10 concepts you should understand to survive the digital revolution

Are you aware that some people are not reading or writing blog posts? Are you using Twitter, Facebook and other social media? In other words: are you 'connected' or 'disconnected'? Some people only read newspapers, watch television and read some books. They only use internet in a web 1.0 way; reading and writing e-mails, check some websites and do some Google searches. They haven't got a clue what is going on in the digital environment.

It becomes more and more obvious: in future there will be a separation between 'connected' and 'disconnected' persons. If you understand the digital age and act upon it you will be able to survive the digital revolution that is currently taking place.

Everybody needs to be connected. It will take a while. If you are a decision maker within a company, you need to be connected to survive this digital revolution! If you don't understand social media or just not interested, no problem! Surround yourself with 'connected' people and listen to their advice!

Web 2.0 have changed some economic laws. Several management guru's have written about the changed principles. I would like to call these concepts 'internet concepts'.

The upcoming weeks I would like to share with you the following internet concepts on this blog. I will also give some examples on the way these internet concepts are influencing your (music) business:

1. The Long tail (Chris Anderson)
2. Paradox of choice (Barry Schwartz)
3. New age of innovation (C.K. Prahalad & M.S. Krishnan)
4. The tipping point (Malcolm Gladwell)
5. Open Innovation (Henry Chesbrough)
6. Blue ocean strategy (Kim & Mauborge)
7. Purple Cow (Seth Godin)
8. The starfish and the spider (Ori Brafman & Rod Backstrom)
9. Tribes (Seth Godin)
10. The future of competition (C.K. Prahalad & Venkat Ramaswamy)
    

In my opinion every manager at traditional (music) companies should at least be aware of these internet concepts. Do you agree with me? Or did I forget an important internet concept? Please let me know!

Attention! Future Music models without ads

'Music is emotion.' Beware! Persuasion is everywhere! In this emotional state you are seduced to buy stuff! The ad-funded music business models are driving consumers crazy! Imagine you are in love with a beautiful girl. You would only think about this girl while listening to a great love song. But there are some other parties trying to get your attention. The artist is trying to sell his album to you, the brand which is supporting the artist is trying to create some goodwill, the platform is trying to upgrade your account to a premium service and if you go to MySpace you even get some great overlay advertisements while watching the music video.

Dave Kusek just blogged that we have to think of a different music model with respect to the artist-fan relationship. I am afraid the ad-funded business model doesn't fit this need. Too much parties trying to get your attention, a subject Gerd Leonhard blogged about today. Gerd writes it is all about participation, engagement and attention. I think Gerd is right, there will be much more advertisements around content the upcoming months and years. Why? Because the music industry isn't innovating! Technology changed the traditional value chain of the music business into a value network. A network where artists, consumers, record companies, music publishers and copyright societies are forced to work together to co-create a great customer experience. The music industry has just stopped the fight against technology and is now fighting with itself about margins. Still no focus on co-creation and innovation! If you would like to read about co-creation, "The future of competition" by C.K. Prahalad and Venkat Ramaswamy is a most read. Thanks for your attention! Let's start innovating!

Ups and Downs: business model innovation

A consortium of Dutch researchers published a report on 'filesharing and the economic impact on the Dutch creative industry'. One of the suggestions of the researchers is innovating business models. Earlier, I shared with you the presentation of Alex Osterwalder about business model innovation. Alex and the researchers are suggesting the same types of innovations. Innovation of value chains into value networks, innovation of distribution and markets. Page 136 of the report 'Ups and downs':

"The only way to cope with the impact of file sharing is to develop new connections and networks to support new products and services'. It seems like a strategy of lawsuits and DRM is not the right way to act. Next to this the market size of legal music downloads isn't generation the same amount of revenues as the decline of the music market." 'The industry is in a forced phase of transition"

Part of this transition is the entrance of new companies into the value network. Companies like Nokia and Apple are taking the lead in constructing new products, services and connections. It is really 'innovation time' for the traditional music companies. Otherwise the new entrants will take over their business.

