|
Loving Music - Launching Jan 26th 2015 (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DJ RANN |
First off, congrats with finally getting this project to launch. I remember talking to you about it and it's as good an idea as it was then.
Aesthetically speaking, as much as I find the site basic, it's a welcome change of over-rich content portals that make you fatigue after a few minutes. The straight up, white on black (how Richie likes it, so I'm told), has an efficient no-nonsense appeal that you really need when trying to explain a new concept to the uneducated.
It's seems form reading the thread that the pointers were on the money and you've re-developed the site to properly complement what you're trying to do. I will say well done for this as it's no small feat; as a business owner myself I've seen so many other people and companies come up with good ideas but been too fixed on their tunnel vision of what it;s going to be which stops them taking on and using vital feedback, a practice which in many instances is fatal. (Who moved my cheese ;) )
The logo in the top corner doesn't look good though. It's not a huge deal, but aside from being a a bit boring (which isn't necessarily a bad thing) it looks pixelated, where the other text is crisp. As that's really the only design element, you may want to put just a smidge of flair in that element.
I do like the simplicity though, one of my clients (the largest talent agency in the world) literally has a one page website. It just has office locations, simple detail and that's it. It screams : you know who we are, you know what we do.
Your site to me states: No bull, here's something new, and here's how you do it.
Well done for getting here and I hope to submit something if I ever get around to finishing one of the tracks I have on the boil. |
|
|
| Raphie |
Much better, so reading between the lines you got yourself either aggregator access (rebeat/labelworx) or aggregator status and you're gong to sell DYI release packages on transactional basis, where the DEMO function is more or less quality controll so that stores don't get flooded with totally ty releases :D
So let's cut the crap and artist fondlling
What do you offer? And what does it cost? And why musiclovers and not directly enroll with labelworx, rebeat or one of the many others?
I would for sure NOT pay a "label" to release for me, the label takes the risk and cost.
What's next? Building a community on soundcloud and FB where releases are goung to be shared? MANY went before you that route, get daily mails on soundcloud from " labels" wanting to offer me packages (i.e. Pay xxx€ and you get on all major stores, dj promo lists, 20.000 followers facebook exposure and 100.000 soundcloud plays)
I'm really curious how you plan to make a difference :) |
|
|
| echosystm |
New front page is great. Massive improvement IMO. Site looks clean and nice in general.
Good luck with it all! |
|
|
| Storyteller |
| quote: | Originally posted by Raphie
Much better, so reading between the lines you got yourself either aggregator access (rebeat/labelworx) or aggregator status and you're gong to sell DYI release packages on transactional basis, where the DEMO function is more or less quality controll so that stores don't get flooded with totally ty releases :D
So let's cut the crap and artist fondlling
What do you offer? And what does it cost? And why musiclovers and not directly enroll with labelworx, rebeat or one of the many others?
I would for sure NOT pay a "label" to release for me, the label takes the risk and cost.
What's next? Building a community on soundcloud and FB where releases are goung to be shared? MANY went before you that route, get daily mails on soundcloud from " labels" wanting to offer me packages (i.e. Pay xxx€ and you get on all major stores, dj promo lists, 20.000 followers facebook exposure and 100.000 soundcloud plays)
I'm really curious how you plan to make a difference :) |
It's a record label. There is no cost for artists (it also says so on the website). I've got several distributors for an ideal mix of webstore/streaming coverage and percentages being paid out. Any costs that arise will be covered by the label.
Getting spam is part of the business, unfortunately. But I'm not worried. |
|
|
| Raphie |
Ok, now you got my attention :D
So you cover the release setup costs (roughly 5€ a track for access to all portals UPC//EAN code)
Then you promote everything you release into the network that you will be building
You withhold the setup costs and anything recovered beyond those the artist gets a %
Though I admire your enthousiasm , unless you sign some major bangers that warrant millions of plays, you should be happy to break even, if already. Streaming pays peanuts, you should really look for millions of plays to make it worthwhile.
I might sound a bit negative, but access to portals is no longer something special.
The dream of many "up and coming artists" thinking once they get on Beatport the rest will come by itself, has been busted already years ago.
I can record my own farts and have them on beatport over the weekend,
If i paypal €10 to my guy in china within 24hi get 50k plays on soundcloud too.
Really exposure no longer means jack , unless it is real.
Spend €50 and you'll be the most played track on SC tomorrow
In the end I think you have a fair model, but it will depend on how your expenses will break down and after what threshold you will actually start paying.
If you calculate with €200 setup cost, you will probably never have to pay your artists
And since it's only 5€ to get them on Beatport, you actually withhold them 195€ for "promotional expenses" as i mentioned before MANY have tried to walk this path before you.
