Going, gone & gone for good this time

Going
Some weeks, the music industry delivers nothing but disappointment. It started this time last week hearing Mark Thomson announcing at the FT Media Conference, as part of a new BBC consultation, the proposed closure of 6 Music. The logic was nothing if not cloudy. However, it has been good to note that since, there has been a really strong & swift backlash, with a groundswell of opinion rightly raging against the machine.

Now 6 Music is not perfect, but it genuinely serves a sustainable, growing niche - exactly the role of a public service broadcaster essentially. If you, like me, don't want to lose your Guy Garvey's Finest Hour (the best two hours of a Sunday evening there is second perhaps only to when Wallander's on), Gideon Coe or Adam & Joe, then go and join up the various petitions and comment on the BBC consultation site. Help make them see some sense for goodness sakes.

Gone
So I got a call yesterday from a business correspondent at the Indy asking for a quote on Elio Leoni Sceti. I hadn't heard the news even, but it took me less than a second to realise - and to not be surprised. Didn't even miss a beat in the conversation. But it's no less disturbing when reflecting on it. The italian gent was, in my view, an inspired choice - something Guy had not exactly built a reputation for in the music business, by the point to which he hired Leoni-Sceti.

I met Elio twice last year. Both times he made a point of coming from behind his desk, not a blackberry or iPhone in sight, to sit ready for pure, effective exchange. Undivided attention. That's quite rare among music leaders in my experience. He was a good listener and asker of questions. He's calm and collected and had managed to galvanise what was left of morale within EMI. The results under his tenureship (if you can call it that) were unarguably good.

But then after just 18 months in the role, he has become yet another licensed-to-innovate leader from outside the music industry that has essentially failed to innovate from within it. Not his fault. Like a legendary football manager once said, you can only do so much up to the point when it all becomes about the players on the pitch. But with music, maybe it's not the players either, but the structure by which the whole game is put together.

Gone again
Even much worse news had come the evening before via a text from a friend (you can see how much I'm keeping up with music news of my own volition right now), who sent me a link to a Tim Jonze blog titled "Sparklehorse took the ugly and made it beautiful". I knew instantly what that meant - before reading one more word of the fittingly touching piece. Turns out Mark Linkous had shot himself in the heart.

I bought Vivadixiesubmarinetransmissionplot when it was first released in 1995. Didn't get on with it, despite all the rave reviews it got. I left Sparklehorse well alone until I capitulated - again on the strength of the reviews - and bought It's A Wonderful Life on the way home from a New York trip. Fell in love with it on listen two - right there on the return flight. I saw them/him tour that album with a gig at Union Chapel Islington - quietly inspiring. I loved seeing a sedentary Linkous just play, calm & focused, his sometimes driving rock, but his oh so delicate fragile ballads - he even played the tracks with all the twiddly bits. He seemed to know the strength of the material and the way in which it was played was what mattered, more than any sense of performance. It was a privilege to witness that. And I liked the way he played guitar, like he'd learnt it only recently, but didn't want to play any better than he exactly needed to for the songs.

I've since played his weirdly abstract, utterly unique sounding music during times high & low. Most of all, I remember playing a compilation of Sparklehorse ballads I labeled 'lullabies' (on minidisk) to my first daughter for the weeks after she was born. I even nick-named her Homecoming Queen (later Queenie) after the song of that name. Kids actually love Sparklehorse, because the lyrics make sense to them maybe, somehow. And he mentions lots of animals. Somehow, of all Linkous's spaced out crazy lyrics (did I really forget to mention him when I blogged here about those before) the one I like best is from Spirit Ditch, which might actually frighten my kids a bit. It goes:

"woke up in, a burned out basement
sleeping with metal hands
in a spirit ditch"

Now I don't know what that means and you don't know either. Neither did Linkous probably. And none of us would want to end up there. But my word it is worth listening to every now & then. Linkous reminds us it's a sad & beautiful world, but also a wonderful life. Linkous was fully qualified - after all he once died for a full two minutes before making a recovery. But this time he really is in the Spirit Ditch.

Major Music Labels: Great Power, Great Responsibility

At the start of the summer, Billboard magazine published an opinion piece by me on Marvel Entertainment - that company's remarkable turnaround and the potential lessons for major record labels. You may have seen that in recent days, Disney has also seen the value in Marvel, acquiring the company for $4 billion.

This being a music blog, I won't go into the why's & wherefore's of Disney-Marvel, but it's one to watch as to whether Disney will get its return, without compromising Marvel's brand too much. Anyhow, with kind courtesy of Billboard, my op-ed is published here in full for anyone who missed it. For similar food for thought, you might also want to re-visit my very first blog post on HBO - Music Lessons from a Content Powerhouse. For the true believers then...

With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility

Music is being consumed by more people in more ways than ever before—we just have to figure out how to monetize it.

How many people have said that now? More people in more places than ever before, basically. Yet all is not well with the way the music industry is adapting to the new paradigm. Digital delivery may be changing the game for consumers and artists, but the bit in the middle—the industry—hasn’t yet figured out where the real money is going to come from. Meanwhile core product sales are in structural decline. What’s an industry to do?

Well, back in the late 1990s, another great entertainment business was dying on its back—comic book publishing—and specifically a great American cultural icon, Marvel Comics. In 1997, Marvel Entertainment escaped bankruptcy by a thread thinner than one of Spiderman’s. The company had failed to diversify its publishing business and flooded the market with comic book lines, effectively commoditizing its core business and leaving the company with a stock value of under $1. Yet today, Marvel is transformed with a stock value of $32 and a market capitalization of $2.5 billion. It is currently piling on the growth, riding roughshod over the global recession.

In order to rebuild, Marvel was forced to transform itself from a products business to a licensing business. With its “superstar” characters bringing in consistently lower yields, it needed to find a way to make money from its entire catalog of characters—not just the big names.

Three strategies began to turn Marvel’s fortunes around:

1. Licensing. After the success of Sam Raimi’s “Spider-Man,” Marvel had hot IP once again. Other studios took a renewed interest in its characters and there was a rush to license other major characters from the portfolio.
   
