23 Mar
2006
23 Mar
'06
11:43 a.m.
R Parker wrote:
--- tim hall <tech(a)glastonburymusic.org.uk> wrote:
sell
That is the only reasonable model I'm aware of and I'd
like to know what Carlo believes. Or if you care to
share it then what you believe.
Is this proposed record label going to invest $700.00
a month into advertising my music so I can have the
measly $2,000.00 a month requirement? Is it going to
do the same for you and how many other people? Does
this business proposal have an operating budget?
I'm not trying to discredit the idea that there's a
group of artists whom share a "for the good of all
mankind" philosophy and that fans can derive vicarious
fulfillment and alleviation through listening to our
music. After they buy it.
I want to know the plan. How does the record label pay
for its overhead which includes operational and wage
expenses. Are we gonna put our songs on a website and
hope people stumble across it, pay $1.00 per download
and then the artist recieves exactly $1.00 in their
paypal account?
Alot can be done with very little money. Let's say
five of us agree to invest $20.00 a month into banner
adds or google AdText to promote site Y where a list
of artist websites exist...
OK, I understand what you're saying now. This is exactly the kind of
hard headed reality I have trouble wrapping my head around and
subsequently why I'm not earning 2 grand a month from music.
Do you honestly think that banner ads are the most effective means of
advertising or was that just as an example?
I agree that it is the songs which will sell, the technology used to
produce them is largely irrelevant to the end consumer - it may provide
added value in some cases.
The trouble is, if you run on a donations basis, it's easy to believe
that you can only afford free advertising. It is hard to make any kind
of business plan when you have no guaranteed income. I don't suppose
that's news to anyone here.
cheers,
tim hall
R Parker wrote:
Understanding product, buyers and the means for
reaching buyers is my marketing objective. One of
every 1000 views of a banner results in a sale. A 30
day campaign for $100.00 will be seen by 40,000 people
and result in 40 sales. Production cost per unit is
$5.00 leaving a $300.00 profit.
This community seems determined to associate a value
with its music that's derived from the tools used to
produce the music or the philosiphy that governs the
development of those tools. I share som of that
romantic sentiment. However, I am practicle and
believe it is the song that sells.
If it's the song that sells and I want to make
$2,000.00 a month on my music then I need to invest
about $700.00 a month into banner adds.
Clean up
Hi,
I haven't got enough time to properly revue your
ideas
and proposals but will attempt to respond in
part.
--- Carlo Capocasa <capocasa(a)gmx.net> wrote:
>MARKETING TACTICS
>
>We all need marketing. In its best sense, it
simply
>>means that there are
>>no obstacles people need to get around to get to
>>your music. >the
dog poo in front of your store. Sure it's
>flattering to see to what
>lengths people will go to get your product, but
>maybe that length could
>be reduced to one: How much will they pay?
>
>1. For the first business model I was thinking of
>selling music on an
>'All Rights Reserved' basis, but with FULL RESALE
>RIGHTS. In other
>words, people are allowed to distribute your work
>for free if they want
>to, but there is a little incentive not to,
because
they can
also sell
it to their friends.
From the Copyright owner perspective, I issue a
license that describes how you can legally use, and distribute my property.
This is probably the same as what Carlo is
suggesting, except you
already have a workable version?