The Search For The Mythological Magical Business Model Bullet
from the give-it-up,-it-doesn't-exist dept
One of the things I've noticed over the past few years, in discussing the various business models that are working for content creators, is that one of the regular criticisms we get is that "this won't work for 'x'." Or something along those lines. Basically, they want to write off any success story as an exception, and yet they like to use any "failure" of a business model experiment as proof that innovative business models can't work. That all seems backwards to me (after all, if a single failure disproves a business model, then we can conclude that the business of selling CDs or movies "failed" the first time one of those offerings flopped).I was thinking about this a bit more after reading Mathew Ingram's take on Paul Biggar's long post mortem on why his greatly hyped NewsTilt collapsed and shut down after just a few months. That post is interesting, though not surprising if you've ever worked in a startup (especially one that's failed). NewsTilt was trying to "solve" the "problems" facing the journalism business, but the founders admitted they didn't really care about journalism that much -- which was a pretty big problem. Still, what caught my attention at the end of Ingram's post, was where he notes (paraphrasing David Cohn of the journalism startup spot.us):
There is no magic bullet that will suddenly save the media industry, or transform ordinary journalists into independent-thinking online media businesses.I'd expand on that, and note that there is no "magic bullet" that will suddenly save any content industry that's in a state of disruption today. And that's okay. But it's part of the problem. The folks who were used to being able to rely on artificial scarcities had a crutch for a business model. It let them lean on that artificial backstop, rather than really think about more creative (and, potentially, better) business models. But, just as relying too much on crutches without exercising your legs can make those muscles atrophy, those who rely too much on artificial scarcity let their creative business modeling ability atrophy as well. So they all want to know what the "magic bullet" is, and have trouble accepting any answer that doesn't involve a magic bullet. If it's not a magic bullet, it's an "exception" or it "won't scale," and thus, it doesn't matter.
But that's a huge mistake. Because one way or another, all of these industries are changing rapidly. And while certain models will become more standard, none will be a magic bullet. It's always going to involve experimenting and adjusting as the world changes. Those who are waiting for the magic bullet seem to think that if they just keep asking for a magic bullet, the old models crumbling around them will stay up. That's not how it works. The old models are crumbling, whether or not there's a magic bullet. So rather than complaining about the lack of a magic bullet, isn't it about time you started experimenting with what is out there?
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, magic bullet
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Optimism...
Watch as major media profits go back...and to the left. Back...and to the left. Back...and to the left....
Kidding aside, isn't this ultimately a good thing? I know it can look frightening for businesses as a group to think about doing global business in a nuanced, differentiated way. It's complicated.
But doesn't it open more doors than it closes? Doesn't the fact that we can have a fractal marketplace filled with all kinds of marginally differentiated business models mean that there will be global business just as varied? And doesn't a marketplace that allows for multiple ways of approaching its business (and equally varied customers) mean a greater gross production for everyone?
This, actually, is why I'm not on board with the total dismantling of copyright. Scale it back to its original state, loosen some of the more antiquated requirements on it, and let more people have more choices. I think business attrition would be a far better way to free up copyright than mere legislation....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Moving targets
There are some industries that come pretty close to having a magic bullet. I would argue that the CD industry was a magic bullet for the record labels. The problem they have is that the target did start moving. The industry has gotten some legislation that attempts to keep the target from moving. They want more legislation in the hope that they can move the target back to where it used to be. However, markets move no matter what legislation is passed, and they can never be made to flow backwards.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Their entire "business" is the collection of government imposed rents.
Their "magic bullet" is to have the government enact more mandatory rents to collect.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Magic Bullet and the cookie cutter business model ...
"If it's not a magic bullet, it's an "exception" or it "won't scale," and thus, it doesn't matter."
That is the main problem facing the content industry. They can not or will not use multiple business models. It is why they are lobbying for all these laws (ACTA, C-32, COICA, DEA, etc) to restrict use of content and turn back the hands of time. So they dont need to change. Copyright should be turned back to pre 1976 standards or earlier. This will in effect shake up the content companies and remove the ones that are being held afloat artificially. It would also allow for new companies to form without the threat of lawsuit.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Moving targets
[ link to this | view in thread ]
magic bullets for sale
[ link to this | view in thread ]
magic bullets for sale
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Optimism...