2. Product development. Nothing impacts on the culture like blockbuster movies, enabling Marvel’s characters to become hugely popular toys, video games, clothing and party accessories.
   
3. Character development. With a library of over 4,000 characters, Marvel went to work on strategies for commercializing the mid-tail brands, including Daredevil, Elektra, X-Men and Ghost Rider.

By 2003 Marvel was rejuvenated, with steadily increasing revenues and profits. One key insight that helped drive this new phase of growth was the Marvel brand itself. Marvel had created a universe where characters not only had their own compelling stories, but where those stories were carefully and complexly interwoven with other characters. That universe is what drew many fans (including me) to Marvel comic books in the first place and still does, to its increasing stable of movies and related products. Now, the Marvel Universe concept is integrated throughout the company’s strategy.

The potential is there for record companies to use their labels in a similar way. Not easy, but it could be essential to long-term success. Island’s 50th Anniversary celebrations couldn’t be achieved without focusing on its identity. Nonesuch has created a wonderfully eclectic but somehow cohesive community of artists—and loyal fans. Indie labels might argue their identity is their lifeblood, even if not directly recognized by every music consumer. The music business needs to organize communities of music lovers and buyers, not just social networks with music tacked on.

Marvel’s turnaround isn’t complete. The company made nice profits from licensing (which involves no capital outlay) but could only take a small cut of overall box office. To really scale revenues it moved directly into distribution—risky for a company so focused on content creation—forming Marvel Studios to produce “Iron Man” and “The Incredible Hulk,” a move that paid off handsomely.

Most music majors now have in-house production companies but not the strategic purpose and budgets to be equivalent to the commitment made by Marvel. But music companies should be making documentary films and session content for their artists—highly attractive to sponsors and licensable to all the digital networks increasingly desperate for quality content. [iTunes LP, announced yesterday, is a step in the right direction for example].

Direct-to-consumer is a key part of Marvel’s digital strategy—in 2007 it launched Digital Comics Unlimited—a subscription-based service with thousands of comic books available in digital format. Like another successful subscription provider in TV, HBO, Marvel realized that to offer a compelling subscription service didn’t mean having to make everything available—few subscribers want that. But they will subscribe to a service if that service contains something they do want that’s exclusive to them as subscribers.

From a successful licensing model, Marvel evolved its strategy into bigger plays: harnessing brand power, building on insight, diversifying its product and making major moves into distribution. Subsequently Marvel Entertainment now controls its destiny, when all looked hopelessly out of control a mere decade ago.

The State of independents #1

In eight years working in the music business I never attended an AIM meeting, until this week’s 10th Anniversary AGM. I have to say I rather took to it. There was an informal and certainly collective, feel to the proceedings. And a celebratory feel too but in a modest, nicely understated way. Nothing seemed too staged or rehearsed.

Hearing Alison Wenham reflect back on the ten years since AIMs inception and give her ten wishes for the new era, it wasn’t difficult to get a sense of just how much AIM has managed to achieve, against the odds I suppose, when the job in hand is basically herding cats. And what cats. Alley cats that’s for sure. As Chris Blackwell says in his forward to the AIM Anniversary brochure “The indies will always be the lifeblood, usually started by misfits who are passionate about music and the excitement of youth culture”.

Having worked on a project lately that has required partnership with a number of indie labels I can see the spot they’re in and it’s a very sticky one. If we assume a future scenario of gradual continued devaluation of recorded music (can you see any other?) then the only means to long-term survival for record labels is diversification into other revenue streams and rights ownership. In which case, only the Majors (& not all of them!) have the muscle to wrestle their way through, surely? If you run an indie label, record sales are your lifeblood – not gigs, T-shirts etc. And that means that soon enough, you’ll be relying on the true misfits of society – record buyers – to keep you going.

But surely, someone somewhere will come up with a more effective platform for indie music than those currently on the market. There are so few around, most notably e-music – the world’s number 2 music service by value. The others – Bleep.com, Beatport – are small – smaller than the sum of their parts basically.

The indie scene in the USA is a little more dynamic, but mainly due to the proliferation and popularity of music blogs – Stereogum, Aquarium Drunkard, Brooklyn Vegan et al. including my own favourites Daytrotter.com and Ear Farm. But blogs are also less than the sum of their parts. Blog aggregators like Hype Machine and Elbo.ws do a good but perfunctory job of corralling blog content, but these hardly make compelling music store experiences. The indies could do with a branded platform (digital and physical) to help them do exactly what these others fail to do – punch above weight, not below.

There cannot be a more marked indicator of indies punching below their collective weight than a glance at the annual best-seller lists. The IFPI publishes the top fifty best-selling albums worldwide each year. Over the past two years (i.e. out of 100 slots) indie label albums have featured just four times, with all of those from one label in one fanatical marketplace – Japan (Indie label Avex is basically a Major in Japan).

Small Labels, Big Ideas

At the AIM meet, board members sponsored individuals to shout out their big idea for AIM and the indie sector going forward. This was both intriguing and engaging, and the ideas were pretty good too – many of them pragmatic – like an industry database of media contacts to assist indies with their low-cost marketing efforts (a tie-in with The Guardian Media Guide perhaps?).

My favourite big idea was ‘Death to the CD promo’ – an industry wide switch to promo streaming. This is one of those no brainers for the modern age – creating a greener and more secure network for digital distribution of all promo tracks to media and brands. Not only that, but the flow of information from this network could be so much more effective than now, i.e. phoning around in vain to see if anyone in the media received or has listened to, your tracks. Not only that, with services like SoundCloud on the market, this could be achieved within a year. I’m sure it would be supported by the Majors but would be a nice one for AIM to lead. However, the idea was voted number 2, runner up.