Music, Beer & innovation

Last Saturday, 17 January 2009 a meeting of Beer and innovation was held in Groningen, The Netherlands. The idea of beer and innovation meetings is to connect professionals and start-ups with each other. The start-ups will pay the drinks, the professionals will share their knowledge. The meeting in Groningen was initiated by Lopend Vuur and was all about music start-ups. Not really a coincidence because during the weekend the European music conference Noorderslag / Eurosonic was held. The following start-ups were presenting themselves at the meeting: Twones, Cloudspeakers, Tipspot, Tribe of Noise, Next best band, New music labs (tools for tribes). Conclusion after some beer and an inspiring conversations: we have a lot of innovative upcoming / promising Dutch start-ups which are using music as one of their core activities. The Netherlands is ready to create and facilitate more music tribes!

3 reasons why an artists still needs support of intermediaries

In the age of web 2.0 the music industry value chain is changing. Traditionally, intermediaries like record companies, music publishers, copyright societies and record stores are supporting the author and artist to create, market, distribute and sell their works. Nowadays social networks are providing powerful tools to both artist and consumers. Artist can upload and share their works with consumers. Consumers can find, share and consume this content. Most of the time for free. (or feels like free) The question arises if the artist still needs the intermediaries these days? I will give you 3 reasons why intermediaries are still adding value.

1. An artist needs support on the business side so he or she can focus on the creative process. 

2. Social networks are not paying artists directly for the use of their content. 

3. Creating and selling content are different processes for which you need different skills. 

I don’t say it is impossible to have a value chain without intermediaries. Next post I will give you some reasons why it is possible. 

You Tube and the content of major record companies

The You Tube team announced that music video's of Warner Music are no longer available on You Tube. The Washington post published the statement of Warner Music:

"We are working actively to find a resolution with YouTube that would enable the return of our artists' content to the site. Until then, we simply cannot accept terms that fail to appropriately and fairly compensate recording artists, songwriters, labels and publishers for the value they provide."

On the other hand Cnet reports that YouTube is driving significant revenue for itself and some of the video site's partners. Rio Caraeff, executive vice president of Universal Music Group's eLabs, said in an interview with Cnet that You Tube is bringing in "tens of millions of dollars".

The contrast of these two stories is interesting. Will record companies use You Tube to earn a substantial amount of money for their artists? Or will they turn their back to You Tube? I am curious which alternatives Warner will use to generate more attention to their content. Is this really the end of the 'hit culture'? Or just part of the negotiation between Warner and Google? Will the user of You Tube start listening to other content which is less popular but nevertheless quit interesting? 

Event: Entertainment & Rights

'Entertainment & Right' was held on 21 November 2008 @ Holiday Inn in Amsterdam. The following topics were discussed:

• Dutch Media Law which will be updated soon
• Artists & Taxes
• Duration of Neigbouring Rights within the European Union
• 360 degree artist contracts
  
• New licensing model of Dutch music copyright organisation Buma/Stemra

Can a song of 10 minutes be seen as a product innovation?

Did you realize that the length of a 'mainstream song' of the traditional recorded music industry is approximately 3,5 minutes? Do you know why? I think there are two main reasons:

Marketing. Radio stations don't like songs which are longer than 3,5 minutes. Listeners are shifting to other station when they are bored with a song that is played too long.

Technology. The length of songs were based on a combination of the capacity of sound carriers and the quality of the recording.

In theory 'traditional songs of 3,5 minutes' will be history within the digital environment. The length of a musical work is becoming less important.

Marketing. There are far more digital music providers than traditional radio stations. Listeners stick to digital music providers because of the uniqueness of the content. No more - middle of the road stations only - but niche markets. Every music lover can listen to his own music taste. It simple doesn't matter if the length of the content is a little longer.
Technology. It just doesn't matter if the data storage of the content is a little more. Storage capacity is almost endless these days.

