5 ms·

The situation isn't entirely hopeless. Even within the most aggressive labels (and by that I mean their legal departments) there are parties who do encourage i

by physcab 16y ago

The situation isn't entirely hopeless. Even within the most aggressive labels (and by that I mean their legal departments) there are parties who do encourage innovation. These are the people that go to bat for artists and are trying everything imaginable to promote them. They try new advertising campaigns, are experimenting with alternate branding, and moving to the sports business model (ie endorsements). Its unfortunate that the legal departments have been the ones with all the power, but this will fade with time as current employees are replaced with ones who see the effectiveness of all these new promotional channels.

pg 16y ago
This sounds naive. The people running the labels are very cynical, and the way they're compensated makes them even more so. They don't have equity. They're motivated by bonuses that come out of this year's revenue. So they're not interested in building stuff. They just want to extract large amounts of money, this year, from whoever they can.
- ABrandt 16y ago
  But why can't this change over a period of time as physcab has indicated (who by the way, works/worked for one startup leading the charge)? I believe it impossible for the industry to fail--there will always be people making music. So the big four are either going to have to get with the program (and probably significantly reduce their market cap), or get the hell out the way. This is in someways analogous to what YC, super angels, et al. have done with venture capital. Just like ~$20,000 is about all you need to get a talented founding team started, musicians today can do things on the cheap just as well. The entire system no longer hinges on the $100M home-run in either case. Everyones been focused on investing in the killer app that will bring the music industry back to equilibrium. The Spotify's and last.fm's will certainly play their part, but its a fundamental shift in capital structure that the industry needs. Making it as a musician is, never has been, nor ever will be easy. There's extremely talented people out there though that, given a little cash and a little support, have the drive and persistence to make a career for themselves. Sans record label.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
- physcab 16y ago
  Yes, perhaps thinking the labels changing their ways (or hoping they do) over time is naive. I'll admit that (but I'd like to say optimistic instead). What the music industry needs is a platform where unsigned artists can go to promote their music without the help of the labels. This platform could probably act like a label, but better serve the artists and users. It would have to garner a lot of eyeballs so it could effectively break artists into the mainstream. It would have to be smart at targeting a specific demographic of listeners so artists could know where to travel and know they can fill auditoriums. Lastly it would have to be a tech company, so the Platform would be in the hands of every listener. MySpace might be able to do this if they gave up on the social network thing. There certainly is room though for a new company to have this role, but it is going to be a long and painful process. And you certainly shouldn't do it for short term gain.
  - jbrennan 16y ago
    What I've been wondering is why Apple doesn't pony up and do just that. They could say "Hey artists not [yet] on a label, join the iTunes Label. We're a great distribution channel, and we'll give you a 70/30 split." OK so it's a bit far-fetched, and it really depends on what iTunes-as-a-label would provide (but with GarageBand/Logic/CuBase who needs tons of financing?). Really the only thing iTunes doesn't have a great story for would be touring (but even then, what better way to sell concert tickets than through iTunes/Ping?).
    - yuvi 16y ago
      CDBaby and tunecore are pretty close I guess, they'll get you on iTunes and more (physical copies too in CDBaby's case)
    - blhack 16y ago
      Because record labels are more about promotion than distribution (anymore). Amazon, cdbaby, etc. can all already do this. Honestly, the artists don't even need those people anymore. I've seen artists who sell their music directly on their own site, and I don't see why more can't.
    - 16y ago
- hristov 16y ago
  Also, as part of this cynicism, the labels are very good at having people that seem like the kind of people that are on your side. I.e., the kind of people that "will go to bat for the artists."
jfb 16y ago
I'll believe it when I see it. The labels are largely just a copyright exploitation system designed by lawyers; certainly, this is where the money comes from, and until that changes (which I would imagine would happen approximately never), the fundamental behavior will stay the same. Even as their profits are shrinking, the individual incentives to behave monstrously remain in place. I think that the majors are going to end up as 50 person (all lawyer) holding companies suing the bejeezus out of everyone; and promotion and marketing will end up more evenly distributed, albeit much crappier on the high end. I wouldn't touch a music startup with a 1000' pole -- thankfully, I'm not an investor.
zumda 16y ago
Yes, these people exist, they work for independent labels... The music industry doesn't just suck the money out of start ups, they also suck the money out of artists! Don't be fooled by the crowd that says the music industry is "investing" in talent, they are lending money (and producers, which of course they charge to the artist again)! There are some ridiculous stories about the music industry.

by physcab 16y ago

pg 16y ago

This sounds naive. The people running the labels are very cynical, and the way they're compensated makes them even more so. They don't have equity. They're motivated by bonuses that come out of this year's revenue. So they're not interested in building stuff. They just want to extract large amounts of money, this year, from whoever they can.