Number 1 was this: ‘Lobby the BBC to encourage them to play a wider range of independent music on Radio 1 and Radio 2’. Now it’s easy to see why this got the most votes even in the absence of knowing what the other eight big ideas were (they’ll be on the AIM web pages by now if you’re interested). I’ve no doubt that if I switch on the radio right now (lunchtime basically) I’ll get one of Take That, Pixie Lott or if a commercial UK radio channel, inexplicably, ‘Halo’ by Texas. Either those, or (Still) Chasing Cars by Snow Patrol (aren’t they really an indie band though?).

I’ve mentioned a few times on this blog in the past how radio has a lot to answer for, in the UK and even more so in the US. Radio is still the number one music discovery platform according to surveys (though I’m convinced the surveys are wrong and that radio’s position as tastemaker is secondary to its role as background music for people who can’t be bothered to like music that much). And because of the huge audiences radio reaches it remains priority 1 for record promotion.

However, the strategic dilemma for indies is whether AIM should bother lobbying the BBC about the R1 and 2 playlists or whether it is better off working with alternative promotional platforms to get a greater presence for indies on those. To my mind it’s the latter, because I can’t see a huge audience of indie music buyers regularly tuning in to R1 and 2 during daytime, but I can see them streaming more alternative radio shows via digital channels or reading about new music in Clash, or streaming new music on Spotify.

And so to the other great dilemma of the day for indies – to license or not to license (or perhaps more how & when to license and at what price) – new digital services like Spotify. This was also a big idea: to ‘persuade digital service providers that independent music is essential for any complete, compelling and successful music service’. This idea didn’t get such a big vote on the day, but probably only because AIMs members felt this is already very much in hand – which it is, through licensing body Merlin and through digital distributors like The Orchard, IODA and Vital.

However, speaking with my strategist hat on, I’m not sure if the indies collectively aren’t missing a trick with digital licensing. Fighting your corner on deal terms is one thing, but AIM should consider if it’s worth licensing to digital streaming services at all. I’m not advocating that the indies don’t license, I’m saying that it would be a valid strategic decision not to, on the basis of unquantifiable net value (i.e. after substitution effects and relative assessment of deal terms compared with Majors).

It would be an even more valid strategy if the indies could create an alternative platform to the current crop of streaming services. On the day, several members emphasized the exclusivity and ‘quality’ of indie music and I can’t help but think that there are better ways to leverage this than licensing to a slew of services as second fiddle to Majors catalogues. They could opt to support e-music more proactively, giving it another push, though it seems that with e-music now actively courting Majors, the opportunity is lost. Or the indies could look at creating a platform of their own – perhaps working with more innovative technologies like Songbird or similar.

Perhaps the biggest obstacle to an alternative platform strategy for indies is the music itself. Yes it is exclusive and of quality, and comes from a place of passion first, above commercial priorities. But that’s true of plenty of the repertoire on Major labels too. One out of 2 of my own favourite ‘indie’ bands are in fact released on major labels. While there is still a gap in the market for an indie music platform, consumers simply don’t divide music between Major and indie labels in that way.

So finally, to my big idea (with the benefit of a review of the ten presented on the day of course) as follows:

Launch a new branded platform for independent music (not exclusively indie label music, but it could begin there) that focuses on emphasizing the passion behind the music – the exclusivity, the quality etc. - everything that isn’t just availability, basically.

A boutique brand for indie music is what springs to mind. By necessity it would have a digital presence (downloads, streaming, radio and a licensing platform for blogs), but also very much a physical one as well – after all the brick & mortar space is somewhat less competitive these days. This could be through a small network of new stores or through a network arrangement of indie shops.

It’s contrarian, sure, but that’s the essence of indie culture, isn’t it?

The AIM meeting was the culmination of a week of events celebrating the tenth birthday and ‘Independents Day’ – when we are all meant to flock to our local indie music retailer to buy CDs & support the biz. I didn’t get around to shopping for indie music from an indie store on Independents Day, sadly. In the end I was too busy and not near an indie record shop – and in truth I would not know where to find one. Besides I suspect they wouldn’t be stocking my current wish-list of music. If I could have though, I would have!

My current indie music wish-list is the entire back catalogues of Spoon, Dinosaur Junior, Death Cab and Laura Veirs (only two of which are on Major labels).

Newsflash for latecomers: Glenn Peoples from Billboard (and formerly Coolfer of course) has alerted me to exactly what I refer to above - a new indie platform - in the US, called Thinkindie, here...http://digital.thinkindie.com/...which is interesting innit?
Nice use of the black sheep mascot too. One to keep an eye on.

Digital State of the Nation # 2: partnerships - when will it all go right?

[As promised, the second part of my assessment of the current digital space. This is a slightly longer version of what became an opinion piece in Music Week a couple of weeks ago. In the two weeks since, it’s been interesting to see the PRS change its license rates for streaming music and the commentary about Warner and other majors bleeding the horse for some ad-funded streaming services including iMeem. It was also interesting to read Hilary Rosen’s retrospective in Billboard - http://bit.ly/WTZoE Clearly things continue to move at a dazzling pace in the digital music business even if we’re no closer to figuring out which models will last it out. This piece is a call for a more strategic perspective on licensing and partnership, until we do].

Following recent developments in the relationships between music producers and their evolving digital partners, a fairly messy picture of the digital music landscape emerges. On the one hand, we have had the recent failures of new music start-ups including Muxtape, Mixwit and FabChannel – all of which have pointed the finger firmly at the record labels’ (and music publishers) collective lack of a flexible licensing policy. Seeqpod seems to be rapidly going the same way.

Perhaps most significantly given the overall direction of the business (towards music streaming) are recent grumblings by digital juggernauts like YouTube, iMeem, iLike and Last.fm that licensing costs are, erm, making life difficult. On the other hand, we have the buzz of Spotify and the tenacity of iTunes, continuing to make the best of its market leader position and loyal audience, if lately pushing it a little with price changes.

Such is the uncertainty of the digital music business however, that no one can say, hand-on-heart, which services will still be around in say, five years time. Spotify could be the new improved Last.fm with all the same commercial problems in the end. As for iTunes, it could either go the way of the streaming models or simply tough it out as the last man standing in downloads.