Just to be clear, what expenses do you plan to withhold from the artist before starting to play? Or if you pay %, what % are u planning on giving artists of all gross pay you get from aggregators? |
|
|
| Storyteller |
I get 100% of aggregators from major stores at very little cost. For lesser known stores I'll get a percentage of the gross income. I'm aiming to pay out 40 to 50% of the gross sales income to the artist.
I will not withhold any costs from the artist royalties. None. Investments are a risk for the label to take. Artists will get paid instantly as soon as their royalties cross a threshold which I still have to set. It will be reasonable. 50E or lower.
Furthermore the music will be available for free, legally. And artists will even get paid for the free downloads that will be realized. There's tons of good reading material on how that expands reach, fanbase and engagement.
I will not be buying fake fans or plays. That is costly and will not get me anywhere.
I'm not looking for major bangers at all. I'm looking for music I love and want to share with the world.
The label operates in a multi-sided market business model which allows me to run the label at a loss (if necessary) even though the overall company will make profit. |
|
|
| Raphie |
Ahh ok, you have the capacity to generate traffic and if portals want some of your traffic they pay you. Which helps them with advertising clicks.
Very curious to see if you can pull it off, sounds fair to the artist but generating traffic will be crucial |
|
|
| Storyteller |
| Thanks all of you, Raphie, Rann and Echosystm. I'll be making it look a bit better soon, without taking away from the key information this time :). |
|
|
| MSZ |
| I've met some totally retarded bastards running digital labels, so im sure you'll pull it off ST; seeing that you're competent. |
|
|
| cryophonik |
| I didn't see the original website, but the new one looks nice - simple, clean, easy to navigate, and lots of information. Hope this works out for you ST - looks like it could be a great deal for artists. |
|
|
| zodiac9 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Storyteller
Furthermore the music will be available for free, legally. And artists will even get paid for the free downloads that will be realized. There's tons of good reading material on how that expands reach, fanbase and engagement.
|
I've had that idea for years, that record labels should release everything for free, and rely on sponsors for revenue. Youtube has done this in a loose way. Selling music became pointless years ago, yet labels still insist.
The above should be the focal point of your narrative (free downloads and streaming). Get the makers of DJ hardware to sponsor, and offer the ability to make seamless, streaming playlists. Market to DJs first, then expand.
Why even offer tracks for sell on other portals? I think you should have exclusive content. You want people to have a reason to visit the site, don't discourage them. Selling something you are offering for free elsewhere, bad idea.
I think you have the right idea, this is about the only way small record labels can make a profit in this new age.
I might lend a track or 2. |
|
|
| Storyteller |
Thanks for your reply :). A lot of things you mentioned I've been thinking about as well.
| quote: | Originally posted by zodiac9
I've had that idea for years, that record labels should release everything for free, and rely on sponsors for revenue. Youtube has done this in a loose way. Selling music became pointless years ago, yet labels still insist. |
You, me and many others before us. There's a difference between thinking of something and executing it. And then there's just executing it or executing it well :). I'm not saying my concept of a record label will be perfect, but I will to the best I can.
I don't think selling music is pointless at all. Any product is worth what people are willing to pay for it in my opinion.
| quote: | | The above should be the focal point of your narrative (free downloads and streaming). |
I've moved the remarks about free music to the top of the list. I won't put it in the actual taglines, there is way more to the concept than music being available for free.
| quote: | | Get the makers of DJ hardware to sponsor, and offer the ability to make seamless, streaming playlists. Market to DJs first, then expand. |
Regarding sponsoring. I'll need to keep my options open but I want to limit that to an absolute minimum. Nor am I excited to see my website(s) filled with ads. The music listening experience on the record label website is a challenge but doable.
I don't aim for dj's to be my main audience. I'm looking for true music enthusiasts over dj's. This is a much larger audience albeit a tad harder to reach usually. This is where the free segment comes in to play as an extra stimulus.
I don't intend just market to dj's first. They're not my main audience of interest, even though the early majority will automatically be dj's because of their interest for music.
| quote: | | Why even offer tracks for sell on other portals? I think you should have exclusive content. You want people to have a reason to visit the site, don't discourage them. Selling something you are offering for free elsewhere, bad idea. |
Quite the opposite. Independent research (By Nielsen) has shown people consume music the way (and time) they prefer and otherwise are a lot more likely to just skip it. Every method you fail/refuse to adopt is a missed opportunity in gaining exposure/fans/sales/streams.
Some people prefer to pay, some don't. A staggering majority would consume music through legal channels if the music is available in the way they prefer (which for a lot of them means the music should be freely available). Roughly about 40-50% of all consumed music is from a pirated source, if offering music for free would only attract 10 or 20% of those pirates you already massively increase your audience and should be able to monetize that in several different ways. Seperately from downloads/streaming.
| quote: | I think you have the right idea, this is about the only way small record labels can make a profit in this new age.
I might lend a track or 2. |
Thanks. Looking forward to it :). |
|
|
|
|
