Record Labels In Germany Learning That YouTube Has The Leverage

from the no-more-videos dept

Just as in the UK, where Google decided to block all music videos from the major record labels, after those labels demanded payments that Google felt was way out of line with what could be made from advertising, it looks like Google has now pulled music videos in Germany as well. Once again, the record labels will likely complain and demand investigations -- even as other artists have learned that they don't need to profit directly from their videos on YouTube, but that they can profit indirectly and that pulling their videos down actually does a lot more harm than good.

Of course, the record labels recognize this implicitly -- otherwise they would be happy that their music videos were pulled down. If they didn't recognize the benefit from YouTube, why would they complain at all? The problem, it seems, is more psychological. The record labels know they benefit from the music being on YouTube -- but they also know that Google benefits. Rather than realizing there can be relationships where both sides benefit and everyone is better off, the labels seem to feel that only they should really benefit, and thus, Google should have to pay out all (or most) of its benefit.

Filed Under: germany, music, videos
Companies: gema, google, youtube

Bands Take Pay What You Want To Merch... And It Works Great

from the business-models-that-work dept

While at the Leadership Music Digital Summit last week, I got into a fantastic conversation with Dave Allen, perhaps most well known for being in the hugely influential band Gang of Four. In fact, the reason I missed the panel discussion about ISPs teaming up with the RIAA was because the conversation with Dave was so fascinating. I hope to talk to him some more in the future as well, but he's a musician (who now helps other musicians) who really seems to understand the new business models that are out there.

Part of what we talked about concerned an experiment, where he convinced a few bands to stop offering set pricing on all of their merch, and instead, told them to ask each buyer what they wanted to pay. The bands that have tried this found that this made fans much happier. Many fans paid more than list price (even when told the "recommended price") because they really wanted to support the band. Other fans, who wouldn't have been able to afford the merch at the list price, came away much happier because they were able to afford stuff. Those fans become committed lifelong fans who are much more willing to spend more money in the future as well.

A few more bands have been taking Dave up on the challenge to try this model, and Ben Taylor (son of James Taylor and Carly Simon) recently tested it out and found that he made a lot more money doing things that way.

We took in well over $1000 in CD sales, double what we would on an average night. We normally sell 3 Full Lengths at $15 each and an EP at $5.

We sold a total of 84 CD’s averaging almost $12 per CD!

Last night we were in Jackson Hole, the trend continued, proving another good night. Where we sold 48 CD’s and averaged almost $11 a CD.

We are moving more product than we normally would and in average making more than what our CD were to sell on iTunes or a record store.

Filed Under: business models, merchandise, music, pay what you want

Congrats, Recording Industry: You May Now Have Killed Seeqpod Too

from the shut-'em-down dept

The record labels' animosity towards Seeqpod has never made much sense. Seeqpod is a basic search engine that seeks out music files online. Some of these files are, undoubtedly, unauthorized copies, but Seeqpod has always been focused on streaming the music rather than letting you download the tracks. Seeqpod, itself, has no way of knowing whether the tracks are illegal or not, just as a search on Google using "filetype:mp3" doesn't distinguish between illegal and legal files. Yet, of course, the major record labels have decided that there can be no innovation without the record labels owning a piece of it, and so both Warner Music and EMI (two labels, by the way that have been the loudest in insisting that they've changed and are no longer anti-innovation) sued Seeqpod for daring to run a search engine.

And, now, thanks to mounting legal bills, the company has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, and is cutting off some developers who were using its API. It seems like yet another example of the major record labels stamping out innovation through lawsuits. Of course, others will rise in their place (most likely in foreign countries where it's harder for the labels to sue). But, it's pretty sad that the labels have been so successful in using questionable lawsuits to make sure that no one can innovate without their stamp of approval.

Filed Under: bankruptcy, innovation, lawsuits, music
Companies: emi, seeqpod, warner music

BitTorrent Site Mininova Makes It Easier To Sell Scarcities With Downloads

from the neat dept

A bunch of folks have been sending in the news that popular BitTorrent site Mininova is now making it much easier to monetize your own BitTorrented music. Basically, it makes it easy to sell other things alongside the torrent. This is very much about using the free music to sell related scarcities, such as concert tickets, CDs or other promotional goods. Imagine taking the various tiered upsell solutions that are becoming popular and connecting them directly to your own torrent of the music? As the story notes, at least one indie record label, Beep! Beep!, has signed up and is releasing all of its music via this system -- and even offering those who download a 20% discount on products as a thank you for helping to seed the files:

"It's only fair not to pay for something you haven't heard yet. In our opinion torrents are an excellent way to present you with our music. That's why Beep! Beep! and Mininova have teamed up. We like the fact that you're taking the effort to get to know new music. In fact, we'd like to thank you for downloading and seeding our music by giving you a discount on our hardcopies."