Product/service innovation can be seen as 'the result of bringing to life a new way to solve the customer's problem – through a new product or service development – that benefits both the customer and the sponsoring company.' Since the artist has more time to express himself and the music lover has access to more inspiring content, I think songs longer than 'standard' track length can be seen as product innovations.

First Dutch hiphop businessclass

On 1 november 2008 the first Dutch hiphop businessclass was held @No Limit in Amsterdam. Speakers of Telegraaf Media, Radio 538, Rockacademie, Buma/Stemra, 3time and Netlog told Dutch Hiphopartists how the business side of the Music Industry works. How do you get your music on the radio? Do you really need a record company? How do you clear copyrights? Do you need permission of right holders when you use samples in your song? How can you use social media to get in touch with your fans? Next to the various presentations professional hiphop artists provided hiphop workshops to improve your skills as MC / Hiphop artist. 

'Think & act as an entrepreneur' was the most important message of the business professionals. Use new media to produce, distribute and market yourself and your music. The hiphop professionals had another important message: 'It is good to have heroes, but don't become a copycat'. 'Find your own style. Continiously improve your sound.' 

There will be more hiphop businessclasses in 2009.

How to start a legal digital music service

If you like to start a digital music service you just can't start sell music on your website that you bought on another digital music service like iTunes, or even worse, ripped from a cd or from a peer2peer service. Why not? Because it is not your music. The creators of the music, authors and artists, own the music. If you like to sell their music you need their permission. Creators have various rights. Rights to exploit the music. If you like to sell the music of the creators you have to pay a (small) amount of money to them.

Clearing copyright and neigboring rights

Within the Netherlands you have to pay the author based on the copyright act of 1912. The artist (performer) has to be paid based on the neighboring rights. But, how can I find these artists and authors? And, how much do I have to pay them?

Most of the time artists and authors are supported by organizations to market, finance, distribute and sell their music. Music Publishing companies are supporting authors, Record companies are supporting artists. The relationships between artists and record companies and authors and music publishers are based on record deals and publishing deals. The creators are (partly) transferring their rights to these parties. It means that record companies and music publishers are becoming rights holders as well.

The role of the copyright society

Another party is involved. The copyright society. Music Publishers and authors can transfer the exploitation of their copyrights to a copyright society. The copyright society charges music users for the use of music based on the copyrights of the rights holders they represent. So, when you like to start a digital music service, you have to start to get a license from a copyright society. This was the easy part of the story.

Get licenses from the 4 major recordcompanies to cover 80% of total market

To get a license from a record company (because of the neighboring rights) you have to make deals with several record companies to clear the rights. It is not possible to clear your rights with one organization. You have to start negotiations with various record companies. The four major record labels (Sony, Warner, Universal and EMI) have an accumulated market share of 80%. To have a successful (mainstream) music service, you need the content of the four majors in order to survive this highly competitive market.

Conclusions

So, if you like to start a digital music service: clear copyrights and neighboring rights. Copyrights can be cleared via copyright organizations, neigboring rights need to be cleared via record companies. Start with the major labels. Clearing rights can be a time consuming and an expensive process.  

8 feels like free music business models

Consumers are getting more and more confused. Free music is everywhere, but is it legal music? And, is it really free? Or are you paying your music in a different way than you did before? Or is a third party financing this music? I have identified 8 'music feels like free models' for you. Some models are still great innovations, other models are becoming more mainstream.

1. Advertising funded

Some music models are advertising supported. Examples of this businessmodel are Fabchannel, Spiral frog or We7. Advertsing income is used to cover the costs of music. Advertising can be served in various ways. Instream advertisements, bannering, buttons, pre-rolls or postrolls. The radio and television industry is using the advertising model for years. For the (digital) music industry this model is relatively new. 

