Music 2.0 Definition Smackdown at Music Think Tank
March 28th, 2008 
Below is the result of a discussion going on at the new Music Think Tank blog which includes a couple of guys I have lots of respect for, Bob Baker and CD Baby founder Derek Sivers. The question posed to the group was “Would you give exclusive rights to a download store in exchange for keeping 100% of your music revenue?” Even though the thread skewed a bit off-topic, some interesting points were raised. My comments appear in bold.
No. Hell no.
Why chase pennies? Seriously, right now, how many of you actually benefit financially from the sale of downloads? How would the situation change for you if that revenue doubled? tripled?
I think the emphasis on SELLING downloads is seriously flawed. If we’re talking about empowering the indie musician, we need to level the field with a nuclear missile - make music free. Make your download a TOOL for sales, an opportunity to build community - not the SALE itself.
Screw 99 cents. Give it away, build trust, build community and THEN monetize. Building TRUE fans means looking at each fan’s lifetime spending potential. Their dissemination potential! A real fan is a megaphone for your music, NOT a consumer with a tray at the buffet.
I’d pay .99 for a real fan. Wouldn’t you?
We can all agree that a nuclear missile is not required: recorded music is pretty much free already. It is generally possible to download the song you are after for no money. For this we have the Internet to thank.
Having been robbed by the Internet of the means to make money from recordings, independent artists are somehow still loathe to let go of the Internet as a business opportunity. However, when it comes to new conceptions of making money in a web environment no one seems capable of being anything other than exceedingly vague: ’selling relationship’, ‘building community’, ‘building trust’ and my personal favourite: ‘monetizing’, what does any of it mean?
I am sure when the industry moved from sheet music to recorded music, there was not the same degree of confusion as to how to proceed that there is now: they had something to sell. Now we have to sell ‘relationship’, and over the Internet - of all places. Who is going to buy it?
The record is just a marketing tool. The product is music. How are we going to sell it now?
@Sebastiaan
Since you seem to think that the notions of community, trust and monetization are too vague to grasp, then allow me to expound.
Building community is about your fans gathering under a common banner - you - using a common mechanism for them to participate in your career. People bring people - excitement brings more excitement. It’s about gathering momentum through your fanbase and them through you.
Monetization is your revenue stream. T-shirts, videos, tickets, donations - these are the ays artists sustain themselves financially. If you’ve “built community” correctly, then these people are qualified consumers ready and willing to buy what you choose to sell them. You have fans, now you can MONETIZE that relationship through sales.
Trust is why they buy. Hopefully, you’ve built that by over-delivering to their expectations. They’re hungry, they’re excited and now, they trust you. Let’s do business.
You can go ahead and curse the Internet of robbing you of a revenue opportunity. Frankly, this kind of entitlement is what’s wrong with this discussion.
Am I being vague? Then let’s get more specific. Exactly how much money have YOU lost to Internet piracy? Have YOU ever broke even on a single cd release? How much has file sharing hurt YOUR career?
Music is a product? Do you know who MADE music a product? I’ll give you a hint: it wasn’t a musician.
@Aaron
People cannot muster respect for a product that is widely available for free. That there are still some folks left who have respect for the record at all is due to its distinguished past. However, in ten years time this respect will have been entirely eroded, as a consequence of the record’s (MP3’s) availability on the web for free.
It is impossible to build community on a meaningless product/marketing tool. Giving away compressed home-recordings will soon no longer induce anyone to buy T-shirts. Monetize while the monetizing is good, but anyone who wants a career in music in the next decade, ought to focus his attention on his live show - and abandon the web.
There will come a time when an artist’s slightest presence on the web will signal to the consumer that his music is meaningless; damned if it isn’t happening already.
Share on Facebook
March 28th, 2008 at 10:22 am
Stimulating dialogue, with lots of interesting ideas to think about. I can’t imagine there will ever be a time when “an artist’s slightest presence on the web will signal to the consumer that his music is meaningless”. Indeed, the opposite is true–an artist’s *absence* from the web will be the signal of his irrelevance.
March 28th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
I strongly agree with your comments above, Aaron. I remember when Google.com displayed little to no ads and was sky-rocketing in search share on the ‘net. I’m sure many saw it and thought, “how are they making any money?” But they were building trust and creating a great product - and look at them now.
I thought the others’ comments above were thoughtful and interesting, too, until I got to this: “There will come a time when an artist’s slightest presence on the web will signal to the consumer that his music is meaningless; damned if it isn’t happening already.” Sorry to be blunt (and I admit one quote is not sufficient to adequately judge someone!), but this seems like a painfully misguided notion. Kinda reminds me of Andrew Keen / Cult of the Amateur, even. I wouldn’t side with either extreme, but I think it’s far more likely that a musician *without* a web presence will tend to turn people away.
March 28th, 2008 at 8:39 pm
Given the gargantuan pool of music available online, and the trend of young listeners collecting music in far greater volume, one may be tempted to think that the more prolific artist would have a greater chance of profiting from an online presence. Despite the 24/7 earbud infusion, I think that it’s highly unlikely that kids are actually listening to all of the songs on their iPods in their entirety multiple times like we used to with cassettes and records, though.
I think it’s turning into a kind of perverse beanie-baby-like song collectors culture where song count is a status symbol and much of the music is actually ignored. While the prevalence of free music has many positive aspects such as the ability to escape from pre-programmed corporate pushbutton music and increased diversity in listening habits, I believe the point at which these benefits are eclipsed by the rise of the music ‘hoarder’ who perceives music as a series of bits is coming soon (if not already).
There will inevitably be a rebellion against this where young people start to actually crave the experience of music in a much more direct and powerful way. The music scene that emerges from this change is where you most likely will want to be. The big question is ‘what form will it take?’ Will it be a resurrection of past experiences like live music or vinyl ? Will it be something completely new like the ‘Visi-Sonor (see google)?’ I tend to think it’s the latter and the iPod will then become irrelevant.