The Singles-Business Model

[Mahesh]

India is one of the countries with the highest piracy rate in music and movies.

 

It is more common here to download the music off the internet than pay for the music. It is very bad here in that sense for independent musicians.

 

So,many here have taken to the Singles-Business Model (I dunno if that is really a thing, I'm just using the term that way).

 

Basically, its just that you release singles only. Mostly for free. Make a music video. Support that hype generated with gigs and merchandise. When asked about this, they said that they do not plan on releasing any albums either. And they find it more logical to invest in such a way ie., periodic bursts of 'hype' by releasing singles and music videos leading to gigs.

 

 

I find that totally weird to not release an album at all. Maybe I'm not getting the whole story. But has this been witnessed anywhere else?

 

What are your views if any?

 

 

[tomcollins]

That's smart business bro,

If you know your gonna get pirated, then yea release a single and build off live gigs,smart,

Rock on

[john]

Hey

The singles model is more or less as described, except it was not intended as a further free distribution as a constant stream of releases where some revenue could still be generated, but at the very least a suitable level of promotion could be attained with the never ending goal of getting to a level of popularity where concert tickets and merch etc would provide the basics of income. however, it can still be used to effectively generate income.

The problem is this:

You record an album of songs. The album is then made available somehow for free (often ripped by someone in the production or promotion chain). All tracks are instantly ripped and the overall promotional or monetary gain is of little different to if they had released one song.

The reason I simple. In terms of increasing the market value of a band, music itself is now just a fulcrum, a pivot. The actual step up is achieved by the associated exposure and promotion.

So, a singles model seems to be appealing. Each song is self contained. They are not recorded en masse and dumped on the market as a collection. Instead they are recorded as needed and drip fed onto the market, affording each the opportunity of increasing exposure.

BUT

That is only a little hit of how it can work. The BIGGER issue is bands not understanding how each model works, it's weakness and it's strengths.

Fundamentally downloads work on a per track basis, although some services also provide album downloads where an album can be downloaded at a reduced price, say 10 tracks for the price of 10.

Ever more desperate bands, not understanding fundamentals, follow the singles business model, forgetting the business. Everything becomes a giveaway.

Mahesh, doing it right will make a difference, BUT:

You are in a local market, a national market and an international market. While there are buying habits within your national market, similar though possibly less severe versions of those buying habits exist locally and internationally. I say locally is different because those are your closest fans, the friends and family, those who see your band more often etc. internationally there are definitely markets that were more recently paying markets. However awareness of different trends and buying habits is useful knowledge. In fact, understanding those markets allows you to work those markets to your advantage.

Do you remember when you were releasing your EP? I told you it was all about timing. Getting the maximum exposure and promotion is all about timing. Retaining fans is about mechanisms and timing, making sales and profit is about timing. Without timing you may as well piss into the wind.

Well, the singles business model is an ongoing exercise in timing, mechanisms and understanding leverage.

Additionally, you cannot overly restrain your business practice by purely what happens in India, if your ambition lies beyond it.

The clue here is the name. The Singles BUSINESS model. Not the singles giveaway model, or the singles vague goal model.

It takes planning, coordination and discipline to get it to work.

Sure, you can stumble towards popularity (or at least more popularity) by releasing (more commonly these days just "making available" not releasing) a sequence of songs.

To make it a business model, it has to make money. It has to have a plan to work effectively.

If you do it without a plan, making money us less predictable, less effective. If you have a decent plan your uplift in popularity can be multiplied hundreds of times. Your ability to make money can go up a thousandfold.

How do you do it? Well.... I can tell you, but not all in one post! Lol

[Mahesh]

Hey

The singles model is more or less as described, except it was not intended as a further free distribution as a constant stream of releases where some revenue could still be generated, but at the very least a suitable level of promotion could be attained with the never ending goal of getting to a level of popularity where concert tickets and merch etc would provide the basics of income. however, it can still be used to effectively generate income.

The problem is this:

You record an album of songs. The album is then made available somehow for free (often ripped by someone in the production or promotion chain). All tracks are instantly ripped and the overall promotional or monetary gain is of little different to if they had released one song.

The reason I simple. In terms of increasing the market value of a band, music itself is now just a fulcrum, a pivot. The actual step up is achieved by the associated exposure and promotion.