2. Mobile music subscription model

Examples of this model are TDC in Denmark and Nokia's Comes With Music. Consumers are buying a handset with music included. The price of the handset includes the price of the music. When you download the music from a music store to the handset you don't have to pay. It feels like free. The innovative part of this model is the role of Nokia. Handset manufacturer Nokia is entering the music industry to sell more mobile phones and deliver more services to their end users.

3. Music tax

Media futurist Gerd Leonhard has written a lot about his 'music as water' music model. According to Leonhard 'music tax' should be paid to a governmental institution for the use of music. An independent party should distribute the collected money to the rightholders. A lot is said about this model. One thing is sure: this model can be a future solution, not a solution for 2008. The various governments and rightsholders are not ready yet to implement this model. ‘Tax’ is not innovative, a music tax is!

4. Levies

This 'music feels like free' model is slightly different from the 'tax' model. Levies could be collected based on Internet access, mp3 players and / or other devices. Levies are collected by public organizations instead of governmental institutions.

5. Brands

Bacardi is using 'music' for marketing purposes. Some artists have record deals with brands like Bacardi.   

6. Piracy

A lot of music is shared via p2p networks. This music is not licensed by copyright- and / or neighboring right holders.

7. Creative Commons

"Creative Commons provides free tools that let authors, scientists, artists, and educators easily mark their creative work with the freedoms they want it to carry. You can use CC to change your copyright terms from "All Rights Reserved" to "Some Rights Reserved."

Creators of musical works can use Creative Commons licenses to show the world if it is allowed to use or remix the musical work and distribute it. Traditionally, copyright societies are taking care of collecting and distributing royalties for the use of music. Creative commons isn’t collecting and distributing any money.

8. Promotions

Sometimes artists are giving away their music for free. To promote their music, to promote their gigs and to let the world know about their amazing music.

The rise of the all-you-can-eat mobile music model

This week Nokia has unveiled the Comes with Music service for the United Kingdom. It launches on the 16th of October 2008. This all-you-can-eat service provides unlimited access to music via your Nokia phone. Sony-Ericsson is offering a similar service: Play now plus. Are this innovative services? Who are profiting from these services? Time to discuss this music model. 

Is this service an innovative music model?

According to Wikipedia 'innovation' means a new way of doing something. But, is this kind of service new? Five months ago the Danish Telco TDC launched a similar music service called 'play'. So, not completely new, but almost. The subscription part of this model isn't new either. eMusic offers a subscription model as well. This model is ad supported and 'feels like free' for consumers. Another subscription model is 'Planet music' a music service of KPN within the Netherlands. Consumers are charged to use this service. So the subscription and ' feels like free' part are not innovative any more. Maybe the 'DRM free' part is a new element? This service is still a walled garden according to blogger David Gerard. Although, this music model is not an innovation, I think you can call it innovative from a rights holder’s perspective. Siliconrepublic.com reports that all the major music labels and major publishers are supporting this service.

Who is profiting from this music model?

This brings me to the next question: Who is profiting from this music model?

• The consumer?
  
• The Telco’s and mobile phone manufacturers? 
  
• The rights holders?
  

They all are profiting! 

• The consumer is finally offered a new music model to consume and discover music, 
  
• The Telco’s and manufacturers are hoping to increase sales of the devices and data transmission
  
• The rights holders are generating new income streams from giant multinationals which are using the content of the rights holders to increase sales by increasing customer (music) experience  
  

But, are consumers really shifting away from P2P networks with this service? Or is this service cannibalizing the sales of other legal music services like iTunes or Beatport? At least it is a nice try and a positive next step for the music industry when it comes to music innovation.

Social Media and Marketing Revolution

        

Five Characters of Social Marketing

Great presentation on behavior and motivation of Social Network users. 

Open Innovation and Co-creation

Last week I have visited two conferences, E-Day and Picnic. At both conferences 'crowdsourcing'  was discussed. It surprised me that one of the speakers brought up 'Open Innovation' as an example of co-creating products and services with your customers. 