In each & every case the central issue is the same – that of the commercial value of music. In recent weeks I have had discussions with a number of young digital businesses all with a stake in music. Not one of them holds a belief anything other than music (at least, digital music) will be free within five years. I’m not going to argue with that notion here, as much as I’d like to - there isn’t enough room to do so.

My point here is to argue that the digital music business – suppliers and partners – have a choice in whether digital music is to be free in five years or not. Music doesn’t have to be free if the business cannot find a way to deliver it for free. I don’t care what Mike Masnick or Chris Andersen or whoever super-geek thinks about it. Are the movie or games businesses considering a free model? I don’t think they are. The music industry might not look too smart in five years if music’s free but digital films & games are commanding good prices.

It seems clear to my mind that an unambiguous licensing policy might help to start with. I don’t mean stubborn, or prohibitively expensive, just clear. For an innovative new music model that is non-threatening (one that for example passes my test of ‘natural friction’- not DRM or price friction, but repertoire based when set by users themselves – such as playlists, which don’t replace albums even when shared), licensing should be nice and flexible. It should represent good value, thereby incentivising innovation.

I hope the recent deals between ProjectPlaylist and at least two of the major labels fall under that category. Music providers can even support such services in other ways, through direct investment or content development, such as exclusives. It would mean label digital departments doing much more than deal-making and accepting cheques. It would mean Content Services and Account Management teams really working to support & sustain service partners in innovative ways. And both parties need to share and use collective consumer data better to iterate service development in line with users needs.

For a major ground-shifting service that potentially speeds up cannibalisation, licensing is much trickier and therefore by necessity of managing risk, more expensive. This challenges the service provider to find a workable model at the point of usage. If that model doesn’t exist or cannot be created, it can’t afford the license. Buying up content in advance distorts this picture longer term, adding to ambiguity in defining what is successful and leading to more market uncertainty.

If a clearer, more strategic licensing means a potentially smaller short-term digital business I think that is a fair trade-off for one of potential longer-term value. I don’t know if this is what the UK Government was driving at with its recent recommendation for a Licensing Agency – maybe it was, maybe it wasn’t quite sure itself. Maybe we'll see later this month when the full Digital Britain Report comes out.

It doesn’t take a government initiative, but it does mean music providers need some more collective clarity. With a clearer set of criteria for digital licensing, the music industry can meanwhile develop its other products and revenues more confidently, including improvements in physical product, merchandise et al.

Marketing the mid-tail: how the business must do more for great records by established bands

In 2007 Turin Brakes released the album Dark On Fire. Have you heard it? It's a great record. Great tunes (hardly a weak moment among the entire 12 track set), heartfelt lyrics, superb musicianship and a wonderful sound. It represents a career high for a band which, until then - despite a couple of hits - had just trudged along – for three albums. But they still just trudge along, the issue being that nowhere near enough people heard or bought Dark On Fire.

Every music fan has a list of albums like this. Records they love, play to everybody they know and talk about a lot, but no-one else actually has. As for record companies, well, they have a shed load of unsuccessful records of course - at least 20 misses for every hit – that's the standard business model. But each label also has a good bunch of skeletons in the cupboard –great records that sold next to nothing. It's how a lot of artist and label relationships come to an end, when the label decides it has done everything in its power to take the band to the next level, but it just hasn't worked.

Now of course, I realise that sadly, we don't exist in a world where talent rises biologically to the top. The entertainment world is many things but Darwinian in nature it isn't. From time-to-time, positively vacuous movies, books and records make massive global hits – hardly anyone seems to truly understand why this happens. Meanwhile, genuine works of art go unwatched, unread and unheard. That's just the way of things in entertainment media. In some ways you have to have more admiration for people who do produce the big blockbuster hits – they somehow captured the public's collective imagination, or lack of it – a true marketing skill.

But in this case I'm talking about neither the hits or the obscure, out-of-time lost classics. I'm talking about great records by established, if not yet superstar bands. Subjectivity is not the issue here. When you are a producer of records day in day out, you know when your charges have created something special. Dark On Fire was Turin Brakes out of their skin. Last month I wrote about Starsailor's All The Plans – again, out of their skin. You simply cannot argue with genuinely good song writing and execution by bands that already have a proven track record. But then, these great records still bomb – and quite often. Why? It's a question bands, managers and labels should investigate, post-mortem, government-enquiry, coroners-inquest style.

The first problem is of course, that it’s hard to determine any one factor contributing to the lack of deserved success. But if anything, suspect number one will be lack of radio support. The radio has so much to answer for in the workings of the modern mainstream music business. Any marketing executive from outside the music business is vexed and slightly amused by the relationship between records and radio. Certain bands occupy radio slots like they own them, whether or not they release a good single or a stinker. Meanwhile whole swathes of new bands and great new sounds can't get a look in, certainly not across daytime slots. Frankly, if a total overhaul of the relationship between music & radio was called for, that wouldn't be a bad thing in my book.

But lack of radio support can't be an excuse for a failed marketing campaign – not these days. Radio might still be where the casual majority hear new music, but digital platforms register the most growth in influence, especially for the under 30s demographic. Digital platforms are more fragmented than radio in terms of audience reach, but for a new artist, they represent a greater opportunity in aggregate than chasing precious, unobtainable radio slots.

The next culprit is the supply system itself. Release schedules are crammed (especially the notoriously over-crowded 4th quarter) and physical music retail is in complete disarray. If you are not a superstar act in the promotional stratosphere (and if you were you would probably be taking up way more than your entitled share of TV & radio-slots and retail space) you can only hope that enough supporters somewhere along the value chain will champion you to the point where the punters take note.

Suspect number three might be the artist themselves. Are they willing to go the extra mile for their baby? Get off a high horse or two perhaps? Really work it – blood, sweat, tears? I wouldn't blame artists for complaining about promo schedules in the way Paul McCartney did before the release of Memory Almost Full (through Starbucks). Macca, at sixty-odd, was willing to work as hard as any artist one third his age, but was simply crying out for something different to do other than hawk himself around an endless circuit of radio and TV stations. Apart from a few genuine over-precious cases, the artist is not culpable.