So, a singles model seems to be appealing. Each song is self contained. They are not recorded en masse and dumped on the market as a collection. Instead they are recorded as needed and drip fed onto the market, affording each the opportunity of increasing exposure.

BUT

That is only a little hit of how it can work. The BIGGER issue is bands not understanding how each model works, it's weakness and it's strengths.

Fundamentally downloads work on a per track basis, although some services also provide album downloads where an album can be downloaded at a reduced price, say 10 tracks for the price of 10.

Ever more desperate bands, not understanding fundamentals, follow the singles business model, forgetting the business. Everything becomes a giveaway.

Mahesh, doing it right will make a difference, BUT:

You are in a local market, a national market and an international market. While there are buying habits within your national market, similar though possibly less severe versions of those buying habits exist locally and internationally. I say locally is different because those are your closest fans, the friends and family, those who see your band more often etc. internationally there are definitely markets that were more recently paying markets. However awareness of different trends and buying habits is useful knowledge. In fact, understanding those markets allows you to work those markets to your advantage.

Do you remember when you were releasing your EP? I told you it was all about timing. Getting the maximum exposure and promotion is all about timing. Retaining fans is about mechanisms and timing, making sales and profit is about timing. Without timing you may as well piss into the wind.

Well, the singles business model is an ongoing exercise in timing, mechanisms and understanding leverage.

Additionally, you cannot overly restrain your business practice by purely what happens in India, if your ambition lies beyond it.

The clue here is the name. The Singles BUSINESS model. Not the singles giveaway model, or the singles vague goal model.

It takes planning, coordination and discipline to get it to work.

Sure, you can stumble towards popularity (or at least more popularity) by releasing (more commonly these days just "making available" not releasing) a sequence of songs.

To make it a business model, it has to make money. It has to have a plan to work effectively.

If you do it without a plan, making money us less predictable, less effective. If you have a decent plan your uplift in popularity can be multiplied hundreds of times. Your ability to make money can go up a thousandfold.

How do you do it? Well.... I can tell you, but not all in one post! Lol

 

Great insight as usual John.

 

As you said, a vague plan is gonna go nowhere. We need to look at how much we can leverage out of it. 

 

I was wondering about whether such a direction is common in other countries like the U.K or the U.S. I mean sure, Indians are heading in that direction for two main reasons: the indie music scene is still relatively new. And the other one is that piracy is at its highest. But how prevalent is it there?

 

Nonetheless, it is an approach which deserves venturing during times where album sales are going rapidly down.

[Mahesh]

Yup.I agree, It is pretty self-destructing. But we've driven ourselves into this. Our desperation to make even a little has. 

[Just1L]

It's a sad situation. Until people can be legally forced to remove music and with A BIG hefty fine, things won't change. And it really sucks to say "I'm gonna sue you if you don't take my song down". But, in part, it's already too late. One person, posting one link of a song on the rise and millions can have it before anything can or will be done. A crux of the internet. It doesn't take a large group of people do do damage. Ah well, I'm starting to get over it a little.

[john]

Absolutely Hobo, but fans are still fans.

I don't deny either the download market is an issue, or the streaming market for that matter.

However, the issue is not about how those markets handle music, so much as answering the question of "Can artists make a good living from their music?"

If you go at it with the old mindset, then frankly, you are stuffed.

Fans still pay. Fans still like exclusivity. They still like to feel special. Artists are not duty bound to put everything they create on general release.

People pay to be first. The Movie market works that way. You want it right away? Go to the cinema. Prepared to pay some but like convenience, go On Demand. Not prepared to stump up that, then movie channel subscriptions got your back 6 months after On Demand. Really determined not to pay? Well you can legitimately wait until it us on the free channels after a year, or you can break the law and go to some dodgy site that will blast you with advertisements, infect your PC with a Trojan or two and deliver a low bandwidth version of the movie! Some may still opt to have their own, physical copy.

Some people fall into each camp. Depending on the movie, they may be in different camps of even several.

Artists can do exactly the same. By that I mean they can target all these types of users. Some will always pay to get it early, get it first, get the best quality. Some will never, ever pay, may or may not be driven to get it immediately, or don't care about the quality they get. All combinations are possible, as are the wide variety of options between extreme positions... Such as price points!

Ok, so an artist brings out a song. Yay! To a large extent they can take advantage of their understanding of different listeners. They can also take advantage of the changing value / desire-ability of a song.

