http://azoz.com/newsarchive/2008/12/strategy.html

Developing a Better Strategy

by George Ziemann -- December 27, 2008

I haven't written anything since, like, yesterday, so I want to talk about the 10 million "unsold" songs again from a slightly different perspective, namely that independents have a much greater advantage than I previously realized.

First, let's review the infro from Tech Radar:

Recent figures suggest that out of the 13 million tracks available for download, just 52,000 songs made up 80 per cent of music purchased online.

When it comes to albums, a staggering 1.23 million albums were made available with just 173,000 bought ­ which equates to 85 per cent of bands and singers who released an album this year did not sell one single copy.

Some people may see this as a very bad sign. I previously mentioned that this means that 70 percent of all the signed acts didn't sell a copy, as the RIAA claims 85 percent of the market. That also relies on not one independent having sold a copy, so the actual percentage is probably higher.

I thought about that again. Those that didn't sell a single copy weren't actually part of the market, so there's no real way to tell how that breaks out. Percentages are very handy that way.

The part that I got right is that if you sell even one CD, you're in the top 15 percent. How many do you have to sell to hit the top 14 percent? Or 10 percent? While this is all very interesting, forget it. The important question is really how you can sell some songs or CDs.

"But Mr. Wizard Guy, 85 percent didn't sell a single album. What chance do I have?"

CD sales may suck, but concert grosses set a record this year. Obviously, people are still willing to drop a buck or five for entertainment. The iPhone has an app that farts. It's bringing in $10,000 a day right now.

At five years old, the iTunes Music Store is the oldest and biggest of the online music retailers, the first thing that the RIAA didn't sue out of existence. There are also eMusic (older than iTMS?), Amazon, and others available now. The point is that it's still a really new idea that hasn't matched the life cycle of the 8-track yet.

The major labels have spent most of that time trying to sabotage the whole idea. Simultaneously switching to a download delivery system while preaching that downloading is theft seems rather self-defeating. Suing people seemed downright stupid. Nobody is buying their music? What a fucking surprise.

The average independent's problem is most likely that no one knows who the hell you are. No one is "stealing" your music. You can't get them to look for it, much less steal it.

The only solution to this is to generate publicity. This is always tricky, as "generate publicity" often turns into "get arrested." In the long run, this is not necessarily a bad thing, but it's gonna mean you might miss a gig. So if you are going to get arrested, after the last set on Saturday is probably the most convenient time to get tossed in the slammer. In England, it appears that being arrested or forced into rehab on a regular basis is almost a requirement.

Another prime opportunity still in the toddler stage is YouTube and user-generated videos. Warner Music doesn't want anyone to see any videos with their artists or their music. Well, that'll help sales. But thanks for getting all your shit out of the way. We thought we would have to load the truck.

What YouTube, and iTunes, Amazon and everything else going on right now offers is merely opportunity. For the most part, it's opportunity that the majors have turned their noses up at. It doesn't take a half million dollars to create an album. It doesn't take Martin Scorsese and a huge budget to make a successful pop music video, either.

It doesn't matter as much how much it costs to make. All that matters is that people like it enough to buy a copy. It could amuse them or resonate with them. It could appeal to their sense of harmony or oppose it with anarchy. And there is absolutely no way in hell to predict what people will react to.

As an artist, I don't trust my own judgement on what constitutes a good song. We (Hurricane) always try to find some objective listeners who will tell us what they don't like. Other than that, we can only go by what is streamed and downloaded. There was a recent period where our cover of "Some Kind of Wonderful" was downloaded more than 2000 times in a week.

Carl said, "I don't get it. We didn't play it right, sang the wrong words, didn't even do a very good job, and it gets downloaded 2000 times? WHY?"

It doesn't matter why.

The best way to improve your odds is simply to increase your number of entries. We've been pretty successful with recording this year and are geared up for some more. We expect to release at least three albums in the next 12 months.

I expect that if we ever do have a profitable song or album, it'll be because of some out-take or joke song that we threw together in two minutes, or a complete accident of some sort. But it would seem that sooner or later, someone would at least stumble upon the collection and go, "Damn, these guys have a lot of tunes. Who the hell are they, anyway?"

Also, when someone does find you, and you've only got three tunes for them to listen to, well, hope you picked the right three. At 75-100 songs (I haven't counted lately), we've got enough to keep you occupied for a while, maybe even get you to invite your friends.

One of the greatest advantages is if you're working every night and have a varying audience. People seem to be the most receptive to buying a new artist's music (or an older artist's newest release) right after they've seen them. But in that case, you'll probably do better with CDs and t-shirts.

You've got to have that magic song that people latch onto for whatever reason it is people latch on to things. Everyone has their own set of songs, their own reasons for liking them or not. Then there are songs which you might not even particularly like that get stuck in your head.