Finally, the last suspects are consumers. Like the radio, they (we) also have a lot to answer for. A large chunk of the record buying public (deliberately chosen anachronism there) are lazy in the extreme. That's party how some superstar acts get away with somewhat rocky creative periods – the people continue to buy their stuff because that's all they know! Fact: the number one reason people claim they don't by as much music as they should – lack of information – they don't know what to buy. They are quite literally stuck in a groove.

It seems to me that if every record released has to go Route 1 through radio, TV and retail in a vain attempt to reach a respectable chart position, many genuinely good albums will simply fall by the wayside. There simply are not enough effective media or retail slots available to every record justice.

So what's the answer to maximising a great record in these days of fragmented mainstream media but ubiquitous, commoditised music?

At the risk of being coy about potential solutions to this I am going to be deliberately careful here. I've already littered previous posts with potential routes to market for new bands, but for established bands (with or without record deals) it is in many ways trickier. You have history to contend with. When you're on the 3rd or 4th album bands tend to have a certain vibe going on with the media – who either will still feel goodwill towards the band or will have become long since bored. If it's the latter you are dead through this route, try the alternatives:

Digital + Live

While record labels have marketing departments and talk about getting records to market, a lot of the mainstream activity isn't really marketing as such, but promotion. Even established bands should go back to roots, focusing around a combination of web & live, where fan data can be combined with a deeper connection to the artist and the scarcity of the live performance.

There can be few better examples of working web & live than The Script, signed to the Sony label. But the Script is a new group, not established. For an established band to do the equivalent, they would need to accept the idea of touring much more extensively, perhaps taking residences in smaller venues and/or taking the support slot for a superstar act. More touring festivals could work well here, especially in the current value-seeking climate.

Marketing not promotion

There are occasional examples of record campaigns that look more like marketing in that the approach is either more subtle or radical than simply scatter-gunning (or if you have a bigger budget, carpet-bombing) media placements. For example, Radiohead's approach with In Rainbows was to radically alter the marketing mix – in this case price and place. Coldplay chose a classic give-away-the-song-to-sell-the-album, but also went for a pretty startling art and styling theme – risky but clever, since rarely do big artists choose to radically alter their image. But these are superstar acts of course, not the immediate subject here. It's harder to find examples of marketing innovation lower down the food chain.

Look out for The Hours' current campaign. Here the band – second album in - leverages its relationship with a 3rd party – in this case the artist Damian Hirst – to achieve something different. The Hours has teamed up with The Guardian & Observer Music Monthly (also note, a good audience fit for the band) for the launch of new album See The Light. The Observer and Guardian ran a month-long teaser campaign offering consumers the chance to win a Damien Hirst original piece around the album's cover theme. Just how much it built anticipation for the album is harder to tell though.

What's the rush?

Finally, the slow-burn must come into it. With most album campaigns spanning not much more than a quarter-year, truly great records may not have time to reach the audiences deserved before attention spans waver on behalf of everyone involved - except the potential audience. As a listener, I don't care whether a record is new or not - it's new to me that's the important thing. This shouldn’t happen for the best records - grind it out for the best. It didn’t for Elbow’s Seldom Seen Kid - now bring back the 18-month long album campaign!

A cure for industry breakdown - Elbow grease

I just checked on Elbow's UK sales for The Seldom Seen Kid, which have just cruised past the 500k mark. When I first posted on Elbow's momentum and the contributing factors to it back in September, sales had just past 150k. But Fiction boss Jim Chancellor confidently suggested the album would reach platinum. I believed him. I suggested an arena or two might be in the offing at last? It was in plan said Jim – and was signed, sealed and delivered with aplomb at their triumphant Wembley show a couple of weeks back (my music mistake of the year so far: not attending that show).

At that time the band had just won the Mercury Music Prize, so platinum sales and arena shows looked very much on, but even Chancellor probably wouldn't have bet on a Brit, which the band won in February. And so, Elbow was resurrected from a languishing obscurity. Their wonderful, but very 'unpop' Seldom Seen Kid Album has become popular (let's not overdo it, The Seldom Seen Kid ranked 35th best-selling album for 2008, though is by far the most 'progish' repertoire on that list) and will probably tick-over into double-platinum (UK sales of 600k) at some stage this year.

This is all great of course, with the band themselves and Garvey in particular, seemingly able to enjoy their long-awaited success with a lovely humbleness – basking in it without melting in it, and at the same time none of the awkward embarrassment that can often come when 'indie' bands break into the mainstream. When Garvey says “it's been good being me of late” on his 6 Music show (if you haven't discovered it yet, do, it's a genuine radio gem) it comes across as genuine appreciation.

Better than great in fact, Elbow's success is refreshing. The sometimes cynical UK music press has launched no backlash at all, not a hint of it. Instead, just continued good will. I've yet to come across one hard core Elbow fan to reel from their mainstream success. Maybe in these hard times, a little glory to the underdog is simply appreciated. Of course, the whole episode is underpinned by sheer quality. Listening to “Grounds For Divorce” and “Weather To Fly” this week, those two tracks are still revealing new qualities to me now, 18 months after first hearing them, and listening to them lots.

Elbow's success is now widely recognised and often referenced. In reviews for new releases by Starsailor, Doves and The Hours (all of which are very good records) you'll find obvious references to Elbow as unlikely but welcome trailblazers. I've been thinking though, could Elbow's success have a greater significance for the music business itself? It has certainly lifted the mood (as well as raised the stakes) in many record label marketing camps for other indie bands. In these hard times that is much appreciated. Perhaps there is now room for a bit of confident swagger in the way the campaigns for these records are executed. People really want this stuff! And there's no doubt The Seldom Seen Kid has nicely created a public appetite for more of it.

Being both fun and serious and about it, Elbow's success has scratched some very stubborn itches that have plagued the ailing record business for quite a while:

• Labels: Think the 18 month long album campaign is dead in the age of immediacy and music-streaming-file-sharing ubiquity? Not necessarily - The Seldom Seen Kid


• New bands: Can you survive in the cut & thrust of today's ruthless business, with one or two album deals and at best, three-strikes-before-your out? You just might – Elbow


• Old bands: In the hole? Sales & audiences falling despite delivering your best work? Past your prime but not past your best? Do carry on – Elbow!


