Bob Lefsetz wrote a week or two back that "Gaming’s got all the sexiness that music used to have. It’s the land of visceral excitement…and profits." There's some truth to that statement, but does it mean music is dying? Absolutely not.
All that's happened over the past few decades is that music has shifted from a rivalrous to a non-rivalrous medium--instead of sitting down and listening to a record from start to finish while doing nothing but maybe look at the album cover, we have music playing constantly while doing other things. It doesn't compete for our time. It accompanies other daily activities like driving, reading, running, shopping, etc. The same shift has happened for TV--the hours people spent watching TV spiked in the 70s and 80s because people were starting to while TV while doing something else. (Will all cinemas of the future be restaurants as well? Or have other activities integrated?)
Gaming enjoys its sexiness and profits because it is the newest major entertainment medium, and is naturally a step ahead of movies and music in terms of being naturally engaging (a point that the wii brought to the mainstream). But watch as they follow a similar arc to music. Already gamers are complaining of the major studios releasing "safe" games--sequels or new games that follow existing models for success. Soon, tools will be made available to allow anyone to create their own games quickly, cheaply, and easily; and we will have the computing power to be able to distribute those games quickly, cheaply, and easily over the internet. Already you see the beginnings of it with user-modified levels. The real question is will the major gamining studios learn the lessons of the music, film, and TV industries before them?
But back to music. Music as a medium is alive and well, despite its gradual shift away from demanding our attention. More people are listening to more music today than ever before. Just because the medium itself isn't as engaging as it once was doesn't mean that music can't be engaging. Artists need to build relationships with their fans, and need to give them more to play with than a new CD every 2 years. This doesn't just mean releasing every track that you record and mix in the back of the tour van. It means everything from video blogs to merchandise to live shows--get creative! Get engaging! Give the people what they want, and then some! Your band is a brand, and a single product, updated once every two years, simply isn't going to cut it if you want to have any of the sexiness and profits of the gaming industry.
Monday, June 16, 2008
Friday, June 6, 2008
What is Chipotle up to?
Yesterday at Chipotle, I decided to forego my usual routine of picking up a copy of the Dallas Observer (local indie weekly newspaper) and reading the music section, and instead just sat outside and enjoyed the breeze through my hair and view of endless strip malls. As I looked down at my chicken soft tacos, I noticed something odd: the brown paper lining the basket now had some writing on it making out spiral designs. More than that, I immediately picked out the word Evoka--a small band out of NC who I tried to book for a show at Davidson once. Odd, I thought, then looked at the paper a little closer and saw many other names I recognized mixed into the hundreds of names listed.
I searched everywhere for an explanation, but only found a little logo saying "Design. Art. Music." No links, no explanation, no nothing. So I went to the Chipotle website and this was the best I could find: http://www.chipotle.com/#flash/restaurants_music. From that all I can discern is either these bands are on Chipotle's radio station, or they're going to have concerts sponsored by Chipotle. But maybe there's a different supersecret plan. I think it's great that Chipotle is doing SOMETHING to support these indie rockers, but would it kill them to tell me WHAT?
I searched everywhere for an explanation, but only found a little logo saying "Design. Art. Music." No links, no explanation, no nothing. So I went to the Chipotle website and this was the best I could find: http://www.chipotle.com/#flash/restaurants_music. From that all I can discern is either these bands are on Chipotle's radio station, or they're going to have concerts sponsored by Chipotle. But maybe there's a different supersecret plan. I think it's great that Chipotle is doing SOMETHING to support these indie rockers, but would it kill them to tell me WHAT?
Slight Change of Heart: Lala vs Ad-supported music
At first I was totally opposed to Lala's new model of charging $0.10 for unlimited streams of a song--how on earth did they plan on competing against the free streams at imeem? Then my friend Adam started sending me albums to check out on Lala. I could listen to the whole thing straight through for free, no ad interruptions. Had he sent them to me on imeem, I would have had to put up with a 15 second audio commercial every couple songs.
On the surface, this limited interruption might not sound like a huge deal. But let me put this another way: think of your favorite album, the one you loved the second you heard it, that you listened to from start to finish and didn't multitask while doing so. If the first couple times you heard it, a McDonald's audio ad telling you to buy a Big Mac played between every other song, would it still be your favorite album? Would you have listened to it from front to back? I'll give you a "maybe," but in a lot of cases you'd give up or it at least wouldn't have struck you nearly as heavily.