Nice. Yeah, there's a bit of a difference between a magic bullet (JFK assassination conspiracy theory) and a silver bullet (the one thing that will solve your problem).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The magic bullet is...
1) Don't suck.
2) Don't try to rip people off.
3) Get your message out.
then I guarantee success.
Most of the "business model variation" lies in how you achieve number 3 - and of course number 1 is very non-trivial.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sales of magic beans
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: The magic bullet is...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: magic bullets for sale
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Sales of magic beans
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: The magic bullet is...
That's probably why they hate the internet so much.
"WHAT?! Promotion that isn't dependent on millions of dollars?! KILL IT WITH FIRE!"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: The magic bullet is...
Seems way too many content providers focus on #3 to the exclusion of #1 & #2.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Optimism...
Wasn't Coors the silver bullet for a while in commercials?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Optimism...
C'mon, it's better logic than Hollywood accounting....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hasn't been a crutch so much as a feather bed.
Taking that as so, and applying it to "news": turns out that valuable social services are difficult to glean income from, and increasingly so with lots of competition. Advertising is just not going to work in diffuse outlets; all present funding mechanisms only work when focused into a few channels. To me, that argues for social subsidies to people whom we all agree perform valuable services -- paid for by taxing the hell out of those whom we all agree are *not* contributing to society. Otherwise, we end up in the dark for news, under a plutocracy that fosters a police state, because that's the "business model" currently succeeding.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Magic Bullet and the cookie cutter business model ...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
There is no silver bullet... for anything (outside of beer)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
An Olde Timey Game...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Fund and Release
But it just occurred to me that you can't have a universal model, you need to fine tune that model to fit your business which requires experimentation and risk. The version of "fund and release" that works for small projects won't be the same as the version of the model that applies to the big corporate projects. One of the arguments was how the company pays salaries and operational costs while waiting for the threshold to be met. The second was about what happens to the pledged funding if the studio doesn't deliver.
The other commenter seems to see the model as a donation model, but it is not that at all. Just like TechDirt uses tiered support perks that they sell on the site, those that fund the threshold will get their own perks in return. The thing this model needs is something that will motivate people to pledge funding to a project. The point of this model is to encourage payment whereas the old model deals with forcing payment.
Like Mike has been preaching for what seems like a millennium now, they need to sell scarce goods that are connected to the abundant goods. They can also follow the CTW portion of Mike's favorite model. Creating a community that allows the fans to provide input on the type of game they want made would give them incentive to provide financial contribution to the project. Sell them a visit to their studio, early access to the game, or a "host your own release party" option where they throw a launch party for you and your friends when the game releases if you make a considerably large contribution.
So, what if they don't get the game done or not enough money is pledged to the project? Well, I think if the second problem is solved, it also solves the first. As long as they have enough money to continue to make the game, it will get done. That is assuming they did their budgeting correctly. If not, the nobody has to pay anything and they don't start the project.
So what's to be done in the mean time while they wait for the threshold to be met? I would think they would need some sort of auxiliary revenue stream from another product/service they provide. They could over-estimate how much they need to cover unforeseen complications or provide residual funding to cover the costs of the next project. The issue is the initial funding to launch the company to begin with.
I can see this is running awfully long, but I guess the overall point I'm trying to convey here is that there is no magic bullet solution, but there is basic framework laid down for us. It just needs someone that can flesh it out to work for their own business.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
No Easy Media Pay Dirt?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Hasn't been a crutch so much as a feather bed.
Really? So things like entertainment and culture are meaningless extras? What a sad, colorless box you must live in...
Yes, industry dinosaurs are completely out of touch with consumers, which is why I, as a content creator, have chosen to take them out of the equation and play my own game. I'm actually happy dinosaurs exist because 1) they piss people off, pushing them towards independents who appreciate them and 2)they teach me what not to do.
Again as you say, maybe industry dinosaurs rely on selling content in limited ways, but as Mike keeps pointing out, smart innovators can do more. You can sell more than a book, translations, movie rights... why not develop a toy version of the story for collectors, or offer an exclusive, real-life reenactment of a pivotal scene in the story? Anything can be a potential moneymaker, depending on how relevant your offerings are to your audience. The only limitation here is lack of imagination.
I think the biggest mistake industry players make is treating people as potential one-time customers rather than lifelong fans. Smart creators appreciate the difference and respect their part of that relationship.
[ link to this | view in thread ]