ABrandt 16y ago
But why can't this change over a period of time as physcab has indicated (who by the way, works/worked for one startup leading the charge)? I believe it impossible for the industry to fail--there will always be people making music. So the big four are either going to have to get with the program (and probably significantly reduce their market cap), or get the hell out the way. This is in someways analogous to what YC, super angels, et al. have done with venture capital. Just like ~$20,000 is about all you need to get a talented founding team started, musicians today can do things on the cheap just as well. The entire system no longer hinges on the $100M home-run in either case. Everyones been focused on investing in the killer app that will bring the music industry back to equilibrium. The Spotify's and last.fm's will certainly play their part, but its a fundamental shift in capital structure that the industry needs. Making it as a musician is, never has been, nor ever will be easy. There's extremely talented people out there though that, given a little cash and a little support, have the drive and persistence to make a career for themselves. Sans record label.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
physcab 16y ago
Yes, perhaps thinking the labels changing their ways (or hoping they do) over time is naive. I'll admit that (but I'd like to say optimistic instead). What the music industry needs is a platform where unsigned artists can go to promote their music without the help of the labels. This platform could probably act like a label, but better serve the artists and users. It would have to garner a lot of eyeballs so it could effectively break artists into the mainstream. It would have to be smart at targeting a specific demographic of listeners so artists could know where to travel and know they can fill auditoriums. Lastly it would have to be a tech company, so the Platform would be in the hands of every listener. MySpace might be able to do this if they gave up on the social network thing. There certainly is room though for a new company to have this role, but it is going to be a long and painful process. And you certainly shouldn't do it for short term gain.
- jbrennan 16y ago
  What I've been wondering is why Apple doesn't pony up and do just that. They could say "Hey artists not [yet] on a label, join the iTunes Label. We're a great distribution channel, and we'll give you a 70/30 split." OK so it's a bit far-fetched, and it really depends on what iTunes-as-a-label would provide (but with GarageBand/Logic/CuBase who needs tons of financing?). Really the only thing iTunes doesn't have a great story for would be touring (but even then, what better way to sell concert tickets than through iTunes/Ping?).
  - yuvi 16y ago
    CDBaby and tunecore are pretty close I guess, they'll get you on iTunes and more (physical copies too in CDBaby's case)
  - blhack 16y ago
    Because record labels are more about promotion than distribution (anymore). Amazon, cdbaby, etc. can all already do this. Honestly, the artists don't even need those people anymore. I've seen artists who sell their music directly on their own site, and I don't see why more can't.
  - 16y ago
hristov 16y ago
Also, as part of this cynicism, the labels are very good at having people that seem like the kind of people that are on your side. I.e., the kind of people that "will go to bat for the artists."

jfb 16y ago

I'll believe it when I see it. The labels are largely just a copyright exploitation system designed by lawyers; certainly, this is where the money comes from, and until that changes (which I would imagine would happen approximately never), the fundamental behavior will stay the same. Even as their profits are shrinking, the individual incentives to behave monstrously remain in place. I think that the majors are going to end up as 50 person (all lawyer) holding companies suing the bejeezus out of everyone; and promotion and marketing will end up more evenly distributed, albeit much crappier on the high end. I wouldn't touch a music startup with a 1000' pole -- thankfully, I'm not an investor.

zumda 16y ago

Yes, these people exist, they work for independent labels... The music industry doesn't just suck the money out of start ups, they also suck the money out of artists! Don't be fooled by the crowd that says the music industry is "investing" in talent, they are lending money (and producers, which of course they charge to the artist again)! There are some ridiculous stories about the music industry.