As msucians, we'd all like to think that people will buy our music and attend our shows because of our awe-inspiring talent. That doesn't explain Crazy Frog, Tiny Tim, the Sex Pistols or several current entire genres. If you think quality recording is the magic ingredient, go listen to "Louie, Louie" again. It is one of the best rock songs ever and one of the worst.

The other good thing to remember when you hear that (insert rock star here) has sold a million albums in the U.S., there were still 299 million people that didn't buy it. There's a lot of audience out there who just isn't hearing anything that speaks to them. I think this "branding" concept that is being knocked about is questionable, too. Nothing says rock and roll authenticity like a fashion line and perfume, eh?

It's all a big crap shoot. Your success or failure is not dependent on that of the next guy, or the next band. All it takes is that one magic event that puts a song in the perfect place, hits the right audience and allows it to become a hit -- even if it defies (or simply ignores) the current pop sensibilities.

Sooner or later, the cream will rise to the top, but you've got to milk the cow first. Use both hands.

Musician finds a following online then, sadly, gets a record deal.

I'm gonna take your word in trust and not even gonna click that link George...

Your summary here is TOO damn depressing (AND, that Musician who was "found" just LOST an ear.)

I mean,

fuggit, why should anyone even BOTHER to look when the "news" is that someone got signed (aka, enslaved/force-f**ked up the ass)

*sigh*

Sick Sad World

Because what he was doing before the signing was working.

getting the blogger's to catch just one of your works can make it viral in days. I don't know the label he signed is it indie? or is it an affiliate of the devil?

at another omd/music/social site they add blog scrapes without the artist even knowing, but these scrapes seem to get the most notice and go viral fast at that particular site and cause buyers at there amazon store.

its all about milking the cow.

The band/artist in the first comment is Bon Iver. The label (indie) is Jagjaguar, home to Okkervil River, another indie fave. Don't axe me, I've maybe heard one song from the later band, nothing of the former.

I don't know why we should be sad about someone signing with an indie label. Not everyone can or wants to do it all themselves. That article in Wired magazine with David Byrne and Brian Eno had a section that delineated all the different sorts of ways a musician could distribute his music -- on a spectrum all the way from major label enslavement down to ordering CDs yourself and selling them from the back of your car. In between would be single album deals with indie labels, or hiring a firm only for distribution. And so on. Byrne felt that there were many valid options, depending on the amount the artist wanted to do for himself.

Not being in the business, I can't comment on the wisdom of Byrne's comments. But he has been major label, and is now independent -- doing only deals on each album as it is produced. Byrne also said most of his money now is from licensing -- for TV, film, and commercial, I suppose.

Obviously, I didn't read the article well enough or do any research. For some reason, I assumed the label would be owned by one of the majors.

autodidact is right. It's all about having options.

Hillary Rosen used to say we had two options -- Sign with the RIAA or play at the corner bar forever. At the time, she was pretty much right. But it's not true today.

"Hillary Rosen used to say we had two options -- Sign with the RIAA or play at the corner bar forever. At the time, she was pretty much right. But it's not true today."

so very true and for the musicians that are reading it is up to us to take and run with the options we have now, as the riaa closes doors from its fans and locks them out from there music. Now is the time to put our best foot forward in through the windows they are leaving open for us. Get your music up and out on you tube make it your best the best you can do. fill the gap! send your EP?CD?demo song to every blogger you can, and hey if you peak interest from label check it out don't jump in make sure its what you want to do and it will be good for you in the long run.

I can't say never sign a major deal... that's up to each musician to decide, will I ever again? hell no! but there are some great indie labels that can help distribute your music so you don't have to do it your self.

FANS: help spread the word about your favorite indie musician/band/song... blog it send it to bloggers, post links on your social sites, make a video (ask first maybe... Empire Day wouldn't mind finding a fan video up on you tube )

Soldiers in the fight: do the same as the fans!

As the RIAA or majors keep cutting their own limbs off, we need to step up the pace we have the ability at least for now with the technology (internet, home recording, low cost pro mastering etc. etc.) there is no reason non major label music isn't getting out to the masses. Each and every day more and more are getting out.
rant over

According to Tunecore (and remembering they're not the only ones in this new distribution era -- see ad at bottom of page), we're releasing as much into the retail stream every three days as the majors do in a year.

Considering the industry failure rate (90%) as a universal ratio of the better acts to the total number of acts out there, there should be AT LEAST one new indie album released every single day that is truly a great album.

We just don't know how to find them. Worse, no one is trying to find them and tell us about it yet. That's what we need next -- trusted sources of what's worth listening to.

In a few more years, maybe sooner, we will BE the music industry.

"At the time, she was pretty much right. But it's not true today."

If so, that means...


WE WON!

(Ticker-tape parade for Boycott-RIAA and friends!)




=========

Well, we won PART 1...