So, the trad model is, Artist pushes old song(s) to increase interest in new song. The new song is a product, but also a teaser for the album product. The old songs generate some long tail sales on previous albums. Each single (commonly 2 - 4 per album) provides an incremental step up in the number of fans on the fan list (if it is done right) do sales spike on release due to demand, each time settling to a higher number of fans than before. Each album should also be an incremental increase. If it is done right.

One new approach, the single model, every song is a self contained released, with a spike of interest, each gathering a chunk of fans to the fan list. Each is a product.

But singles do not exist in isolation.

Neither do they need to be sole representatives of a song. E are used to "unplugged" versions, or live and studio versions, but now each version can have a different target market, a different distinct purpose, on top of building fans.

Additionally, what we can do with fan lists has really, really changed. That is the true game changer.

As an example: a traditional, unschooled "I must release an album" approach for indies is doomed to failure. It always was, it is just far more black and white than it ever was. Why? Well, if you go the approach of most indies, they spend a load of cash and time making the album, it takes ages, so they rush some of the process. Generally they follow no release process, they usually don't even consider singles properly (unless signed to a small label). They make their album available with almost no warming of the market with back catalog, with no build up of anticipation and splat, their album is ripped before it has sold 10 copies and the band gets almost no benefit from the process. At best, some new people stumble on the album and listen a few times. With no hype even that falls flat.

If you are clued in, and understand listeners, fans, market segments, basic biz sense etc... Well you can be smarter.

For example. You release one song. BUT you spend time building anticipation for a release date. You create various versions for various reasons... Like an acoustic version, a tutorial version, a single length version, an EP version, a video version, a lo fi version, clips etc. you acknowledge the different listener types, and where they live: your fan list, your radio stream, your download shop, iTunes etc, streaming services, radio listeners in general, single and album buyers the list goes on.

For EVERY type there is a different, but coordinated approach, so that you make the most of every recording in every segment. Each serves a core purpose.

You take advantage of availability and timing and exclusivity. You acknowledge the fact that what is new today is old tomorrow, and that some will pay to get it earlier, or more completely, all versions... Most importantly, you understand what it is to be a fan!

This means that, when you first release a song you can provide the whole thing, in full, for free... But that is the acoustic version. You also provide full production clips ahead of time to reviewers and radio stations that will also link to past releases. You post a video version. It is shorter than the extended length version that you only make available to people on your fan list, paid subscribers, who also get to view exclusive video interviews and behind the scenes stuff, tutorials on how to play it etc. the official version is also on iTunes and normal radio (okay, the last is unlikely as they are a closed group in general!) of course time passes, and what is new, exclusive and expensive, becomes old, common place and free... Depending on how long it is post release.

Then comes song 2.

Leverage. You need to understand leverage. You need to put in place mechanisms to support your activities. You need to plan and coordinate your activities so they accumulate... Money, fans, listeners, whatever your goal is. All of the above! Lol

Each step, each activity has a plan or two or three that will work for it, or it can be part of. Each has a mechanism, a process, a tool that makes it possible.

There is no guarantee of being rich and famous. Being known and paid? That is very achievable. Very. Even for an old fart.

Why do I not do it all? Well, for a start I have no interest in fame. Secondly, I have a variety of personal considerations that incline me not to. I do plan on releasing songs, gigging too if given a chance, and when I do I will take advantage of my knowledge of what works and why.... But, fame, masses of wealth? They just do not drive me, Sorry.

Can I help others? Will I? Sure. That is the plan. I get asked regularly. For ages I have been limited in time, money and energy to really do it justice... But that is very, very different from not being able to help from the perspective of skills or knowledge. However, those that know me well will know that things have progressed with me, and with Songstuff. I am getting my feet clear, and I have been preparing the way to do many things I have wanted to do for ages.

I have dealt with practicalities like paying bills, eating, keeping Songstuff open and being more and more useful... And the good news is that things are either dealt with, in hand, or planned for. This means that I get to focus on adding value, to increasing use, to creating, sourcing, and spending less time on maintaining, marking time, getting by. Fundamentally this should means loads of useful things for Songstuff users. I don't plan to rely on just myself either! IE, with changes come benefits, including bringing in new experience, adding services etc.

Fun times.