In a recent research I used ' Open Innovation' as well. I reffered to Henry Chesbrough. Chesbrough wrote a book about this concept. In the foreword of this book John Seely Brown writes about 'innovating innovation'. John states that we are faced with two new realities: 

1. The networked world allows us to bring customers into the lab as a co-producer.
   
2. The smart people you need to innovate aren't members of any single team but are distributed all over the place in multiple institutions. Finding successful ways to work with them will lie at the heart of innovating innovation 
   

In my opinion 'Open Innovation' is not an example of co-creating but the possibility to co-create is a driver for 'Open Innovation'. 

Chesbrough describes in his book two ' paradigms': Closed Innovation and Open Innovation. 

Closed innovation is the way research & development is done by, mainly large companies, in the last centuries. It is an approach of accessing knowledge that is inwardly focused. 

'Open Innovation means that valuable ideas can come from inside or outside the company and can go to market from inside or outside the company as well. This approach places external ideas and external paths to market on the same level of importance as that reserved for internal ideas and paths to market during the Closed Innovation era." 

Open Innovation within the music industry could mean that a major record- or publishing company are not only innovating from inside the company (for instance adopting 360 deals) but also adopt innovations that were produced outside the company. Buying start ups with usefull technology to create better services to customers.

Businessmodel innovation

Mediaplaza event \'08

View SlideShare presentation or Upload your own. (tags: conference talks)

The Long Tail & Profitability

Do you know the concept of Chris Anderson? The concept gives you some great insights in the way technology is changing industries, particularly the entertainment industry.I would like to share with you a summary of the Long Tail concept:

"The theory of the Long Tail is that our culture and economy is increasingly shifting away from a focus on a relatively small number of "hits" (mainstream products and markets) at the head of the demand curve and toward a huge number of niches in the tail. As the costs of production and distribution fall, especially online, there is now less need to lump products and consumers into one-size-fits-all containers. In an era without the constraints of physical shelf space and other bottlenecks of distribution, narrowly-target goods and services can be as economically attractive as mainstream fare.’

Or watch this video about the Long Tail:

Kevin Kelly, at Wired, who had some nice observations about The Long Tail and the profitability of products:

'Seth Godin has been exploring Chris Anderson's idea of the The Long Tail. As usual Seth brings clarity and illumination to this often misunderstood notion. He recently posted a dissection of the three "profit pockets" within the Long Tail, which he illustrated like this:



There's a blatant switcheroo that Seth (and almost everyone else) makes when explaining the Long Tail. In pocket #1 of the curve, Seth talks in terms of a creator of a work. In pocket #2 of the curve, he also talks in terms of the creator. But then when he gets to the long tail, he switches away from a creator, to talk in terms of an aggregator of other creators' work. Why is that? What happens to the creator? The creator is dropped when we get to the long tail "pocket of profit" because the long tail is not profitable for the creator. It's profitable only for the audience and aggregators.'

Digital Revolution

Technology is influencing the way industries are structured. Stephen Covey and Peter Drucker have written about this subject. In his book 'The 8th Habit of Highly Efective People' Stephen Covey says that we are confronted with one of the greatest shifts in human history. Covey quotes Peter Drucker who said that neither technology, nor internet or e-commerce has caused the change, but rather a change in human condition. 'For the first time literally a substantial and rapidly growing number of people have choices. For the first time they have to manage themselves. And society is totally unprepared for it.'

Covey then talks about four different ages in which 'change' occurs:

1. The hunter and gatherer age
2. The agricultural age
3. The industrial age
4. The information knowledge worker age

For instance, in the industrial age people build factories and learned specialization, delegation and scale ability. 'The productivity of the industrial age went up fifty times over the family farm. What did you need as a farmer to stay a player, also in the industrial age? You needed a completely new skill set and toolset. You needed a new mindset, a new way of thinking.'

I think this story is also true for the music industry these days. The information knowledge worker age is changing the way consumers are behaving. Buying music, listening to music, finding new music, and so on. The music industry must realize that people are finding new music via Peer-2-peer networks, Pandora, Last.fm, and other services. Consumers are not buying music the way they bought music ten years ago.

