industry has got very focussed on one product over the last 100 years, accelerating over the last 50. Many people now define the music industry by audio recordings above all else. Radio, TV and now the Internet has been fashioned around them. Certainly there's video but the main promotion tool (chart radio) and the ability to keep prices and margins up is slipping away with the CD.

(It's interesting that the big grossing acts - Stones, Madonna, etc. - now earn on touring, after a long period where it was a given that tours lost money.)

Now "the hardest thing in the world is to get traffic to a web site" I think, applies to a world where the acts are all very similar and all based on records. Google can't sort them out, the review sites can only cover so many indie releases... so it's true. (I'd also suggest that your tracks are probably no more visible on iTunes. Perhaps more people who want to buy new music browse CD Baby, but that's a different point.) But acts never used to be just about the audio side of things, let alone just the recordings.

A live band from the 1920/30s would have almost exactly the same gripe. "When we hit town we can't get into the big venues. It's all sown up, we can't get the traffic." I think we'll very soon see the back of the novelty value of "web acts"... future Arctic Monkeys, Sandi Thoms, etc. will have to rely on other attributes.

So, your web site won't get you any visibility in itself but I'd argue we need to get away from the mindset that puts records up for sale and looks for shop windows. It doesn't help that the media sees DIY as a "record-based" phenomenon (one of the most common questions I get asked is 'can I get signed from a demo' - it's the same mindset). If the act is fantastic in any way, or if the content has anything remarkable the web site will be found, and it's the best vehicle for managing communication. But it doesn't get you off square one... and neither does getting on iTunes (or CD Baby).

I say 'content' and deliberately not 'recordings'. It's a multi-media world. Hit songs existed before records and even before you could sell a virtual copy in the sheet music or the piano roll. The Internet takes (or in my guess WILL take) the focus off the audio recordings. There are certainly still audio applications and licensing, but fans are no longer limited to their tranny and their Dansette.

One effect of this must be that future charts retreat from a format focus and return to the songs. And I'd suggest that real differences between acts will also be crucial. In the Sixties (sorry!) Andrew Oldham knew that the Stones had to be (perceived as) anti-Beatles... in recent decades just look at the clone dynasties (... U2, Radiohead, Coldplay...) while the individual fan is now open to a torrent of different ideas from many different sources. (I'm convinced that the media focus on micro-genres, while it has found niche markets, has alienated the more eclectic public at large.)

I'm not sure if that moves us on anywhere but it's the angle that stands out for me.

It is the midset that's wrong.
As long as we all allow ourselves to use the old model as parameters, we will get nowhere.
Only when we realise it has all changed and sometimes success in the new music biz doesn't include music (a difficult concept) can we begin to construct really valid fresh thinking.

and after reading these posts it becomes clear that there is no "model" anymore outside of the Major labels who still do what they do.

Everyone else is creating their own model - and the success of such models seems to be down to several things :

a. Contacts ( very necessary )
b. Financial punch or status from past releases
c. Quality of the music

Whether the track flies out of I tunes or Rough Trade it matters not as long as fans get hold of it.

Individual bands ( or even small labels ) do need what is called "Critical Mass" within business to be noticed - either by having some household names on their label or the financial clout to carry out campaigns. Therefore just calling things DIY or whatever seems to miss the point.

If JK starts a DIY label - then because he fullfills all of criteria a/b/c he should be successful even if he does not have bucketloads of money to back his plans. But if Joe Bloggs from Exeter does the same unless he has a band who already have a chart/hit record in his rosta then he is unlikely to succeed.

This discussion applies to those with a/b/c but for many people all they have is c and no way to attain a or b. Some people on this board may have all three because obviously many professionals read this board - but possibly 50% of readers will look at this thread and say they have tried it every way but without a/b it is not happening for them.

My model ( and dont we all have one ) is to have set up my label utilising BOTH digital and mail order ( with some shops as well targeted on tour dates ) and luckily working as a co-operative with some well known acts and then mixing in some new bands as well.

We are slowly growing the label from nothing - bands retain artistic control and the Lion's share of profits and we have already covered our startup costs within 3 months !

However, we tried to make sure that we had a/b/c covered. The model then can be what you want it to be. In terms of the World we have a dedicated licencsing person to exploit other territories working on commisssion. The bands still all own their material but we act as a conduit.

This model has been unveiled at SWSX and at recent conferences in USA and Canada - and we have had alot of interest from many hitmakers who like the idea of being part of somthing that we call Organic but is Organic by nature.

We have excellent bands and artists from the acoustic to the rock ! All hitmakers and all with strong fanbases. www.7organic.com and backed by a co-operative team of professionals.

At present we have found press / radio and TV fine except for daytime radio playlisting on the big stations which as everybody undestands is totally tied up by the majors. We can live with that because we know that sales can be decent even without selling your creative soul to the major.

I agree with JK that it can be done. Your model may differ from his or mine or anyone elses mentioned on here.........we love music and that is what drives us all on.

You're right about a/b/c but I suggest that artistes with c - wonderful music - link up with the music company (possibly like your own; possibly like mine if and when it kicks in) and does a deal - again, I suggest 50/50 - where all the artiste does is concentrate on making the brilliant music and contributing to the press/promotion/exposure/gigs or whatever they are good at and enjoy.
The company ties up all - and I mean all - the other areas and milks it for all it is financially and creatively worth.

david wrote:The hardest thing in the world is to get traffic to a web site. Smokey Tims Music Site might get half a dozen hits a day whereas iTunes might get 50 million a day. There's a big difference - that's why it makes

sense to piggy back onto a winner.

