AMPAL Music Industry Forum: Report
Info TheBiz - Thursday, June 10, 2010
AMPAL Industry Forum , Melbourne- co-presented by THE BIZ
On May 18th, The Biz co-presented a music industry discussion forum featuring a number of industry professionals including Ian James from Mushroom Publishing, Tim Janes from Shock and Rae Harvey Manager of The Living End.
For a full review of the night click on the link below
http://www.ravereview.com.au/melbourne/gigs/407-the-backstage-pass-presented-by-ampal-the-toff-in-town-tuesday-18th-may
For me the highlight was really Rae Harvey. Her main message was really to just get out there and do-it-yourself. She reckons that the best way to learn about the industry is to throw yourself and the deep end and just starting doing. You don't need to intern, you don't need to work for someone else. Just start your own business and start taking on the big players.
I agree. Great words of advice.
Consumerism, Radio Head: Pop is dead?
Mark Beard - Tuesday, June 08, 2010
It has been recently reported that Radiohead’s frontman Thom Yorke claims “pop is dead”
Being interviewed for the 'The Rax Active Citizenship Toolkit' Yorke reportedly said: "It will be only a matter of time - months rather than years - before the music business establishment completely folds"
The loss of the maintstream industry would be "no great loss to the world"
Plus telling musicians not to "tie themselves to the sinking ship".
Links reporting on Thom Yorkes comments
http://www.contactmusic.com/news.nsf/story/thom-yorke-says-pop-is-dead_1145687http://www.musicrooms.net/alternative/8700-Thom-Yorke-Predicts-The-Death-The-Music-Industry.html
Down Under vs Kookaburra
Info TheBiz - Tuesday, June 08, 2010
Down Under vs Kookaburra
There has been a lot of discussion in recent months around the ‘Down Under’ vs ‘Kookaburra sits in the old gum tree’ case. See: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/06/07/2920250.htm?section=justin for the latest.
As the parties are back in court this week, I thought it timely to conduct a closer inspection of what is happening in this case.
It really comes do to an example of the significant portion rule.
Substantial portion
An infringement is seen to have taken place when a ‘substantial portion’ of the copyright-protected work is being used without the permission of the copyright owner or the payment of the correct royalty. So what exactly is a ‘substantial portion’?
It can be a question of quality and or quantity. The question turns to the particular essence or quality of the part that is taken, not how many words or how much of the melody of the original work are used. A snippet of a song (like ‘Kookaburra’) can still be an infringement
There is no hard and fast rule — it is different in every case. Generally, however, if the part of the copyright-protected music that you are using is recognisable as having come from somewhere else, you will need to obtain permission or pay a royalty — or provide a defence as to why you did not.
MYTHS ABOUT THE SUBSTANTIAL PORTION RULE
û I can use any music I want, as long as I change a note or two.
û I can use up to 13 seconds of a song without gaining permission.
û As long as I’m not making a profit from using a song, I can use any part of it I want.
û I didn’t know the part of the song I was using was ‘recognisable’, so I didn’t need to get permission.
û I’ll just use it. No-one will ever know.
In the current case the authors of ‘Down Under’ are saying that the reference to Kookaburra is an insignificant portion. It is important to note that their defence did not include a suggestion that there were no similarities between ‘Down Under’ and Kookaburra. The last phrase of the flute riff in ‘Down Under’ is exactly the same as the opening melody line in Kookaburra. The court agrees with this assessment and it is now up to the courts to decide what that substantial portion is worth in dollar terms.
Watch this space for a discussion of the courts ruling.
USP: Are you only five minutes ahead of your competitor?
Mark Beard - Thursday, June 03, 2010
USP: Are you only five minutes ahead of your competitor?
The term unique selling proposition (USP) is colloquialism created by advertisers to describe the process of finding (or creating) either a tangible or intangible benefits unique to a particular brand or business.
It’s popularity amongst marketers is understandable given the individualistic nature of democratic economies in which the term emerged and flourished. If we are individuals, why then should products not be individual? It seems only natural that for a product to succeed in must be different?
USP is also consistent with the idea of market positioning – a concept popularized by academics like Phillip Kotler who ascribing that products/services/brands can be created to hold a unique place in the minds’ of consumer relative to competition.
We are led to believe by marketers (and I conceded guilt on my part) that having a USP is a pre-requisite of success, as I myself write:
Differentiation is more than just adding ‘bells and whistles’ to your product, rather it is the process of developing true uniqueness. A unique selling proposition (USP) is a unique feature that establishes your market position. Strong positioning statements require that you establish differences between your products and those of your competitors. (Beard and O’Hara; 2006, pp.56)
Yet what does it mean to be unique?
Consider this definition:
“…existing as the only one or as the sole example; single; solitary in type or characteristics… having no like or equal; unparalleled; incomparable.”
(http://www.dictionary.com)
Consider this anecdote:
Recently a corporate client of mine (operates successfully in a hyper-competitive price-based service industry) asked… “What do you think our USP is?”
I responded by saying… “whatever your USP is… it’s only 5 minutes ahead of your competitors”.