But, of course, we'll probably still hear from people about how such torrent sites are destroying the recording industry... even as it helps enable exactly what's coming next.

Filed Under: business models, music, scarcities, selling, torrents
Companies: beep! beep!, mininova

So Only When Piracy Gets Really Bad Will Record Labels Change Their Act?

from the just-wondering dept

Google is today launching a free, ad-supported music service in China, with the backing of more than 140 record labels, including the Big 4. The service sounds like exactly the sort of thing that people have been calling for since the Napster days: a search engine linked to a trove of music files, supported by advertising. Google's wanted to add some sort of music search to its Chinese product for some time, as it's been at a significant disadvantage to rivals like Baidu, which have the feature to thank for much of their success. The record labels say this is the first attempt to monetize online music in China, and mirrors moves by some movie studios to compete with piracy there with new products and services, rather than through lawsuits and lobbying. These efforts always give a nod to the rampant piracy going on in China -- acting as if it's a completely different environment than the rest of the world. So is the lesson here that only if piracy, or at least the labels' and studios' perceptions of it, gets "bad enough", will they do something positive, rather than sue people or try to get laws strengthened in their favor? Or is it only because those aren't viable options in China that companies try something different there? The fact that the labels are moving forward with this plan in China, given its reputation as the wild west of copyright infringement, undermine their contention that they can solve the supposed piracy problem with legal or technological means elsewhere. Furthermore, it exposes the reality that what's staring them in the face is a tremendous opportunity, not a problem.

Filed Under: china, downloads, labels, music, piracy
Companies: google

A Different Model For Touring: House Concerts

from the watch-the-innovation dept

We recently posted a report pointing out that touring revenue wouldn't be an acceptable substitute for a loss in recorded music sales. A part of that report suggested that there just weren't that many efficiencies that could be wrung out of the live touring business, while also noting how expensive it can be to put on a tour. Part of my problem with that report was that it focused very much on an old model of touring, and didn't consider that new technologies could, in fact, really change the way people think about touring.

For example, plenty of folks have pointed to the success Jonathan Coulton has had with touring, by using services like Eventful to guarantee a large enough crowd at a certain location and showing up for a "strategic" concert in a place where he's guaranteed to make some money out of it. But some are taking it even further. We've certainly talked about backyard/house concerts before (in fact, we've been suggesting them for about six years), and we've seen Jill Sobule use them as part of her model to fund her latest album. She ended up doing five or six of them, and said they were lots of fun (and she's still open to doing some more).

However, I recently came across a story from a band who basically did an an entire tour based on (mostly) house concerts. The story is from February, but I just found out about it, seeing it mentioned in the comments on a post from Andrew Dubber about how he wants to attempt house consulting for bands (an interesting idea in itself).

The story of the house concerts tour is really fascinating, though, in a variety of ways. Basically, the band -- based in the UK -- were able to book a bunch of gigs all at people's homes around the US. They did most of the booking via Twitter, from people who followed them, noting how much more efficient this was than the traditional system of begging different venues to put on a show:

Method for our tour: "talk to lots of people on twitter >> make friends >> allow them to discover music as they get interested in who we are >> tell them we're touring >> invite them to host gig >> Book in the dates" - the audience is a shoe-in, cos most people can fairly easily find 15-30 friends who are up for a crazy night of music making in a house. It's a nuts idea, it's fun, and it has the added benefit of being validated by a friend of their's... if Tracy/Linda/Angela/Steve/Gus etc are willing to book this, it MUST be good. The person who books the show then emails the links to what we do around (no need to send out CDs) so people have an idea what to expect. Everyone comes to the gig, eats, listens, buys CDs, and we go home with money and loads of new friends. Win-Win.

Other benefits were that the gigs were tons of fun and the band saved on hotels since they usually were able to crash at the house that put on the house concert. They note how many amazing people they met, and how much of a connection they made with folks by playing in such an intimate setting. Also, an advantage of such house concerts is that it was a great way to expand their audience and fanbase, since the "host" basically would go out and recruit a bunch of friends -- most of whom knew nothing about the band before seeing them play.

Perhaps most interesting of all: the band made more money on this tour than they did in the past touring clubs. They noted that the "risk" and costs are much lower. While they say they aren't getting rich this way, they are earning money -- and more than the "old" way of doing things.