At this point in time, the primary use of streaming services is still to try out music before deciding whether to buy or not. While Lala's model might not make them any money on streaming revenue, the simple fact that you can listen to the entire song or album for free or next to free and purchase it from the same page is genius. Would I like to see them drop the $0.10 rule and eat the extra costs? Yes, from a consumer standpoint, but it wouldn't be a smart business move--by adding the preventative measure of requiring people to pay to keep streaming, even if it's a trivial amount, Lala forces the user to reach for his or her wallet no matter what, and at that point they might as well invest the extra couple pennies in buying the mp3s (the actual revenue generator).
I was thinking about it the wrong way--Lala is not directly competing with imeem, they're competing with iTunes and Amazon. And kicking their asses. At least for now...
(On a side note, I have no idea who has kept Lala funded through all their different iterations (not even a year ago they were strictly a CD swapping broker), but I want them to fund my startup--they sound patient and willing to throw some cash around)
On the surface, this limited interruption might not sound like a huge deal. But let me put this another way: think of your favorite album, the one you loved the second you heard it, that you listened to from start to finish and didn't multitask while doing so. If the first couple times you heard it, a McDonald's audio ad telling you to buy a Big Mac played between every other song, would it still be your favorite album? Would you have listened to it from front to back? I'll give you a "maybe," but in a lot of cases you'd give up or it at least wouldn't have struck you nearly as heavily.
At this point in time, the primary use of streaming services is still to try out music before deciding whether to buy or not. While Lala's model might not make them any money on streaming revenue, the simple fact that you can listen to the entire song or album for free or next to free and purchase it from the same page is genius. Would I like to see them drop the $0.10 rule and eat the extra costs? Yes, from a consumer standpoint, but it wouldn't be a smart business move--by adding the preventative measure of requiring people to pay to keep streaming, even if it's a trivial amount, Lala forces the user to reach for his or her wallet no matter what, and at that point they might as well invest the extra couple pennies in buying the mp3s (the actual revenue generator).
I was thinking about it the wrong way--Lala is not directly competing with imeem, they're competing with iTunes and Amazon. And kicking their asses. At least for now...
(On a side note, I have no idea who has kept Lala funded through all their different iterations (not even a year ago they were strictly a CD swapping broker), but I want them to fund my startup--they sound patient and willing to throw some cash around)
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
My weekend in social media
Two interesting snippets from the weekend:
1. I came across my notebook from Junior year (two years ago, for those counting), which included notes from my radio show, "Middle School Dance." I noticed one point where I had asked my roommate Jared what the worst thing on the internet at that moment was. His answer? "Facebook's 'How I know this person' option." I agreed. At that point, that was the first sign we had that Facebook was becoming something bigger than a way to keep track of and interact with your closest of friends, mostly at your own school (not even all the schools had Facebook at that point; as I recall, High School Facebook caused the next uproar). Many of my friends are now very rare Facebook users for precisely these reasons: the original social graph made sense, and made sense in our context--the people we interacted with most online were the people we interacted with most in person. As connections became more and more distant, more and more people were turned off. As soon as coaches were found digging through athletes' personal photos online searching for incriminating evidence, nearly all the athletes significantly limited their Facebook use. Facebook has grown dramatically, but they've lost much of their core original audience. I'll leave it up to you to decide if that's a bad thing or a worthwhile sacrifice.
2. I went to a bar with some friends this Saturday. None of us had been to the bar before, but we were wary because it had potential for being a "hot spot" and thus far too crowded for our liking. Turns out it was incredibly crowded, and one of the people in the crowd is a star of Gossip Girl (Chace Crawford? is that his name?). Anyway, as I pushed my way through the crowds to catch up to my friends, I overheard nearly constant chatter about Facebook. But this story isn't about Facebook. When Chace walked past, the girls I was with swooned. One spent the rest of the night (and probably longer) kicking herself for not jumping his bones. The other was on cloud nine because he brushed her chest as he squeezed past her in the crowd.
