Music Business – Hindsight 20/20

July 18, 2009 at 7:23 am | In Marketing, Media Business, Music Business | 1 Comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

EMI Music CEO Elio Leoni-Sceti has been recently quoted saying:

Looking at the music industry, which has become something of a bellwether for other media businesses, we have a situation where seventy percent of music consumption is digital and yet only about twenty percent of music company revenues are derived from digital.  Music is in demand and the demand is growing all the time, but we’ve clearly lost touch with our consumers.

Not to ‘Monday Morning Quarterback’ too much, but I would argue that in order to lose touch with your consumers, you actually have to be in touch to begin with and that has never been the case.  Consumers are ’song’ driven and have been since the beginning of radio, but it was always the format that restricted consumption.  From vinyl, to 8-track, to cassette, to CD there were always natural barriers in place to restrict unauthorized distribution.  While those restrictions were in place, artists were bloating their records with filler and labels were increasing their profits, compounding consumer frustration.  The Music Industry can claim ‘bellwether’ status all they want, but to miss the potential of the Internet was just ignorant, filing copyright infringement suits against your consumers was, and is, counterproductive, developing DRM technology was wasteful and futile, and to think consumers wouldn’t gravitate back to single consumption if given the opportunity is just evidence that a few key people had their head stuck in the sand.  It was a nice effort, but it was all ‘reactive’.  Nothing was proactive.  Nobody thought to look ahead.  Nobody thought to plan ahead, and for that, let’s take a moment and pause for the 7 Ps:

Prior Proper Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance

So…In order to leave you with something other than complaints about the obvious, here are a few things I’ve come up with that I would have done differently:

  • Embrace and build P2P in an effort to monetize, cross-market, gather consumer data, and track consumer behavior
  • Demand variable track pricing from day 1 in order to generate revenue with regard to demand
  • Raise the ‘Standard’ track price
  • Build Label-Owned and Label-Merchandised online music destination equipped to compete
  • Empower a 3rd party vendor where competing labels have an equity stake
  • Bring Booking, Publishing, and Management, Distribution, and Merch In-House where possible
  • Develop a modular and streamlined way of delivering digital product
  • Monetize every Artist website and begin a relationship with the consumer at a transactional level
  • Abandon all DRM efforts
  • Invest heavily in a more positive, artist-driven, public re-education campaign around Intellectual Property and Fair Use
  • Aggressively restructure and reorganize
  • Simplify physical product pricing, promotion, and distribution

You may agree or disagree with many of these, but I encourage you to leave your own ideas in the comments section, especially if you believe I’ve left a gaping hole somewhere.  Not to necessarily ‘blamestorm’, but to better understand where we came from and what we have come through in order to better prepare ourselves for the future.  Also, if you want to a consistently good read from a guy who really appreciates the history of the Music Business and music in general, subscribe to the Clore Chronicles.

Moving on though, I think the real challenge is where we go from here.  Leoni-Sceti’s comments above regarding digital consumption versus revenue is a huge disconnect and a code that isn’t easily cracked.  It makes it even more difficult to dig out given the macroeconomic constraints present in today’s US economy.  From my perspective, I still don’t think we are proactive enough.  I still don’t think we are aggressive enough.  So many people are just clinging to their jobs and trying to manage their daily duties, previously handled by multiple people.  I’m not sure who’s looking ahead anymore.  Godin and Anderson are two of my favorite idea guys, but they aren’t the decision makers here.  To make matters worse, I don’t think the future of the business is going to be as glaringly obvious as before.  In the last year, we’ve watched Myspace rise and fall, Facebook gravitate towards women over 55, and Twitter rise to the top overnight in a manner that screams ‘fad’.  We don’t have time for a slow build formula, technology, model, or destination, but that’s what instills trust, relationships, and ultimately transactions.

To sum it up:

The Music Industry can’t afford people spending time looking ahead, but then again…they can’t afford not too

Relationship Marketing: Bringing back “Direct to Consumer”

March 1, 2009 at 4:28 am | In Marketing, Mobile, Music Business | Leave a Comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I can’t prove it, but my guess is that “Direct to Consumer” was the earliest form of retail.  An artisan crafted his product and then sold it directly to those in the community who were willing to pay for it.  His brand was his reputation and his reputation was only as good as his product and his relationship with his customers.  Marketing his product was exactly the same as marketing himself.  Things have changed since then.  Mass manufacturing and distribution have opened the doors for specialists, but specialists, by default, need partners, and partners, by default, come between the maker and the buyer, effectively destroying the essence of Direct to Consumer.

So there is a disconnect.  One that marketers have tried to cover up for decades by telling stories and connecting the dots between products and consumers.  It’s just that those messages are falling more frequently upon deaf ears, or at best competing against a hundred other messages at once.

There are also technological issues at play.  Marketing is story-telling; stories require channels, and most channels are dictated by technology.  So “gadgets” become the gatekeepers of the story.  This was not a problem when the gadget was ubiquitous, but buyers are dispersing at an exponential rate into niche electronic ecosystems where standards are sparse and quality is demanded.  The mobile industry is a perfect example of this.  Even though almost everyone you know owns a mobile phone, each carrier is proprietary, each handset model is unique, and each user utilizes the phone’s features differently.

