meta-roj

a couple days ago, i sat down to hack out a model for the top end of the music business. since then, i’ve gotten some interesting feedback, mostly in backchannels. there is one point i intended to make, but i was apparently a bit too subtle.

i split the top end into “directed” and “organic” pieces. what i didn’t emphasize enough was that the “organic” segment has higher potential lifetime returns – for the artist and anyone who has the patience to stick with them – and with that higher return comes higher risk. the risk is picking the star that never catches fire. by the time it’s obvious a band is going big “organically” it’s pretty much too late to hop on the bandwagon. (and you wonder why they call it a bandwagon 🙂 ).

the “directed” top end almost necessarily comes with a shorter lifetime and faster cycle, and that means the lifetime earnings potential is limited. this means that the system supporting the directed pop stars has to “keep the pipeline” full and risk-manage time as well as talent.

to pick on two examples that should make the point… the dave mathews band is safely described as an “organic” creation, and kelly clarkson is certainly a “directed” creation. in a short window (say, quarterly earnings statement), kelly clarkson might outperform dave matthews on earnings, but the long term picture is very different.

i certainly didn’t mean to dismiss or suggest that the “organic” approach doesn’t make money – it does.