What was their first move upon leaving the bar? Telling everyone they know, of course! First a series of TXTs, then a phone call or two, update the Facebook status, then send a few more TXTs. This is precisely why Twitter, if they get their problems solved, will hit it big in the mainstream. The objective of all those TXTs and the Facebook status could have been accomplished with a simple TXT to Twitter saying something like "OMG Chace Crawford just touched my boob!" On the surface, Twitter messages are little more than Facebook status messages. The difference is in the response they elicit. While 95% of both just get read and passed by, there's that 5% there on Twitter that make people want to respond to each other--and Twitter gives them the mechanism to do so (either @(screenname) or direct messaging). Plus, if Twitter catches on for purposes like it did at SXSW last year (note to developers: geotagging will be BIG with Twitter), lots more people would have tried to cram themselves into that bar. If I were a bar owner, I'd be studying up on ways to get people to tell their friends about the bar via Twitter--it might not be necessary now, but will become a huge boon to word of mouth very very soon.
1. I came across my notebook from Junior year (two years ago, for those counting), which included notes from my radio show, "Middle School Dance." I noticed one point where I had asked my roommate Jared what the worst thing on the internet at that moment was. His answer? "Facebook's 'How I know this person' option." I agreed. At that point, that was the first sign we had that Facebook was becoming something bigger than a way to keep track of and interact with your closest of friends, mostly at your own school (not even all the schools had Facebook at that point; as I recall, High School Facebook caused the next uproar). Many of my friends are now very rare Facebook users for precisely these reasons: the original social graph made sense, and made sense in our context--the people we interacted with most online were the people we interacted with most in person. As connections became more and more distant, more and more people were turned off. As soon as coaches were found digging through athletes' personal photos online searching for incriminating evidence, nearly all the athletes significantly limited their Facebook use. Facebook has grown dramatically, but they've lost much of their core original audience. I'll leave it up to you to decide if that's a bad thing or a worthwhile sacrifice.
2. I went to a bar with some friends this Saturday. None of us had been to the bar before, but we were wary because it had potential for being a "hot spot" and thus far too crowded for our liking. Turns out it was incredibly crowded, and one of the people in the crowd is a star of Gossip Girl (Chace Crawford? is that his name?). Anyway, as I pushed my way through the crowds to catch up to my friends, I overheard nearly constant chatter about Facebook. But this story isn't about Facebook. When Chace walked past, the girls I was with swooned. One spent the rest of the night (and probably longer) kicking herself for not jumping his bones. The other was on cloud nine because he brushed her chest as he squeezed past her in the crowd.
What was their first move upon leaving the bar? Telling everyone they know, of course! First a series of TXTs, then a phone call or two, update the Facebook status, then send a few more TXTs. This is precisely why Twitter, if they get their problems solved, will hit it big in the mainstream. The objective of all those TXTs and the Facebook status could have been accomplished with a simple TXT to Twitter saying something like "OMG Chace Crawford just touched my boob!" On the surface, Twitter messages are little more than Facebook status messages. The difference is in the response they elicit. While 95% of both just get read and passed by, there's that 5% there on Twitter that make people want to respond to each other--and Twitter gives them the mechanism to do so (either @(screenname) or direct messaging). Plus, if Twitter catches on for purposes like it did at SXSW last year (note to developers: geotagging will be BIG with Twitter), lots more people would have tried to cram themselves into that bar. If I were a bar owner, I'd be studying up on ways to get people to tell their friends about the bar via Twitter--it might not be necessary now, but will become a huge boon to word of mouth very very soon.
Friday, May 30, 2008
A new model idea
I don't claim to be qualified to be positing this idea (tax law is not my speciality), but I think it's at least worth throwing out there:
As bands and artists become more and more independent, would it make sense for them to incorporate as nonprofit organizations?
It sounds crazy, but here me out: the price of music is dropping to zero whether the artists like it or not. This doesn't mean fans don't want to support the artists, it's merely a function of distribution--it's easiest to get free mp3s, so that's what people do. Artists still need to make money, but they have to find other ways to do so.
People want to support their favorite artists, but often in varying ways and for varying amounts of investment--I might go see a show of 2 or 3 bands I sort of care about, while I might buy 2 t-shirts and a CD and e-mail all my friends about my favorite band. Currently, there aren't enough ways for artists to leverage the dedication of those top fans who would be willing to do almost anything to see their favorite bands succeed.