Abundant resources are still being spent on some tried and true methods of marketing (TV, Radio, Advertising, Email, Retail Placement, etc) but it’s becoming a crap-shoot at best.  If you’re selling records, radio stations have to hit millions of people weekly to see any retail conversion at all, and the costs of advertising has becoming more difficult to justify with every click-thru campaign.  We all know that email open rates are unacceptable and retail shelf space is shrinking.  So this brings us back to the basics.  Back to an entrepreneurial level.  To make matters worse, while the industry straps up its boots, history laughs as we complain about going through this inevitable valley that some argue we created for ourselves.  Especially in this economy, the Music Industry’s corporate structure is a great way to be cost effective, but the corporate mentality is a liability.  So what is the most important asset moving forward?  Relationships

What are 2 key elements of a successful relationship?

  • Communication
  • Trust

And what does a relationship get you?

  • A Valid Email Address
  • An Attentive Ear
  • An Impulse Buy
  • An Early Adopter
  • An Open Wallet
  • A Repeat Customer
  • Word of Mouth (The loudest most effective Voice)

To the music industry’s credit, over the years they specialized in “music” while forging thousands of crucial and lucrative partnerships with 3rd parties (iTunes, Wal-Mart, Amazon, Best Buy, etc) to accelerate their product into the marketplace and amplify the message.  For these partners, product was supplied, so their efforts were focused on building a strong relationship with their consumer.  While there is nothing wrong with these partnerships, the labels failed to create their own direct relationship with their artists’ fans, ultimately bringing us to where we are now; completely reliant upon our partners to generate revenue for our products and communicate with our customers.  Sure.  We did a lot of good things to help promote the roster, but we didn’t do anything to take the relationship to the next level.  We didn’t complete the cycle.  We didn’t monetize it.  Monetization requires a higher level of trust.  A clearer method of communication.  A level of trust and communication that turns a fan into a consumer.  It’s a different challenge altogether.  A challenge that is dependent upon deep relationships.

Maybe it wasn’t possible to facilitate this relationship then, or maybe it wasn’t cost effective.  Regardless, our partners are not only taking our margin, they are taking our customer data and severing our communication lines in the process.  Every credit card swiped at Wal-Mart or account setup at iTunes is another brick in the wall between the labels and music buyers.  Sure, the product is moving and that’s great, but the spoils of the sale go to the partners, and the longer we wait, the more difficult it becomes to get that back.

So we begin with relationships.  Deep relationships.

Challenges facing Direct to Consumer Initiatives

December 17, 2008 at 1:43 am | In Marketing, Music Business | 1 Comment
Tags: , , ,

The goal for every Direct to Consumer start-up should be creating a great customer experience.  Even though Direct to Consumer is necessary and something the Majors should have broken ground on years ago, the consumer experience is the reason that it will never be the ultimate solution.  It’s a great way to service a superfan with exclusive content, bundle products together, and energize the core, but if I’m a casual pop/rock consumer and I want to buy Coldplay, Britney Spears,  All American Rejects, and let’s say Victor Wooten…because we all like to think we are eclectic…I’ve got to shop at 4 different stores to satisfy my thirst.  Or I could go to Amazon.

The record labels have been tossing “Direct to Consumer” terminology around for decades.  It’s this dream that one day, they will own the distribution and retail channel for their products.  Digital formats and the vast capabilities of the Internet now fuel the fire burning at the end of this tunnel.  Even though the light is more evident, the major labels are no closer to a good solution than they were a year ago and the patchwork quilt of makeshift solutions I’ve seen or read about lately are almost always utilizing 3rd party vendors in some way.  This not only voids the D2C portion of the effort, but complicates the entire issue.  The benefits of D2C are higher margins at point of sale, acquisition of customer data (or fan data), control of the product configuration (digital, physical, posters, t-shirts, tickets, etc.), merchandising control, customized and well-times marketing campaigns, and control of the price-point.  Those benefits have to be weighed against these challenges in order to create a successful D2C solution.

  • Rising Costs – With higher margins, come higher costs of doing business.  You’ve got new expenses (i.e. Web Design, IS&T, Accounting, Customer Service, Online Marketing, Micropayment Transaction Fees, distribution, etc.) 
  • Trust – As each label creates their own storefront and online shopping cart, they are asking each consumer to trust yet another cyber-entity with their credit card information.  Getting a consumer to register, login, and then purchase is a daunting task.  One that even experienced retailers like Amazon have trouble doing on a tight budget.
  • Standards – Within each genre, there are multiple labels.  Great for healthy competition, but horrendous when you think that each label within each genre would be asking every consumer for their personal information on an individual level.  Each site will be different, some easy to navigate and some a nightmare.   Consumers want an easy solution and a transparent transaction.  They want to feel like it’s not costing them anything.
  • Liability - This goes back to trust.  The more sites that pop up, the more difficult it becomes for the consumer to distinguish which ones can be trusted.  The door is wide open for mock websites and other spamming opportunities.  Risk increases significantly along with your payroll if you expect to keep the damages to a minimum.

Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Pool by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.