From A Weekend Musician, To Making $4.2 Million... By Giving Music Away Free
from the another-one dept
Here's yet another one for the books to respond to those who claim that music giveaways only work for "big" artists. Corey Smith was a high school teacher, doing weekend music gigs. Then, apparently, his manager had a revelation and started giving all of his music away for free: and last year Corey brought in $4.2 million. And the music industry is complaining that if the government doesn't step in creative content will cease to exist?Corey's story is quite interesting. He mostly makes money from concerts, and the free music drives more people to those concerts, but there are a few other aspects that are worth exploring. First, even though the music is available for free, plenty of people still buy his music on iTunes. However, as an experiment, they took down the free tracks from Corey's website for a period of time last summer... and sales on iTunes went down. Once again, this proves how ridiculous the claim is that free songs somehow cannibalize sales.
But, still, the real money maker for Corey is concerts, and even here he's doing something innovative: making concert tickets cheap: $5. The thinking here appears to be that once you see him in concert, you become a true fan who will keep going back (and paying) for more. And, in fact, at $5/ticket, you can afford to drag along your friends as well, and turn them into fans as well. And, of course, part of building up those true fans is better connecting with fans -- and so Corey will meet with pretty much anyone who asks. Contact his agent, and he'll set up a meeting.
One other point is worth noting. Corey's manager, Marty Winsch, has tried this with other artists, where it hasn't always worked as well. So, some may claim that the model (again) is very limited. Of course, the reason is that those other acts just weren't that good. To me, that's a system that works quite well. It rewards good musicians, rather than mediocre ones. Still, it's great to have yet another example to add to the (increasingly) long list of musicians adopting the various business models discussed around here and finding tremendous success.
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, corey smith, free, music
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
To me, that's the major issue that the labels seem to be coming up against, and why there's so much resistance. Many modern "stars" are actually quite bland. They're picked by industry people who only want what can sell, rather than what's truly good. A very talented signer will often lose out to a moderately talented singer who also follows pre-rehearsed dance moves, looks good in next-to-nothing or who simply follows instructions.
The new models mean that a vapid model with zero innate talent is on the same playing field as the next Lennon or Hendrix. Given that the industry, from the Beatles onwards, have regularly rejected talented artists in favour of mediocrity, you can see why they're scared.
As for other independent musicians, the rules still apply. Not everyone gets to be successful, especially in a business as crowded as entertainment. Given a level playing field, the cream will usually rise to the top, but the major labels don't want a level playing field. They want the "good old days", where they controlled all the media outlets and people bought what they wanted to sell. Luckily, the industry is changing and people are starting recognise those lies for what they are.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Record labels Hate This
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Record labels Hate This
It used to be a new artist relied on a "label" to promote and distribute physical albums. Now a few hundreds bucks or friend with a half decent studio along with an internet connection and you can be heard by millions .... if you ARE GOOD.
No longer is the "public" (me) subject to (what some gum eared executive that wants to do a favor for his golf buddy) the crap that has come out of LA.
Of course there has been many many good artists. Given the current environment it would be intresting to see what kind of label deals these artists would manage.
Would the labels make as much profit? Doubt it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Congrats
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I will however tell my buddies about his site and if he ever puts on a concert a little closer I'll be there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Special case
this model "... rewards good musicians, rather than mediocre ones."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Special case
BTW...seeing as how I'm an amateur musician, I need to apply for my free industry bailout...I want my free complimentary compensation (free with every RIAA membership application!).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Special case
thats how it should be
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
this is related to the Masnik law mentioned in a previous article concerning free music.
http://techdirt.com/articles/20090114/0645323402.shtml
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The reason others failed
And they weren't as good because they didn't use enough cowbell. =D
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Just kidding, of course (for those that struggle to recognize satire). I think alternative business methods are neat, especially when they succeed. I think the key point, again, is that this model would not work for many, and maybe most, corporate artists. Of course, there is that quality thing, and public interest...darn market forces anyway.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
hard work
I would hypothesize that the amount of work Corey is putting into it is a big factor as well. Not every musician wants to meet with any fan that asks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Score One For Our Side
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That's not actually proof, but pretty close
It doesn't, really, in and of itself. Using statistics with improper analysis is the other side's job, isn't it? Assuming the significant outside factors are properly accounted for (consistent quality and quantity of new music, concert schedule, etc.), it could constitute proof - or as close as you're likely to find - if the sales then went back up after the songs were made available on his site again; but the drop itself could just mean the market had reached its saturation point for his music. For all we know, the sales on iTunes could have followed the exact same trend with or without the free tracks...ok, we actually know better, but my point remains. I'm not saying that's the case, but this isn't proof, it's evidence. Much the same way that the abundance of artists making money by signing with a label are _evidence_ that it's the superior business model. They just don't prove it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: That's not actually proof, but pretty close
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Possibly - but for many people, 4.2 Million works just fine - weekends or weekdays.