Not so David, not so. Getting traffic to a website is very easy and not very expensive to do. Ok one can argue about the quality of the traffic but when it comes to music, driving people to your website is not hard and not always expensive.

It will cost you a bit, but then again anything to do with marketing music will cost you and the most important thing you should be thinking about is the CPM concept. (Cost per thousand). i.e How much does it cost you to get XX amount of people to your website. make sure that there is a viral effect i.e when people come to your site to listen to the music, make sure they have the ability to pass it on to their friends.


Also start with your own address book and build it outwards. You only need 2 people to get the chain going and with a hit song on your hands they will be passing it on like crazy.

I would also add that the myspace effect means that selling music is now a secondary goal and selling hard copies is something that FANS will get involved with.

First release phaze is the myspace phaze otherwise known as the freebie stage.
Put your music in flash, embed it to the website and make it hard for them to have mp3s. As long as you have a simple pass it along script a la youtube then most people will just email the link rather than go to the huge hassle of locating the flash video file, load it on to their software to crack it.

Second phaze is the Itunes phaze whereby those who heard your music will buy it from Itune> I would recommend that the Itunes music quality is higher than the myspace one and im using the names as a symbol of what phaze you are in.

Third phaze is the HMV phaze or physical release phaze and this should be album only if possible or for singles enhanced CD or vinyl.

Give them a non music reason to buy the music. For the itunes release its the convenience of transferring and burning to a CD. For the physical its for the convenience and prestige of having the collectible vinyl version or enhanced CD.


In conclusion there are 2 approaches to getting attention.

1. 2 x 2. This is viral marketing at its best, you market to 2 people at a time and teach them to do likewise.

2. Branding. This is where you blast your artist to every corner in netland to the extent that everyone will hear of you.

Press releases are going to be your best friend here and it is best to hire a professional but failing that learn how to do it and copy some of the successful artists that got it working for them.

david wrote:The hardest thing in the world is to get traffic to a web site. Smokey Tims Music Site might get half a dozen hits a day whereas iTunes might get 50 million a day. There's a big difference - that's why it makes

sense to piggy back onto a winner.

Not so David, not so. Getting traffic to a website is very easy and not very expensive to do. Ok one can argue about the quality of the traffic but when it comes to music, driving people to your website is not hard and not always expensive.

It will cost you a bit, but then again anything to do with marketing music will cost you and the most important thing you should be thinking about is the CPM concept. (Cost per thousand). i.e How much does it cost you to get XX amount of people to your website. make sure that there is a viral effect i.e when people come to your site to listen to the music, make sure they have the ability to pass it on to their friends.


Also start with your own address book and build it outwards. You only need 2 people to get the chain going and with a hit song on your hands they will be passing it on like crazy.

I would also add that the myspace effect means that selling music is now a secondary goal and selling hard copies is something that FANS will get involved with.

First release phaze is the myspace phaze otherwise known as the freebie stage.
Put your music in flash, embed it to the website and make it hard for them to have mp3s. As long as you have a simple pass it along script a la youtube then most people will just email the link rather than go to the huge hassle of locating the flash video file, load it on to their software to crack it.

Second phaze is the Itunes phaze whereby those who heard your music will buy it from Itune> I would recommend that the Itunes music quality is higher than the myspace one and im using the names as a symbol of what phaze you are in.

Third phaze is the HMV phaze or physical release phaze and this should be album only if possible or for singles enhanced CD or vinyl.

Give them a non music reason to buy the music. For the itunes release its the convenience of transferring and burning to a CD. For the physical its for the convenience and prestige of having the collectible vinyl version or enhanced CD.


In conclusion there are 2 approaches to getting attention.

1. 2 x 2. This is viral marketing at its best, you market to 2 people at a time and teach them to do likewise.

2. Branding. This is where you blast your artist to every corner in netland to the extent that everyone will hear of you.

Press releases are going to be your best friend here and it is best to hire a professional but failing that learn how to do it and copy some of the successful artists that got it working for them.

Some very interesting points of view everyone has provided and caused me
to stop and think.

However, I really do believe that recorded music is still the fundemental of the industry even though a handful of acts make hundreds of millions doing huge arena tours all over the world.

Never be in any doubt the clout of iTunes and other online (big gun)
music stores. I am not alone in the realisation of revenue from this
store - I have a friend who has a label that has a reasonable catalog of repertoire and he is making several thousand dollars a month just from songs sold via iTunes music store. Plus he's got revenues with OD2, Rhapsody and SoundBuz as well as branching into ringtones.

Ringtones is a harder market to get into for an indy and I know my friend
has had to jump through quite a number of hoops in order to get a foot in
to that market.

The truth is, people are making money now out of selling content over the internet - it is a viable business model and it does have legs.

Now I'm not an expert in the live music scene - never been a passion of mine whereas records have. We all know that Madonna, Robbie, The Stones, McCartney, The Eagles and there's a few others all make a killing out of these huge tours. My thought is that there aren't that many other artists that generate those sorts of returns. I forgot to mention the Vegas shows with people like Elton and Celion etc.

Those Vegas shows make so much money it's rediculous

(Half their luck!!)

But for those of us who rely on recorded music and song publishing
it isn't so bad afterall.

David

Getting a recommendation from here or ROTD is also a great "freebie" viral piece of marketing.

phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/...716&s=143460

Hi Jonathan and KOH'ers,

I've just visited your iTunes music store site and discovered
the Revolution album.

Jonathan's back in the international music race - bravo !

phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/...716&s=143460