Hello. I see that the headline hooked you in. Now whereas most of these catchy headlines exist to entice you into reading and then disappoint you with something unrelated to the title, I would never be that devious. For you see, today has been a momentus day, we have now got a Sky subscription and so are in the process of losing our Virgin Media account. Now what has this to do with entertainment you may ask, well it has everything to do with entertainment.
The way in which content is delivered and consumed is something that the industry needs to be more aware of. As you may have guessed by now if you've read my other posts, is that the big studios, record labels etc. are losing their stranglehold on an industry they have throttled for far too long.
As consumers our brand loyalty to a service is only as good as the quality and value of it. So if Virgin Media at some point catches up to the excellent Sky+ service (I know there's Virgin+ but it's not a patch), has as many channels (or at least more content you actually want to watch) and offers the same or better value for money than Sky then we may consider going back.
This teaches a very valuable lesson that I myself am learning. As one of these so-called middlemen, it's not enough just to say here you go, have a clown, jazz band etc., but there needs (and of course with Xi Entertainments, there is!) added value. So my example would be that if you want to make sure your event goes off without a hitch use our entertainment services as we will pair you up with only the best performers and ensure that everything goes smoothly.
FURRY MIC NITE
But wait, there's more! Having tried to convince myself that specialisation is the way forward I am now doing completely the opposite. That is why I'd like to introduce you to "Furry Mic Nite." A sort of variety night for the 21st Century, on the 9th May at the Smokestack, Lower Briggate, Leeds, there is going to be a night with Alfie Moore - Stand-Up Comedian, Harrison Richards - Mind-Reader and Maybe Myrtle Tyrtle - Newcastle based contemporary Bluegrass band. For all that it only costs £6 pre-order and £7 OTD. If you're interested please email me on hayden@xientertainments.com
Promoting and the agency go hand in hand. It's all hard work, but a night is tangible. Something for someone (and indeed anyone) to see what it is I do. I'm using the night as a way of providing entertainment but at the sametime showing that I know what it is my clients are looking for as well. I know their audience as well as they do.
The point I'm trying to make is that the lazy days of the 20th Century (not a typo) are coming to end with the possible exception of the tech industry. Everyone has to work harder which can only be a good thing for 99% of the world. I would feel sorry for the large companies, but then I remember, they've screwed me over for years. Now is payback time.
Sunday, 12 April 2009
Tuesday, 10 March 2009
Youtube and PRS
I know this is more of a music post than a startup one, but I'm angry. For those of you who are unaware, Google (specifically YouTube) and PRS are having a scrap. PRS is the Performing Rights Society and they collect royalties for musicians. They want Google to pay for each viewing of a music video and Google believe that PRS is charging too high a price. In this post I will tell you why both parties are being unaccommodating, why that's a bad thing, what the future will hold and hopefully suggest a positive solution (which I am aware will probably be ignored).
So, Google say they can't afford it. They approximately make $5 Billion (£3.65 billion) every 3 months, but YouTube is still their loss leader. If you've been noticing, on many music videos, a "buy on itunes" logo has popped up alongside other adverts so this obviously means that either Apple is paying Google for the service like an advert or Google makes money from each song sold by a click. I'm assuming the former but I may be wrong. Now some of these videos reach millions of views (were talking 10 + million) and some, only a few thousand. However I've clearly shown that Google is making money from these artists.
PRS wants what's best for it's performers and this is understandable so they want a chunk of revenue each time someone views a video. However, unless someone actually clicks on an advert, Google will make no money, so this seems unreasonable. PRS though are right to not trust Google which I am sure would do some "creative calculation" were this on a per click basis. Again though, only the larger artists would actually have enough people clicking to generate any semblance of money.
To a large part, PRS is suffering from 20th century thinking. 1 Play = bit of money. This is done on the assumption that each play helps the venue, movie etc increase their revenue. This is true in an offline world. The online marketplace has changed everything. With the advent of services like last.fm, spotify and of course YouTube, consumers now expect more for free. Realistically, even though it's not ideal, PRS should try and make google do more of its advertsing on offical videos, take down the pirate versions and do a similar scheme as Adsense so that musicians get paid when Google does.
Even with this scheme, the amount performers will receive is minimal. Instead, what is happening and has been happening for the past few years is that live entertainment is returning. Recording singles and albums are mere elaborate mechanisms to get people to part with their cash when going to an arena tour and buying tons of other merchandise.
We all have to work harder, but one thing's for sure. From a creative perspective, we're living in interesting times.
So, Google say they can't afford it. They approximately make $5 Billion (£3.65 billion) every 3 months, but YouTube is still their loss leader. If you've been noticing, on many music videos, a "buy on itunes" logo has popped up alongside other adverts so this obviously means that either Apple is paying Google for the service like an advert or Google makes money from each song sold by a click. I'm assuming the former but I may be wrong. Now some of these videos reach millions of views (were talking 10 + million) and some, only a few thousand. However I've clearly shown that Google is making money from these artists.