• Fans: Think the age where you go to a gig and hear a charismatic front man not only talk between songs, but actually say something entertaining and informative (possibly to you directly?) are sadly gone? No! - Guy Garvey – man of the people and master of audience participation


• Music press, retailers: Think bands that don't erm, scrub up too well, will struggle to find a large audience through mainstream media? Not always – Elbow!


• Everybody: Think a complex, melancholy 'unpop' record can't become a mainstream blockbuster hit? Wrong – The Seldom Seen Kid


• Everybody: Think a band with a terribly dull name will struggle to catch on? Wrong – Elbow! (okay, there's also Coldplay, Oasis etc.).

But where does Elbow go from here? What's next? Obviously there's the question of America and subsequent global super-stardom. What about Elbow The Movie? Personally I would love to see something done in the spirit of Wilco's “I'm Trying to Break Your Heart” or “Ashes of American Flags”. I'll be there for the theatrical release and the DVD, and the coffee table book.

Probably best of all, this band of 18 years in the making, that have worked blood, sweat & tears and must have been several times on the brink of throwing in the towel, is currently writing a new album and no doubt, will make several more after that. That way, they don't miss out on anything and nor do we. At least something in the music business is working.

Hoist the sails, this is really good. But what direction does Starsailor set now?

Starsailor. That name doesn’t inspire let’s be honest.

But then, the name Coldplay didn’t at first, much. It hardly rolled off the tongue, but by the time Coldplay became a household name that hardly mattered. Now the word ‘Coldplay’ is part of our global language.

It might have gone the same way for Starsailor, but it didn’t turn out like that. They blasted off well enough with first album Good Souls, back in 2001, which NME called ‘an album of real musical depth’. It did very well commercially with UK sales of 550k (to date, UK Chart co.). But then the band got caught up in themselves a little bit, probably under pressure to do as well or better second time around, and the follow-up album ‘Silence Is Easy’, stuttered. Both critics and fans liked it less and it showed commercially, with 270k sales. Not bad, but still a 50% drop on the debut.

Starsailor was always far better than indie landfill, but could sail close to being bland, which didn’t endear them to a wide audience for long. Even the band’s singer James Walsh once told a festival audience that “saying you like Starsailor is never going to get you laid”. That summed up their position at that time perfectly. But by album number three things got worse, as the band found themselves firmly ‘on the outside’ as that record’s title suggested.

Actually, they were in ‘The Hole’. The Hole is something I explained (and charted) in the post on Elbow last year. It’s not a place any well meaning career band wants to find itself, because you cannot write - record or perform your way out of it. In fact, you may be creatively improving and you might get better reviews, but your audience and your sales continue to dwindle. And your label accountant doesn’t miss those. What you need is a fresh injection of belief, from both within the band and from the help. Coincidentally, Starsailor are in a hole as deep as Elbow was, with both third albums shifting just 80k units despite improved critical and fan reviews (see chart).

Eight years on from album one, re-entering the atmosphere (sorry, that’s it for the crappy galaxy metaphors) comes Starsailor again, with album four ‘All The Plans’. This is, take it from me, a very good record. Whether you can set aside your prejudice and enjoy it for what it is however, is another matter. But sometimes that’s exactly when you can enjoy music the most isn’t it? When it comes from an unexpected source and hits you right where it hurts – in your own musical preconceptions. Ooof, feel that!

It first happened to me with Duran Duran’s 'Notorious'. I hated them, but I loved it. I tried to resist, but in the end I submitted to it and was converted into a late-coming, unashamed life-long Duranie - and that feels good! It happened again more recently with Wilco’s 'A Ghost Is Born', which made me wonder how on earth I’d missed 'Yankee Hotel Foxtrot'. Somehow, when your converted to a band in this way, you warm to the artist even more than if you liked them from the off. It’s a respect thing I guess. You respect that they, the artist, has made something that has changed you.

But that isn’t exactly an insight that Virgin, Starsailor’s label, can work with I don’t think. The label now has a mixed blessing on its hands. Because the band has delivered with this richly creative, un-self-conscious, genuine, passionate record - and now it’s the label’s turn to deliver its end of the bargain.

So now what? This is a very interesting question for the label (and the band!) so let’s briefly examine the options.

Maybe, Virgin could simply prioritise the record over its other releases (something not easy to do for a band so deep in the hole). And even if it did this, what exactly does that entail? Cranking the promotion machine up to 11? Working the album for longer? Throwing more budget at it? (and convincing top management it'll be worth it). Strike option 3, this is the recession.

Is there truly something different that can be done when it comes to marketing (as opposed to promoting) a record, when you know that record is exceptional? I’m not talking about gimmicks by the way. Sure, Radiohead went & did the best marketing strategy in ages with In Rainbows. But was it really more than a gimmick writ large? It’s certainly not something that can be routinely done. Even by Radiohead’s own admission, it will be different next time.

You could always go for the covermount option, but that’s a cheap shot really isn’t it? Take the money, save a lot of money you would have needed to spend on promo, and go home knowing that 90% of a newspaper’s loyal readers will toss your plastic in the bin on the way out of the newsagents. It isn’t dignified.

You could try & synch the album tracks like crazy. I read recently that James Walsh went over to the USA and performed the new songs acoustically to music supervisors, so the band is already working that space, hard. That sounds like real work – no lazy artists here. But synch has become par for the course these days. Every label & manager worth their salt is at it, fighting for slots on the big US and UK ‘music shows’, now firmly actually television dramas.

Could Virgin have released the album via a brand partnership? All The Plans isn’t a record for brands. It’s a heartfelt thing that is meant to be universally appealing. It’s a record of simple melodies and small understated anthems. Not sure Doritos would be interested anyway even if the band was to be honest.