--

"We just don't know how to find them. Worse, no one is trying to find them and tell us about it yet. That's what we need next -- trusted sources of what's worth listening to.

In a few more years, maybe sooner, we will BE the music industry."

--

Folks, there is STILL a hill to climb!

"We just don't know how to find them. Worse, no one is trying to find them and tell us about it yet. That's what we need next -- trusted sources of what's worth listening to."

This is a great point. Radio is corrupted. MP3 bloggers try to perform this function -- sifting through the dreck and publicizing the diamonds, but they are subject to small bribes too, I think. Plus, most of them seem relatively insensitive to good technical musicianship and recording finesse. I don't find their opinions reliable, in the main. Maybe there just needs to be a new generation of MP3 bloggers with better taste!

Probably I'm just getting to be an old fuddy-duddy, or else we're going through an era in music that simply doesn't appeal to me. I'm listening to more classical and jazz than anything at the moment.

"
We just don't know how to find them. Worse, no one is trying to find them and tell us about it yet. That's what we need next -- trusted sources of what's worth listening to."

Great... What makes you any different than the riaa then? Is this what it's all about? you want control over the distribution instead of the riaa?

"Considering the industry failure rate (90%) as a universal ratio of the better acts to the total number of acts out there, there should be AT LEAST one new indie album released every single day that is truly a great album."

If you guys ever do release a retail cd, You can count on me buying it. Personal differences aside, I am a fan!

RaidHHI,

There were never any PERSONAL differences.

I/We (folks, can I say we?)

I/my difference was that you always thought the way to win was to share the RIAA crap.

I always advised the opposite.

------

"We the people" tend to love and buy only products that are known...

YOU kept making the unfairly known even MORE known by hosting/ripping/etc.

WE advised NOT sharing the "known" (NOT because most of the "known" sucks... BUT because most of the "known" is UNFAIRLY known.)

I know, I know. Such Ideas are impossible to communicate.

That is why I give up.

I QUIT!!!!!

=======

I hope someone else comes along to take my place soon.

Raid and I are OK. We just like to debate the issues.

Great... What makes you any different than the riaa then? Is this what it's all about? you want control over the distribution instead of the riaa?

Not control. Just inclusion.

10 years ago, you didn't get into retail without the RIAA because they owned all the distribution, controlled all the shelf space. Even if you were "independent," in the U.S., Warner Music was probably the distributor.

7 years ago, the RIAA was having my sales taken down because I referenced more than one act to describe what our band sounds like (as in "a cross between X and Y").

When I was younger, our "trusted sources of what's worth listening to" mainly consisted of the radio. The RIAA bought that influence, making the cost of entry simply too high for indies to approach.

The only distribution I want to control is that of my own stuff. Until recently, access to retail distribution has been an obstacle, which generally involved a 7-year contract because the major labels owned all the access points. There was no distribution to control.

This obstacle has been removed, by the retailers.

We can choose which stores to put it in, but that is the extent of our new-found power. Just getting it in the stores is reason to celebrate. This does not give us any sort of control over anything. We are now simply enabled to sell digital recordings through known and accepted on-line retailers.

All it does is give us the opportunity to compete with the big boys on the merits of the music and our ability to attract an audience. It's the level playing field we always wanted.

Do I want indies to steal the RIAA's market share? Hell, yes. But this isn't control of the industry. Even if we somehow capture the majority of the marketplace, it will still be divided among tens of thousands of separate and diverse small labels and acts with no sort of organizational backing or lobbying strength.

Just a bunch of bands competing for individual purchases from the music fans.

We could control the direction of music somewhat by what we create, but in the end, it's up to the audience to decide what's going to sell today. There's no way to control that.

This is the first time we've really been allowed in the marketplace. So if I sold 100 CDs, they didn't count. If every band on DMusic sold 100 copies on their own website, it still wouldn't count. Now they do. We should start picking up market share on that reality alone.

A strong independent movement would seem to decentralize power and influence of the majors while bringing greater diversity to music itself. Plus, the artists get paid more when the label isn't there taking 85%.

What makes you any different than the riaa then?

The artists get paid. The fans don't get sued. We'll keep trying to make better music instead of bad laws. We won't be singing the "You're Stealing Our Stuff" song.

But you quoted the "trusted sources" part to go with that question, which I don't quite get. That's not a control issue, either. I'm just saying it would be nice if there were more people out there actively and objectively looking for new music and pointing out the good ones.

And in the spirit of the level playing field, it wouldn't matter if the same source reviewed RIAA material as well. Again, we're merely looking for inclusion, not exclusivity.

In my opinion, this, combined with the natural human curiosity to find something new, at a point in time where the record labels are producing less music than they have in decades, could be enough to democratize the music business, open up some new genres and bring life back to music.

The only thing independents want to control is their own destiny. If we are successful, it will damage the RIAA and break their control, but none of us will be big enough to control anything.

Amen.