PRS wants what's best for it's performers and this is understandable so they want a chunk of revenue each time someone views a video. However, unless someone actually clicks on an advert, Google will make no money, so this seems unreasonable. PRS though are right to not trust Google which I am sure would do some "creative calculation" were this on a per click basis. Again though, only the larger artists would actually have enough people clicking to generate any semblance of money.
To a large part, PRS is suffering from 20th century thinking. 1 Play = bit of money. This is done on the assumption that each play helps the venue, movie etc increase their revenue. This is true in an offline world. The online marketplace has changed everything. With the advent of services like last.fm, spotify and of course YouTube, consumers now expect more for free. Realistically, even though it's not ideal, PRS should try and make google do more of its advertsing on offical videos, take down the pirate versions and do a similar scheme as Adsense so that musicians get paid when Google does.
Even with this scheme, the amount performers will receive is minimal. Instead, what is happening and has been happening for the past few years is that live entertainment is returning. Recording singles and albums are mere elaborate mechanisms to get people to part with their cash when going to an arena tour and buying tons of other merchandise.
We all have to work harder, but one thing's for sure. From a creative perspective, we're living in interesting times.
Tuesday, 3 February 2009
Getting There
So I finally think I'm getting there. I understand what I should be doing and how I'm going to get there. I really want to tell you more, but on the otherhand I have to be ever so slightly protectionist for my ideas. So here is my attempt at telling you what I'm doing without telling you what I'm doing and without waffling.
1. Get Organised. Soooo important
2. Get your products or services. Make sure they are what customers want and that you're comfortable with them
3. SELL SELL SELL
4. Have fun.
I will try and live by these four points. We'll see what happens
Until next time
1. Get Organised. Soooo important
2. Get your products or services. Make sure they are what customers want and that you're comfortable with them
3. SELL SELL SELL
4. Have fun.
I will try and live by these four points. We'll see what happens
Until next time
Wednesday, 28 January 2009
Future of the Music Industry
Hi,
I know I haven't blogged in a while so I thought I'd discuss something of interest to my sector. The music industry for far too long has been filled with greedy folk who care nothing for the music they produce. Now up until about 5 years ago this was not a problem as they were getting all their money from CD's and consumers were prepared to pay extortionate amounts as they were holding something physical in their hands.
Now the whole arguments regarding onlinr pirated music are flawed. If I go into HMV and steal a CD, that stock cannot be sold to someone else. It's gone and needs to be replaced. If I illegally download a track off the internet it does not affect the supply chain in the slightest.
Does this mean I condone illegal downloading? Of course not. But the industry has to wise up. Why would anyone want to pay for an entire album when all record of it could be wiped away if a hard drive fails? Why would anyone pay anywhere near the same amount of money for a digital download compared to a physical copy?
Yes you do have the immediacy of getting what you want which in my opinion is fantastic, but if the record companies do not have the high production costs of the physical CD, the price should reduce to something fairer.
If this done so say the maximum amount of money someone would pay would be around the £5 mark for a chart album and there was a list of what you had bought in case of hard drive disaster (yes I know that almost all legal online music is now DRM free, but the systems of backup are not easy enough) then the industry would flourish online.
Most consumers realise that music needs to paid for. If a service is well thought out, easy to use and treats its customers with respect it will succeed. iTunes has not succeeded yet as most of the purchases are one off singles and not albums. This will come in time, but it needs some fresh thinking from an industry still stuck in the 1970s
Rant Over.
I know I haven't blogged in a while so I thought I'd discuss something of interest to my sector. The music industry for far too long has been filled with greedy folk who care nothing for the music they produce. Now up until about 5 years ago this was not a problem as they were getting all their money from CD's and consumers were prepared to pay extortionate amounts as they were holding something physical in their hands.
Now the whole arguments regarding onlinr pirated music are flawed. If I go into HMV and steal a CD, that stock cannot be sold to someone else. It's gone and needs to be replaced. If I illegally download a track off the internet it does not affect the supply chain in the slightest.
Does this mean I condone illegal downloading? Of course not. But the industry has to wise up. Why would anyone want to pay for an entire album when all record of it could be wiped away if a hard drive fails? Why would anyone pay anywhere near the same amount of money for a digital download compared to a physical copy?
Yes you do have the immediacy of getting what you want which in my opinion is fantastic, but if the record companies do not have the high production costs of the physical CD, the price should reduce to something fairer.
If this done so say the maximum amount of money someone would pay would be around the £5 mark for a chart album and there was a list of what you had bought in case of hard drive disaster (yes I know that almost all legal online music is now DRM free, but the systems of backup are not easy enough) then the industry would flourish online.
Most consumers realise that music needs to paid for. If a service is well thought out, easy to use and treats its customers with respect it will succeed. iTunes has not succeeded yet as most of the purchases are one off singles and not albums. This will come in time, but it needs some fresh thinking from an industry still stuck in the 1970s
Rant Over.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)