10 New Marketing Classics Every Researcher Should Know About

This slideshow give you some great insights in new marketing concepts. You can use the concepts to get a good understanding on what is happing in the online /marketing field.

10 New Marketing Classics Every Researcher Should Know About

Music as a commodity

Music is getting more and more a commodity. Consumers, Music Service Providers, Record Labels and Music Publishers are collecting music in databases. These databases full of songs are opened up to consumers in different models. Peer-to-peer Models, Add Funded Models, Mobile Subscription Models and All You Can Eat Models.

Music Lovers have access to too much music. It takes too much time to find a song on your MP3-player, at your computer or in your library. And, if you found the song you were looking for, you are getting impatient and can’t wait until the next song starts. It is just too much to handle. A business model that is based on a great Customer Experience will be a huge opportunity. The right music at the right time at the right place. But how do we get there? I think (and hope) that Last.fm and Pandora are just the start of the ‘discovery’ music model.

Changing Music Industry

The music industry is changing. Technological innovations within the music industry are mainly initiated by hardware suppliers not by record companies. It seems like that the global music market is evolving into three markets; the traditional music industry of soundcarriers, the mobile music industry and the online music industry.

Hoe het crossmediale verhaal van 'Sophy de band' verder zou kunnen gaan...

Gisterenmiddag was het optreden van Sophy, de band waarover ik schreef in mijn vorige bericht. Naast het schrijven van mooie liedjes en het geven van spetterend optredens is Sophy nog ergens goed in: het vergroten van de 'fanbase' door een crossmediale campagne in te zetten.

Volgens Monique de Haas, crossmedia expert, is crossmediale communicatie het volgende:
"Bij crossmedia-communicatie nodigt het verhaal de gebruiker uit om een cross-over van het eerste medium naar het volgende te maken." Verder stelt zij: "Doordat de gebruiker er zelf voor kiest om van het eerste naar het volgende onderdeel van het verhaal te gaan binnen hetzelfde dan wel een volgend medium, neemt de betrokkenheid bij de boodschap toe. Het aantal contactmomenten breidt zich uit en het verhaal kan op diverse niveaus tegelijk worden verteld."

Sophy zet diverse media op briljante wijze in met als doel om de betrokkenheid van de fans te vergroten. En met succes! Mede door het inzetten van het You Tube filmpje was de Heeren van Aemstel behoorlijk gevuld! Er is dus door velen een goede crossover gemaakt van de Hyves pagina van Sophy (internetlokatie) naar de Heeren van Aemstel (fysieke lokatie). Mooi detail: het stuk karton dat in het filmpje werd gebruikt om liftend naar het optreden te komen stond tegen het podium.

Het bord zou als een mooi 'encounter point' gebruikt kunnen worden in het verhaal van Sophy. Tijdens een masterclass over Crossmedia dat door het Lectoraat Media & Entertainment management georganiseerd werd sprak Monique de Haas over 'encounter points', het moment waarop je mensen onbewust laat meenemen in jouw verhaal. In dit geval het verhaal van Sophy.
Idee: gebruik het bord om het verhaal van Sophy te vervolgen en daarmee de betrokkenheid van de fans te vergroten: Laat de fans van Sophy een mooie foto maken waarop zij liftend te zien zijn naar het volgende optreden van Sophy op 11 november 2007 in Haarlem. De winnaar wordt bijvoorbeeld door de heren van Sophy thuis opgehaald en naar het optreden in Haarlem gebracht... Vanzelfsprekend wordt het vervolg van het verhaal weer gebruik gemaakt van verschillende media: filmpjes, Hyves en de internetsite van Sophy!

Marketing door de artiest in de lift!

