True enough, but acts like Radiohead (and now NIN who are doing the same thing) are piggybacking on their previous success which they achieved through a major label.
That's not to say that major labels don't need to re-evaluate their business plans and stop disregarding social media - but we're not at the point where they're totally irrelevant.
Tony P.
· 1 year ago
Head's up, the sxsw program listed Ted Mico as with Universal (Geffen/Interscope). Capitol is with EMI.
Magnus
· 1 year ago
What an ungrateful industry with a pathetic "poor me" attitude. They were fat cats for decades and they are pretty much a 3 label monopoly as far as the North American market is concerned. They should have been all over this when they nailed Napster to the wall and started early. They choose to focus on negative campaigning instead of innovation. I'm glad to see the smart and truely artists are paving their own way with grass roots and new media marketing.
Catnap
· 1 year ago
I totally agree with Mico's comment. The labels don't need more online marketing and promotion - they need digital revenue models that work. Why should a label let people watch their videos and listen to their music online for free when that does not translate into CD or iTunes sales?
Marketing and promotion only make sense when they translate into sales. The majors have finally learned that the internet is not only a marketing vehicle to drive sales, but rather a legitimate source of revenue in and of itself.
The more I read these types of articles and the cookie-cutter comments that always follow them, the more I realize that it's not the majors that are stuck in the past...
Angel
· 1 year ago
Mico is with Interscope/Geffen/A&M, under the Universal umbrella. He used to run Capitol New Media, but came to IGA in 2007.
Angel
· 1 year ago
It's pretty funny coming from the guy who runs a digital marketing department!
bw10009
· 1 year ago
Yawn. Everyone knows the labels f'd up with Napster. Can we now move along from that hackneyed finger pointing? Yes, there is waste. Yes there is luddism and stupidity, but don't think for one hot second that there aren't a ton of smart people working on some pretty innovative ideas at all levels of the music biz.
Let me point out a few things:
1. The endgame for many of these sites who offer music for "free" is some sort of IPO or sellout where they (like Myspace or Last.fm) take 260 million, pay out the founders, and then become part of the system. They made their buck just like MTV did, only now the labels are wising up that their content helps acquire users with a lifetime value. If I'm an artist (or a master rights owner who paid tangible cash to market an artist,) and my content makes you rich, i want my cut.)
2. Ergo, those pennies in the jar are more important than ever, every full stream or download of the music MUST be monetized by the artist or label. It's simply stupid NOT to.
Switch
· 1 year ago
It's funny, no one can see outside the box with this problem. There are a ton of other things the companies can do to refurbish the market for music. There are all sorts of incentives and promotions that are still untapped in this industry, not all of them have to be on-line either. I'm convinced that even little old(?) me could save this industry without doing battle with the very people that keep it afloat and, minimize the revenue needed for rejuvenation. I know they could too, which makes me wonder what the hold-up is. The truth is, companies like Capitol Records have their heads so far up their asses they don't realize the world has changed around them. Kids are going "indi" and the world is waking up to a new wave of options. If the companies wont change, then they deserve to die - and they will.
All Comments
That's not to say that major labels don't need to re-evaluate their business plans and stop disregarding social media - but we're not at the point where they're totally irrelevant.
They should have been all over this when they nailed Napster to the wall and started early. They choose to focus on negative campaigning instead of innovation. I'm glad to see the smart and truely artists are paving their own way with grass roots and new media marketing.
Marketing and promotion only make sense when they translate into sales. The majors have finally learned that the internet is not only a marketing vehicle to drive sales, but rather a legitimate source of revenue in and of itself.
The more I read these types of articles and the cookie-cutter comments that always follow them, the more I realize that it's not the majors that are stuck in the past...
Let me point out a few things:
1. The endgame for many of these sites who offer music for "free" is some sort of IPO or sellout where they (like Myspace or Last.fm) take 260 million, pay out the founders, and then become part of the system. They made their buck just like MTV did, only now the labels are wising up that their content helps acquire users with a lifetime value. If I'm an artist (or a master rights owner who paid tangible cash to market an artist,) and my content makes you rich, i want my cut.)
2. Ergo, those pennies in the jar are more important than ever, every full stream or download of the music MUST be monetized by the artist or label. It's simply stupid NOT to.