But I too agree with kirillian - if they start doing like a Music tax - my music-challenged self will claim I'm a musician and get some of that pie! :)
True, my music may suck; but who says I wouldn't be entitled to part of that too!?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
quality
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Numbers Seem Inflated Slightly
1. These are total sales and not profit numbers (Mike's headline is musician "Making 4.2 Million")
2. These sales numbers are self professed and not audited or transparent. Back of the envelope if Corey does 150 performances a night thru the year (which would be a gruelling pace) then he has to play to 5000 people per night at $5 per head to net 3.7 mil approximately (which is the amount 4.2 mil minus itunes sales). When I checked his gig schedule the clubs listed for close to my home town all have seating capacity in the 500-1000 range (no where near the 5000 seat range needed to meet the 4.2 mil).
3. To put further doubt on the above numbers when I read in detail on Corey's site he gives away many tickets to people doing "street team" PR work for him.
Just a cautionary note that managers stating sales numbers have it in their best interest for future sales and buzz to inflate those numbers. Please note that the numbers also could be completely and transparently correct but on balance they seem slightly inflated to me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Numbers Seem Inflated Slightly
Also, where do you get the "5000 seat range needed to meet the 4.2 mil" from? Remember, the quoted figures are from a number of different areas. Gigs seem to be the major money-maker for him, but they're not the only revenue stream.
The thing to take away from this article is that in a time where labels are trying to force legal "protections" and taxes on us in order to "protect" artists, success stories like this are still possible. Whatever the real figures, Corey Smith has managed to go from a part-time musician struggling to sell records to a successful professional musician. All while using tactics that critics keep saying "won't work".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
woops
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
$5 per seat
x 5,000 seats
=$25,000
$25,000
x 150 shows
=$3,750,000, Mr. Smith's gross minus the iTunes sales
,
Still, if Mr. Smith claims to be mainly working weekends and there are, at last count, roughly fifty-two weeks in a year, I suspect something is a little off. Still, this works out to 2.884 shows per week, quite doable if you can book those 5,000 seaters on a few weeknights.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bullshit
I shouldn't even have to prove it, but I will.
His average venue is looking like about a 400 cap. x 150 shows = 60,000 tickets/year.
@ $5 = $300,000 annual door receipts.
Generously, let's say he sells merch to %10 of the crowd @$15 = $90,000
Add his digital sales in, and record store sales and he might be (VERY generously) grossing $470,000 / year ... are you sure someone didn't miss a decimal point somewhere?
Either way, $470k is a great living for playing music ... I support that model; I also support not being an idiot and believing everything you read on the Internet without even a common sense check, which is all it takes to realize that $4.7 Million is ridiculous.
And Tech Dirt ... dudes... you published that headline.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: bullshit
No, actually, they're not. But thanks for playing.
@ $5 = $300,000 annual door receipts.
Assumes, incorrectly, that ALL tickets are $5. That is not the case.
I also support not being an idiot and believing everything you read on the Internet without even a common sense check,
Then why don't you go ahead and check, rather than berating without ACTUALLY looking at the details of his business model.
Just saying...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: bullshit
Most artists lose money on the road because they have huge expenses doing shows. This includes paying Road crews, manager costs, agents costs, transportation costs, hotel costs, airfares, meals, equipment costs and repairs etc etc. Why do people not mention this?? These numbers need to be revised with all the deductions for daily expenses on the road. Even Major bands like Supertramp used to tour then make no money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re Re Bullshit
My point is that these numbers are so grossly exaggerated that none of that matters.
So, sure, let's take those $5 tickets and make them $20 tickets (which he's not averaging), and that's still only $1.2M door receipts. No where near the claimed income.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
With the $5 ticket, Corey is leaving ALOT of money on the table in order to build LONG TERM fans. VERY FEW people have the charisma, performing chops, and great songs to pull this off, but Corey does.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Musicians connecting direct-to-fan is smart biz
Worth noting: Nimbit (www.nimbit.com) who counts 15K musicians as customers. Nimbit helps the artists connect, market, sell direct to fan over the Web, Thru Nimbit, artists can put up their own MyStore to sell tunes and merch from on their Facebook fan sites (and keep more of their own money compared to using iTunes or Amazon.com)
Nimbit is currently sponsoring an industry-wide "2010 Direct-to-Fan Survey" at bit.ly/nimbitnews-d2fsurvey
All music artists and their teams can weigh in.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]