Being a 501(c)(3) wouldn't prevent artists from selling merchandise and such--those are "unrelated business expenses" that get taxed like they would if the artist weren't a nonprofit. However, being a 501(c)(3) allows the artist to receive tax-free donations, and the donors would likely be able to deduct their donations from their taxes. With gas prices soaring, this would enable a band to set up a fundraising effort (perhaps on Tipping Point models like ThePoint.com or CrowdFunder.com where nobody pays unless the goal is met) to ensure they can afford to make the drive around the country. With proper donation tracking, the band can try to book shows near where their big donors are. I would gladly give a few hundred tax-deductible dollars to my favorite bands to allow them to tour--I almost called the guys from Kaddisfly last night to let them know I wanted to do so, til I thought there might be a better way to go about it than just sending them a check for gas money.
The key is enabling the artists to "make the ask." Most artists understand business in the traditional sense: you get paid to play a show, you sell CDs and merch, and you make friends on MySpace in the hopes of spreading the word. Some understand that the top few fans are infinitely more valuable than all the rest put together. Few know how to capitalize on that concept.
In a step-by-step process:
As bands and artists become more and more independent, would it make sense for them to incorporate as nonprofit organizations?
It sounds crazy, but here me out: the price of music is dropping to zero whether the artists like it or not. This doesn't mean fans don't want to support the artists, it's merely a function of distribution--it's easiest to get free mp3s, so that's what people do. Artists still need to make money, but they have to find other ways to do so.
People want to support their favorite artists, but often in varying ways and for varying amounts of investment--I might go see a show of 2 or 3 bands I sort of care about, while I might buy 2 t-shirts and a CD and e-mail all my friends about my favorite band. Currently, there aren't enough ways for artists to leverage the dedication of those top fans who would be willing to do almost anything to see their favorite bands succeed.
Being a 501(c)(3) wouldn't prevent artists from selling merchandise and such--those are "unrelated business expenses" that get taxed like they would if the artist weren't a nonprofit. However, being a 501(c)(3) allows the artist to receive tax-free donations, and the donors would likely be able to deduct their donations from their taxes. With gas prices soaring, this would enable a band to set up a fundraising effort (perhaps on Tipping Point models like ThePoint.com or CrowdFunder.com where nobody pays unless the goal is met) to ensure they can afford to make the drive around the country. With proper donation tracking, the band can try to book shows near where their big donors are. I would gladly give a few hundred tax-deductible dollars to my favorite bands to allow them to tour--I almost called the guys from Kaddisfly last night to let them know I wanted to do so, til I thought there might be a better way to go about it than just sending them a check for gas money.
The key is enabling the artists to "make the ask." Most artists understand business in the traditional sense: you get paid to play a show, you sell CDs and merch, and you make friends on MySpace in the hopes of spreading the word. Some understand that the top few fans are infinitely more valuable than all the rest put together. Few know how to capitalize on that concept.
In a step-by-step process:
- Incorporate as a 501(c)(3)
- Give your music away for free--your fans will appreciate it (they almost expect it, but still get excited when artists embrace it)--and encourage them to spread it to their friends
- Sell merch as you normally would
- Ask for donations. Bloggers often use a "Tip Jar" widget, but I envision something more relevant for artists: associate items with levels of donation ($5 buys the band a beer, $20 buys the band lunch, $100 fills up the gas tank (heck, you could base it all on gas--sponsor the miles on a tour), $500 buys a new amp, etc). A simple widget on your MySpace page goes a long way (especially if the fans can also put the widgets on their pages when they donate to spread the word further).
Thoughts? Anyone willing to give it a shot?
A lesson in execution
My punk rock ideals make me a bit of a cynic towards anything even remotely "mainstream" or "corporate." I'm certainly not alone in that mindset, as we see more and more people rebelling against big business in favor of niche markets (enter The Long Tail).
The exception comes in execution: if a large or mainstream entity executes an idea incredibly well, it's very tough to hate or avoid. Apple is the biggest example--some, but by no means all, of their products are revolutionary, but from design to customer service, their execution is impeccable.
