Yes, Using Free In Your Business Model Works For Small And Large Bands
from the follow-the-bouncing-business-model dept
With Radiohead's new business model getting so much attention, we're hearing a bunch of folks start to claim that this kind of business model only works for big, established bands. Funny thing is, when we point to smaller artists doing similar things, people say that such a model may work for no name artists, but couldn't possibly work for big pop stars, who would inevitably lose money. The fact is that a business model that involves using the music as a promotional good can work for both small and large bands if you understand the economics of infinite goods and how to apply the appropriate business model based on the stage of the musician's career. So for all those claiming that the Radiohead situation is unique because they're so well known, can you please explain why other, significantly less well known artists have done quite well using similar models? The simple fact is that these types of business models allow some less well known musicians to have a career in music in the first place -- whereas in the past they may have been forced out of music into another job. It's opened up plenty of new possibilities for ways to make a living by growing a fanbase and charging them for additional (scarce) products. So, yes, Radiohead will do well because they're well known and well-liked. But, plenty of less well known artists are adopting similar models because it helps them establish a following in the first place.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: business models, music
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Brad Sucks
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Brad Sucks
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I like it...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This also assumes that what is reported sold by the record labels is what is actually sold. There have been several lawsuits against the record companies for their accounting practices in not giving the artists what they were due even based on the one-sided contracts they have with the record companies.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Brad Sucks
Fixed the URL for you!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Brad Sucks
Fixed the URL for you!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
small artists?
Let's try Bob, then... Bob went through many bands, got two albums released on a major label, and was a boyfriend of one of Hollywood's top actresses.
These people are not unknowns. They may qualify as "smaller" in the sense that they don't make as much money as NIN or Radiohead, but that's mostly because their chosen musical genres are not as popular. The fact remains, they had careers before they started giving stuff away for free.
A better example might be Tom Smith, but then I'm not sure "doing this for a living" necessarily equates to financial success on an appreciable level. And, again, Tom is a big fish in a tiny genre (filk). He was a big deal before he started putting his stuff online.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: small artists?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
They all start out as small bands!
Having been involved in the business for many years I appalled Radiohead for being the first for to step into the future that has been so badly ignored this last decade. Not only did they provide a place for internet visitors to get their music but also gave them a place that the visitor to find all kinds of band information about Radiohead making them feel at home with them and of course concert information, and that's where the 'real money' is going to be made.
Everybody who loves music and knows the internet has to be asking themselves, much like I am, what took so long.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Maybe there is a reason that small bands start with the Internet and then go to labels?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Small artists from Malaysia
1 year ago nobody in Taiwan or Malaysia even knew who he was. By utilizing the free business model he has made himself well known internationally (among Chinese communities) and made himself some money. His albums are selling like hot cakes. He even has a song 'King of Daoban' where he encourages people to pirate his songs.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=namewee&search=Search
http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Namewee
So, yes free works for small artists.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Of course, now he is in hiding ala Salman Rushdie
"He even has a song 'King of Daoban' where he encourages people to pirate his songs."
Technical point here. He has the copyright. If he gives people permission to copy, swap, trade or whatever, it isn't piracy, copyright violation, theft, or anything else you choose to call it. As the owner, he can allow that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
free music and donations
[ link to this | view in thread ]