So, once again, this obviously isn't a model that works for everyone -- and no one's saying it is. But it does show yet another business model that can work for certain bands, by taking a very different look at the market and coming up with creative and innovative ways to get themselves out there, and do so profitably.

Filed Under: business models, house concerts, music, touring

Josh Freese's $250 Option Sells Out In Less Than 48 Hours

from the not-bad dept

Last month, we wrote about how Josh Freese was using rather hilarious tiers to sell his latest album. In my keynote at the Leadership Music Digital Summit earlier this week, I used Freese as an example of a less well known artist doing something similar (and yes, we're working to get the video of the keynote online, but it may take a little while). Now Ian Rogers from Topspin alerts us to the fact that Josh's $250 tier has sold out in less than 48 hours (there were a total of 25 available). At that tier you got a signed CD/DVD (and the music as a download), a t-shirt, a signed drumhead and drumstick and lunch with Josh at PF Changs or The Cheesecake Factory (he's apparently a big fan). That's a gross of $6,250 for just that option alone. That's no $750,000, but it's a pretty damn good start for a musician that is a lot less well known. Looks like Josh is going to become pretty well known at the local PF Changs... and I'm sure some folks will still claim that these models can't work for less well known musicians.

Filed Under: business models, josh freese, music, tiers

Music Industry Folks Worried About iTunes Variable Pricing

from the it's-going-to-annoy-people dept

Aaron Martin-Colby alerts us to an LA Times report saying that Apple's variable pricing for iTunes is set to launch on April 7th (a week later than initially planned). More interesting, however, are the reports that many music industry veterans are quite worried about this, and believe that Apple and the major record labels are making a big mistake in that it's going to piss off and annoy fans, just at a time when they should be embracing fans and giving them more of a reason to buy. The fear is that adding that extra $0.30 to many tracks will add in enough of a mental transaction cost ("is this song really worth that extra $0.30?") that it may harm sales. Some, like Ted Cohen (former EMI exec, who's now been pushing his former colleagues to finally enter the 21st century) worries that it's going to backfire in a big way:

"This will be a PR nightmare. It is for the music industry what the AIG bonuses are for the insurance industry."

And the manager of Nine Inch Nails noted something similar:

"Wouldn't it make sense to try to price it cheaper instead of squeezing the handful of people who are still willing to pay for music?"

Oddly, the LA Times article claims that the new pricing scheme is "true to supply-and-demand economics," but, as Gizmodo notes, that's not true at all. The supply is infinite. So if it were true to supply-and-demand economics, the price would be free. The actual price is based on an artificially limited supply and a made up demand.

Filed Under: itunes, music, supply and demand, ted cohen, variable pricing
Companies: apple

Musician Called A Copyright Violator On MySpace For Uploading Her Own Music

from the hurray-for-copyright dept

The various record labels have pushed sites like MySpace to institute aggressive filters to try to stomp out the ability of people to upload others' music -- but as with any such filters, they seem to make mistakes that aren't easily fixed. Reader Ken Blake points us to the news that indie musician Emily Bezar had her account flagged as a copyright violator after she tried to upload five or six songs from her own self-produced CD. She's emailed MySpace's support email... and seems to have heard absolutely nothing back weeks later. But, no, overly aggressive copyright enforcement doesn't hurt anyone, right?

Filed Under: copyright, emily bezar, music, uploads
Companies: myspace

Oh Gosh: How Dare People Want To Listen To Music

from the how-dare-they dept

It looks like we've found the new evil bogeyman for the recording industry: people daring to listen to music for free online. We mentioned it earlier this month, when there was a report about how all the various online streaming services were taking away from sales. Apparently, the record labels are passing around statistics claiming that such streaming services hurt music, claiming (incorrectly) that "there's nothing left to promote."

This morning, at the Leadership Music Digital Summit, Russ Crupnick, a music industry analyst at the NPD Group, gave a "state of the industry" talk, where he pointed out (good) that p2p file sharing isn't as big a problem as the industry makes it out to be, but then dove into the "problem" that more and more consumers of music are "only listening to music," using these various online sites and services, rather than buying the music. It seems to be quite a strange world where the idea that lots of people are paying attention to your product and it's seen as a "problem." He even noted that folks who do buy (such as concert tickets) tend to spend a lot more on music-related goods (beyond just concert tickets) but seems to brush over that.

While it's good to see that folks are starting to get beyond just blaming P2P (though, Crupnick did repeatedly refer to it incorrectly as "stealing" music), this industry has a serious problem: it looks at every single opportunity as a "problem" or a "threat" and never as an opportunity. I would argue that's a much bigger problem than fans daring to listen to and share music.

Filed Under: business models, listening, music, streaming