Nieuwe technologieën maken het voor zowel consumenten als artiesten mogelijk om elkaar te benaderen zonder tussenkomst van allerlei partijen in de muziekindustrie. De platenmaatschappij was in het verleden in staat de 'traditionele' distributiekanalen te beheersen. Tegenwoordig is dat behoorlijk veranderd. De artiest neemt zelf de marketing touwtjes stevig in handen waarbij dankbaar gebruik wordt gemaakt van de mogelijkheden van sites als 'You Tube' en het Nederlandse 'Hyves'. Een mooi voorbeeld van een band die zijn fanbase vergroot door het inzetten van dergelijke toepassingen is de band "Sophy", een band waar we nog veel over gaan horen... Het bovenstaande filmpje is zeker het bekijken waard, net als het optreden van Sophy op 15 september in de Heeren van Aemstel.... Zie je daar..

De functie van platenmaatschappijen (deel 2)

Op 6 juni schreef ik over de rol van de platenmaatschappij. Artiest en Recht (2003) vermeldt dat de platenmaatschappij vier functies heeft:

1. A&R,
2. Legal & Business,
3. Sales, merchandising en distributie,
4. overige functies.

Een wonderlijke indeling. ‘A&R’ is duidelijk. ‘Sales, merchandising en distributie’ zijn duidelijk verschillende zaken. ‘Overige functies’ is altijd handig in een opsomming, kan je in ieder geval nooit iets vergeten. Het blijft dus eigenlijk vaag wat nu de functie van een maatschappij is.

In mijn zoektocht naar de 'echte' functie van een platenmaatschappij stuitte ik op aantekeningen die ik maakte tijdens een gastcollege (Media & Entertainment Management, 1999) van Stef Collignon, op dat moment in dienst van Universal / Polydor. In de toelichting van de toenmalige organisatiestructuur van Universal werd nagenoeg hetzelfde rijtje gebruikt. Het lijkt wel alsof de ‘functies’ uit Artiest en Recht geen functies zijn maar ‘afdelingen’ van een major platenmaatschappij als Universal. Op het verschil tussen een major en independent kom ik later terug.

Na mijn bronnenonderzoek en de bovenstaande constatering stel ik daarom voor de volgende indeling van functies te hanteren:

1. zoeken naar artiesten & muziek (A&R)
2. financieren van artiesten & muziek
3. marketing van artiesten & muziek
4. distributie van artiesten & muziek
5. exploitatie van verworven eigendomsrechten

In de bovenstaande opsomming houd ik rekening met zowel majors als independents. Bovendien is deze indeling meer generiek en spelen zowel de artiest als de muziek een rol.

De laatste functie lijkt steeds meer voor te komen in de digitale muziekindustrie; de platenmaatschappij als ‘content aanbieder’.

Muziekindustrie waardeketen

De muziekindustrie waardeketen is een model waarin de relaties tussen de partijen uit de traditionele muziekindustrie zijn weergegeven.

Een dergelijke model blijkt in de literatuur lastig vindbaar te zijn aangezien de waarde uitwisseling tussen verschillende partijen steeds varieert. (De relaties en waarde uitwisselingen zijn ook steeds in verschillende overeenkomsten geformaliseerd)

De pijlen in dit model geven dus alleen aan dat er een relatie bestaat tussen de partijen, het is geen schematische weergave van geldstromen, goederen, diensten of rechten.

Omdat in mijn onderzoek mogelijke innovaties voor platenmaatschappij centraal staan, is het van belang eerst te begrijpen welke partijen in de traditionele muziekindustrie actief zijn en wie welke rol vervult. Vaak wordt ook een poging gedaan om partijen uit de online muziekindustrie in een dergelijk model op te nemen. Wat mij betreft is de online muziekindustrie een andere waardeketen waarbij een aantal partijen ook in de traditionele waardeketen van fysiek product aanwezig zijn. Het zijn naar mijn idee dus verschillende modellen. De modellen van de ringtone waardeketen en de online waardeketen zal ik binnenkort ook op deze blog weergeven. [klik op het model voor een groter formaat]