At play of course are deep philosophical question as to what it means to be unique, yet the “truism” of USP is so ingrained in marketing thought that rarely is it questioned – it is simply assumed to be true.
Marketers believe that if we apply USP, greater economic reward will follow. In the case of my client, after studying the “USPs” of several of their key competitors we found little difference between any of them. Success it seems relates to the personality of the customer-facing elements of that business, not in transient, easily copied and price-discounted “features”.
A post-USP world?
Differentiation and market segmentation – phenomena that underpin the idea of USP evolved as means of exacting rents from markets. Meaning, that either by adding utility or perceived value to a product one could charge a higher price for it. While normative for modern consumer, this process of differentiation was not always seen as fair.
In agricultural and commodity markets that dominated simpilier (past) ecomomies it is/was not easy to convince people to pay higher prices for greater perceived value, moreover, it is also seen as unfair. Classical economists were keen on the term “exacting rents” because it intrinsically denotes unfairness.
USP is the first casualty in the battle of web-based marketing supremacy
Every market in today’s global economy is awash with competitors who claim to be unique. Search any term in Google and watch as a plethora of competitors offering products and services with little or no discernable difference will attempt to get your click.
So how to attract customer/fans/patrons?
First of all, if you are looking for the answer, I don’t have it. All I can do is assist in helping you ask questions.
Importantly, prescriptive approaches and checklists of marketing success are oxy-moronic. If marketing phenomena were scientifically provable then everyone would have the same advantage, and thus no advantage at all.
Consider the thoughts of Kapferer
When products were rare, the USP (unique selling proposition) was the key concept. As we leave behind brand image, positioning and personality behind we enter the modern age of brand identity. (Kapferer; 2004, pp.106):
So perhaps look to brand identity, which is seen to mirror human identity by combining personality traits and cultural phenomena as a source of uniqueness.
Your uniqueness as an artist cannot be “only 5 minutes ahead your competitor” since no two people nor artist are alike.
References:
Beard, M & O’Hara, B. “Music Marketing, PR & Image Making”, Music Sales, 2006
Kapferer, J. “The New Strategic Brand Management”, Kogan-Page, London, 2004.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/unique
Remaining authentic amid a sea of hype
Mark Beard - Tuesday, June 01, 2010
Remaining authentic amid a sea of hype
Recently USA Today journalist Edna Gundersen characterized the career of singer/songwriter Jack Johnson thus: “unbending path of honest self-expression… in today's spectacle-driven pop world, where artifice trumps art, that's a non-conformist stance and one that has impressed legions of admirers”.
So how, in our marketing-driven culture do artists like Jack Johnson remain true to their craft, generate critical acclaim and a sustainable income?
“Consider such as the late jazz pianist Bill Evans, generally aspire to be artistic innovators, attempting to create music that meets their own artistic values of quality while appealing to a genre or sub-culture of fans. Early in his career Evans was troubled by the mysteries of career promotion. Not a natural self-promoter, he resolved to be the best musician he could be, trusting that audiences would find him. Evans never compromised his musical and artistic vision, and although open to new musical ideas, he always maintained the traditional jazz song structure. With this artistic approach he became one of the most successful jazz musicians of all time” (Source: Music Marketing PR and Image Making)
As for Jack Johnson, Billboard chart analyst Keith Caulfield puts it this way:
"There's a certain mystique about him that people find fascinating: how he exists as a musician in a hyper-public world, his conscious decision to lay low as that surfer dude chilling out in Hawaii."
The irony is, that sometimes, artistic serendipity comes first, then the “branding” follows.
We marketers are tempted to assume that the process goes something like this:
-
Through research, identify the unmet needs of market segment.
-
Develop a product and brand story that meets the needs and expectations of that segment.
-
Pull out the “4-Ps” from the marketing toolbox and “pee” all over that market.
-
Wait for the cash to roll in.
But… marketing is non-linear. Don’t assume that just because a pro-forma marketing plan document sets out “marketing” in a rigid order, that marketing in practice follows those rigid steps.
Often product development, (or in Jack Johnson’s case artistic expression) comes first and the “marketing” follows. True it could be argued that product/artistic development is a constituent element of the product “P” in the ubiquitous marketing mix. If this is true, then marketing must be non-linear. It simply defies logic that an artist, like a market researcher would first consult the market prior to creating.
I think Jack Johnson, Bill Evans and even the Ray Kinsella character in Kevin Kosner’s Field of Dreams had it right…” if you build it, he (the fan) will come”.
Read the full Edna Gundersen USA Today article here
http://www.usatoday.com/life/music/news/2010-06-01-jackjohnson01_CV_N.htm
1
Share
Recent Posts
- The Suits will inherit the Earth, or History will teach us nothing.
- The 2011 AMPAL Event in Melbourne - AMPAL Presents BEHIND THE MUSIC
- Music Fans Vs Popular Culture Fans
- Rick Springfield is a Marketing Genius
- How to: Copyright Symbol
- Your music is your marketing
- The Dawn of the Independant Musician
- How much do I charge for...
- Tax deducations and musicians
- Sources of Finance for Bands
Comments
Post has no comments.