The label could work the album stateside, where the record has potentially broad appeal and the band less baggage. But that’s just a bigger, harder slog than grinding it out over here. We are seriously running out of options here. Just what is the answer?

Maybe we really know. I’ve started it off already, here, by telling you I love a Starsailor record! I’m going way out on a limb here this is a big risk you know! I’ve built my reputation on recommending great music to people. Real music. But All The Plans is real music.

Somehow, Virgin and Starsailor have to work as a team with this record to gain a groundswell and regain the audience the band has lost. But the band's fans have to do the selling, first by reconnecting. Could Starsailor play some intimate free gigs for the hard core fan base, performing the whole album? Perhaps on condition those invited bring along a close friend who isn’t a fan. Reach out for the to-be-converted. There’s a raft of ideas to brainstorm - “imagine, then do” as Terry McBride says. A groundswell strategy is mostly a combination of digital and live, the mainstream media slots aren't as effective these days (but the traditional slots can’t be ignored either).

The inspiration here undoubtedly, is our friends in the north and Starsailor’s own north western neighbours, Elbow. If you make a record for the people, it deserves to be heard by as many people as possible.

Is this an alternatively timed creative charge coming from EMI?

Good news for EMI and good news for us. The Pet Shop Boys are back with a good single and generally good album reviews. Depeche Mode will soon join them with their new album due next month (and released as part of the shiny new iTunes Pass format). Old guard they may be (both released their first records roughly 25 years ago) but you need your old generals leading the front line.

Next, you need your experienced, reliable corporals – the ones who can really carry it for you if you let them. New albums from Starsailor (wipe that smirk off your face & grab a cup of coffee for tomorrow’s post) and Doves could potentially do better than any previous releases by those bands, if the campaigns are good and all the suns align with the planets. Both have great lead singles. Could this be the Doves year? It’s a question Guy Garvey posed on his Finest Hour radio show on 6 Music. All that would be required is for Doves to do ‘An Elbow’ – namely emerge from an underwhelmingly slow-burn career to be not only be more widely appreciated, but revered and then, actually popular. Note that this doesn’t just happen because the band has made a great record (see Juggernaut Brew post on Elbow for details). If only that was the world we're all living in!

But the slew of recent & forthcoming releases by new talent could certainly help the sales curve at EMI wake from its recent slumber (Coldplay aside). Empire Of The Sun and Lonely Dear have both been well received critically, especially the latter, with its easy on the ear sound-scapes and nicely lilting tunes. Julian Velard might struggle to differentiate himself from a crowded space of male troubadours, but the songs I’ve heard have real strength.

Bat For Lashes has no such problems standing out from the crowd. Every bit battier (it’s all in the name) than the very recent parade of solo female pop artists and with a point to prove in taking on the ever-more difficult second-album-syndrome, I’m especially looking forward to hearing this record. However, it maybe that Polly Scattergood is actually even battier. It’s too early to judge her success on this debut perhaps, but one to watch for the future.

Add to these the small media industries of Lily Allen and Pete(r) Doherty and it seems like quarter two 2009 is looking like the most active period of music marketing EMI has had for roughly two years – since their new owners took over, essentially.

Quite what impact Terra Firma has had on the schedule is hard to tell. Several albums mentioned above come delayed by the various corporate meanderings but perhaps that’s no bad thing. As a result, EMI is unusually, piling a lot of new product into what is usually a quiet quarter – which might well give some of these artists an edge - or at the very least, some breathing space to be heard. As an alternative to the fourth quarter pile-up in which many big releases effectively crowd each other out, it’ll be interesting to see if the timing of this combination of releases gives EMI a noticeable hike.

Transforming labels - six ways re-evaluated

I was in a meeting the other day at which somebody asked me for a copy of a report I had written over 18 months ago. It wrong footed me a bit - I have mixed feelings about sharing something I've done that long ago.

It was a brochure I wrote and self published, about six ways in which record companies could build new revenue streams during these challenging times. When I got back to my office I skimmed through it with dread. 18 months is a long time and thinking moves miles on in that time frame.

I felt a bit embarrassed reading it, but a tiny bit proud as well – just for giving it a go and getting it done. After all, this brochure helped win me a couple of projects. And there it was on Guy Hand's desk the day he hired me to help Terra Firma understand the record business. The opening line of the brochure was quoted in a widely read leader piece written by Robert Sandall for Prospect Magazine. And, people who read it liked it, so I guess it served its purpose at the time. But on re-reading, I wondered, especially given the dizzying pace of change in the music business, how much of what I'd written 18 months back was in any way still relevant in the here and now.

It seems timely to consider this after a few weeks in which we've had a number of interesting things said by the majors – three of them anyhow. First we saw EMI reveal its new strategy of three new operating divisions: New Music, Catalogue and Music Services, along with the soon to be launched D2C 'learning lab' on emi.com. Meanwhile, Warner claimed that all new artist signings would have some element of multi-rights – partial 360 degree deals. And Universal (currently literally wiping the floor with its major competitors) somewhat audaciously revealed operating results that included a growth in revenues of 4%.

Revenue growth in the record business? Is that still possible these days? Obviously the answer is yes, though the vast majority of this was driven from core album business, thanks to two out of four major artist releases now belonging to the Universal roster. Pure market power works, even in a steadily dwindling market.

But my brochure was about going beyond the traditional and diversifying the core record business into new – and more profitable – revenue streams. My six ways to drive new business were as follows:

1. New retailing.
2. Brand partnerships.
3. Personalisation & recommendation.
4. Commercialising communities and D2C initiatives.
5. Customer loyalty.
6. Product innovation & programming.

Aside from evaluating whether this really is a list of coherence rather than a brain dump, I'll take a very brief look at each one, benchmarked against the success of real efforts made by the labels – or new entrants of course - in each area.

New Retailing
The idea here was to take particular titles or repertoire outside the traditional physical retail space and look for new retail partners. The Spice Girls famously did this with Victoria's Secret for example. And Hot Topic, Nordstrom and Starbucks had all entered the CD retail business in the US, so it seemed like momentum was building and might transfer from the US to other markets.