I just got back from lunch at a new location of Corner Bakery. I don't know who owns Corner Bakery, but I know it to be a large chain that competes with the likes of Panera and Atlanta Bread Company in the upscale fast food market. I had never been, but the experience will keep me coming back: there was a smiling greeter holding the door and handing out menus; while you wait in line, you can peruse the menu or check out the various packaged baked goods on the table next to you; they move people through the checkout extremely quickly without rushing anyone; between each checkout lane is a table full of fresh baked goods, which they ask if you'd like to add to your meal; the seemingly standard americana montage wallpaper actually includes many local pictures; they bring your food to you, quickly; the manager is on a constant roam around the dining area, smiling and checking with everyone to make sure they're enjoying their meals. Picking it apart, I can't think of a single thing they could have done better. And to top it off, the food was delicious!
The importance of execution is relevant to music as well. The example I come back to is Green Day--one of the biggest rock bands in the world, and notorious "sell-outs" from the early 90s. But I can't hate them, because they do what they do so well. They proved their abilities to me again recently when I watched their side project, Foxboro Hot Tubs, perform for a crowd of 500 in Dallas last week, the day after their album came out. The music of Foxboro Hot Tubs cops to many classic rock n roll styles, largely drawn from 1970s-early 1980s influences (from The Doors to Joan Jett)--it does NOT sound like Green Day. Yet I have never felt a cement floor move under my feet as much as at their show--the band, who are used to playing to tens of thousands at a time, sold each and every moment of their performance to a small group of folks who only could have listened to the songs a handful of times before the show. Without major label support or more tour plans, Foxboro Hot Tubs remains a test in word of mouth. So far, so good--the next night's show in Austin sold out before noon.
Regardless of what you're doing, attention to detail in execution gives you an extraordinary advantage over your competition. When mass advertising is no longer effective, people who notice the details drive your success--give them something to talk about.
The exception comes in execution: if a large or mainstream entity executes an idea incredibly well, it's very tough to hate or avoid. Apple is the biggest example--some, but by no means all, of their products are revolutionary, but from design to customer service, their execution is impeccable.
I just got back from lunch at a new location of Corner Bakery. I don't know who owns Corner Bakery, but I know it to be a large chain that competes with the likes of Panera and Atlanta Bread Company in the upscale fast food market. I had never been, but the experience will keep me coming back: there was a smiling greeter holding the door and handing out menus; while you wait in line, you can peruse the menu or check out the various packaged baked goods on the table next to you; they move people through the checkout extremely quickly without rushing anyone; between each checkout lane is a table full of fresh baked goods, which they ask if you'd like to add to your meal; the seemingly standard americana montage wallpaper actually includes many local pictures; they bring your food to you, quickly; the manager is on a constant roam around the dining area, smiling and checking with everyone to make sure they're enjoying their meals. Picking it apart, I can't think of a single thing they could have done better. And to top it off, the food was delicious!
The importance of execution is relevant to music as well. The example I come back to is Green Day--one of the biggest rock bands in the world, and notorious "sell-outs" from the early 90s. But I can't hate them, because they do what they do so well. They proved their abilities to me again recently when I watched their side project, Foxboro Hot Tubs, perform for a crowd of 500 in Dallas last week, the day after their album came out. The music of Foxboro Hot Tubs cops to many classic rock n roll styles, largely drawn from 1970s-early 1980s influences (from The Doors to Joan Jett)--it does NOT sound like Green Day. Yet I have never felt a cement floor move under my feet as much as at their show--the band, who are used to playing to tens of thousands at a time, sold each and every moment of their performance to a small group of folks who only could have listened to the songs a handful of times before the show. Without major label support or more tour plans, Foxboro Hot Tubs remains a test in word of mouth. So far, so good--the next night's show in Austin sold out before noon.
Regardless of what you're doing, attention to detail in execution gives you an extraordinary advantage over your competition. When mass advertising is no longer effective, people who notice the details drive your success--give them something to talk about.
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Subtle but important update for TuneCore
TuneCore, the service that allows independent artists to easily distribute their music across digital music services like iTunes and Amazon, just unveiled the ability for artists to see weekly trends and zip codes of people who buy their music through iTunes. This is HUGE in any number of ways: everything from booking tours to seeing responses to marketing efforts or big concerts. The issue, though, is how many artists truly understand the depth and importance of this data? I would love to see TuneCore either open their APIs to allow third parties to help bands manage these numbers in relation to other band activity (and internet buzz, etcetc) to try to make sense of why these numbers are showing what they are and what can be done to make the most of them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