But it's gone rather quiet. Starbucks has scaled back due partly to the tough economy, but also due to a now badly exposed lack of real commitment to music. One-off successes like The Spice Girls have proved harder for the labels to scale across the piece. Meanwhile no new dedicated entertainment retail brand has emerged (I've been approached twice in the past two years by new physical ventures, so there is interest, but no execution). In the UK have we seen Virgin's enthusiastic re-branding as Zavvi, but that's not new. Giving a school grade verdict on new physical retail for music then, over the last 18 months? Has to be a D, for disappointing.

Brand Partnerships
This has been a potential industry panacea for a while now. No question, brands have been a shot in the arm for music in several key ways. One-off licensing deals have secured vital bottom-line income for labels. Some artists (notably Groove Armada) have successfully gone outside the mainstream label system directly through brand partnerships. And the synch business itself has grown impressively, as has public performance of music in general.

The innovation and creativity around individual campaigns (ads, festival sponsorships, TV soundtracks) has been a genuinely great development for the music industry. Listen around you – wherever you go or whatever you see on TV or in film, the music has become intriguing and of consistently high quality. No more jingles and less library music and a lot more money being generated. However, labels have so far failed to truly scale this across the piece, with initiatives like Universal's BrandAmp and Warner's Brand Asset Group fairly quiet after fanfare launches two years or so ago. Labels have not become creative agencies for their artists. For the industry this has to be a B+, but for the music labels, a C+.

Personalisation & Recommendation
By this I meant prioritising licensing to technologies focused around this. Back in December 2005, Gartner Research and Harvard predicted that, by 2008 25% of online music purchases would be driven from recommendation technologies. That just hasn't happened. It's taken iTunes ages to come up with Genius. As ever with Apple, it’s doubtful they'll share data on the impact on sales directly from that feature. Meanwhile, despite a flurry of activity, no real breakthrough has occurred. Pandora has struggled (partly due to licensing prices but also due to the hit & miss nature of the way it works). Recently launched Mufin has attracted rotten user reviews.

Besides, where a service is actually built around recommendation itself, there is and always will be a monetisation problem. Consumers won't pay directly for recommendation. The other issue is the illogical nature of music recommendation and discovery. It can't really be efficiently coded can it? Real music fans are so far underwhelmed by recommendation technologies – either collaborative, music-genome based or otherwise.

Personalisation is another thing entirely. The BBC & Google have both understood the power of allowing users to very easily personalise their home page and web navigation experiences. But when you login to the iTunes Music Store, where exactly is your personalised home page? Spotify is better at this and allows you to personalise the user interface in nice, subtle ways.

So things are developing. But overall the technology, services and licensing in this area has not driven anything like the impact predicted by Garner & Harvard. Combined industry efforts hear get a C- could and should, do better.

Label, Artist D2C
It's funny, 18 months ago I wrote passionately about artists creating communities for themselves (via artist websites primarily) rather than letting others do it for them. I tipped Radiohead to be the first to succeed with the approach – an obvious choice that turned out as expected with the In Rainbows digital release. Right now there is a lot of talk about capturing the artist-to-fan relationship better, and understanding fans individual and collective needs better.

Even if a lot of the talk is hyperbole right now, there probably is something in this. However, no artist has been really successful to date except Radiohead and Trent Reznor (although the definition of ‘success’ might lead to a different conclusion). In my previous post on this subject, I tip Topspin Media to make the most impact for artists going direct to consumer. Anyone interested in why should check out Ian Roger's recent keynote at the Grammy music conference in the US. Ian posted his slides online – recommended reading.

As for label D2C – we have a couple of imminent releases – so I will reserve any judgement until then. But the timing is iffy. With a slew of new digital services recently launched but yet to bed down, and even more coming, I don't think this is great timing for launching a D2C service. The impact could get lost in the crowd. So as I write this, commercialising artist communities gets a C, with label D2C specifically a D, notwithstanding new launches next month.

Customer Loyalty
The point I make in the brochure is that many fans would spend more on their favourite artists if given the opportunity, conveniently. Pre-orders, special-edition versions and fan loyalty schemes could be used to extract more value from fans. This has been done successfully, though again Radiohead and Nine Inch Nails seem to have capitalised more than most on the idea. I have hopes that Amazon, with its deep retailing expertise and scale, can achieve a lot in this area for a wider array of artists. Also, I think subscription services – yet to really come of age – can drive the elusive ARPU that everybody talked about when these first arrived a few years back. I think this is an area with a lot of commercial promise, but I don't think a huge leap forward has been made in the past 18 months really. Grade C.

Product Innovation & Programming
For me this is the single biggest area of impact. With the core music formats – albums, songs and videos being gradually commoditised from the combined impact of file-sharing, unbundling and music ubiquity, classic management theory would suggest that what this industry needs most is a re-invented core product.

But what would that be exactly? Digital brings all kinds of possibilities, such as multi-media bundles and of course, the all-you-can-eat music subscription. I'm surprised that we haven't had more EP type formats in the digital space, though there have been a few examples. I like iTunes Complete My Album as it is a dynamic price model – the more you buy the better the value (though isn't an all-you-can subscription 'complete my catalogue' by default?).

I still believe that long-form video and greater innovation with audio-visual content using digital channels, can improve music as both a product and experience. What did I mean by programming from a label viewpoint? Firstly, every label - the majors especially - needs a production business (most majors do and in Sony’s case of course, SiCo is a major contributor to the bottom line).

Rather than simply making multi-media programmes around artists, new albums or even non-music ventures, this function needs to do much more for the labels strategically. In order to achieve maximum impact for artists, there is a need to make the right content, get it through the right channels and platforms, at the right time and using the right brands as sponsors – all to reach the right audience. This is new in music marketing and is a subtle, strategic discipline that can be offered as a true holistic service to artists. No longer can labels simply spread content around in the hope that some of it will stick and trigger off demand for an album. The game is changing. Look back to my very first post on this blog on HBO – Music lessons from a content powerhouse – for more thoughts on this subject.