"Guns don't kill people, people kill people."
Fifty-odd years ago there was a rash of airplane hijackings. Taking a plane to Cuba was a regular thing, you almost thought 707s were personal Ubers. But then strict security measures were enforced at airports. Suddenly there was screening for metal, i.e. guns, and not only could passengers not walk straight from the parking lot to the gate, their friends and families couldn't either. Yes, that was a regular feature, you'd walk off the jetway and there your loved ones would be, smiling, ready to walk you out of the airport to the car. If you were a regular flier...you could arrive at the gate mere minutes before they shut the door and the plane took off. It was so much easier! But then those damn hijackers ruined it for everyone.
If the same thing happened today, if people were hijacking planes and we didn't have layers of security, there would be an outcry at the institution of any screening, it would impinge upon people's liberty and freedom. As for a solution to the problem, pilots would all be told to strap on guns. And if that didn't work, then the passengers. After all, one has a right to get on the plane without personal intrusion, and if it affects the well-being of others, so be it.
Fascinatingly, twenty years ago this same swath of the public was willing to give up so many rights in the effort to fight terrorism. No liquids or blades on the plane. Sure, you could bring small containers, but even at this late date it's always fascinating to look in the garbage cans at both ends of the security screening apparatus. They're filled with contraband. Some are too stupid, some are uninformed, some just forget...but shouldn't they be protected, why do they have to throw this stuff out?
This is America today. We are not a homogenous society under one president, we're not even an homogenous society under one flag! We are not all in it together, we're all out for ourselves. It's caveat emptor through and through, you don't deserve welfare and if you want to be rich pull yourself up by your bootstraps you lazy S.O.B. But if you're going to have a disabled kid, it's your responsibility, life is precious, it must not be snuffed.
As for mental health...
Let's start with opportunity, jobs. You have to go to college today to get a high-paying job, a reasonable job, forget what you learn there, it's a litmus test. God forbid you don't have a high school degree, you're a nonentity. Used to be you could make bucks as a blue collar worker, but now you have to run around like a rat in the Amazon warehouse, afraid of unionizing for fear Jeff Bezos will come and crush your job, while the enterprise makes you watch anti-union videos, legal under the law, because America runs on corporations, and if they're not given welfare, how is the money supposed to trickle down to you, the rank and file?
This is not the way it used to be.
But this is the way it is now.
I'm not saying it used to be perfect, but LBJ had a war on poverty, and one can debate whether there's less poverty today, but one thing's for sure, no one cares about the poor, you're the scourge of society, and if you're doing dope good riddance. Yes, there wasn't an opioid problem until the scions of the wealthy started to drop.
This streak of "rugged individuality" appeared in westerns, but hadn't been the everyday life of U.S. citizens since the 1800s. But it's back now. You need your freedom, the freedom not to get a vaccine. Back in that same era, actually about a decade before the airplane hijackings, we all lined up in school to take a plastic spoonful of polio vaccine. That couldn't happen today. Ironically, both the extreme right and the extreme left would be up in arms. Both would distrust the government, both would question the safety and efficacy of the drug, and both would rely on bogus information to support their case. We used to agree on the facts, which were reasonable. But believing in Q and being in Congress? Impossible!
So what do we do now?
First and foremost, we ignore the ignorant. For far too long, we've been playing to their sensitivities, we've been afraid of offending them. Not only on a governmental level, but on a personal one too. Obama kowtowed to Republicans who wouldn't work with him no matter what. And you were told you must not talk politics, you might offend someone.
But today, Biden has called foul on this governmental strategy. And Joe is supported by more than half the country, he was elected by a margin of ten million votes, his approval rating is 59% as of this writing. But those on the other side not only can't accept this, they don't believe it!
The sides are sliding further apart. And they must come together, falsehoods, misinformation, inanities must be quashed and eliminated.
You can't appease anyone anymore. They're dug into their position. Why respect one based on falsehoods. Never mind a stacked Supreme Court that believes if you're gathering under religion, somehow Covid-19 knows and you're immune, and therefore this behavior is protected, never mind that choir that got infected.
We've got to start laying down the law.
You want to fly on an airplane? You've got to be vaccinated. Just like with guns. We're not saying we're taking away your guns, we're just saying you can't fly with them, it's your choice.
Same deal with going into public spaces. Concerts, even grocery stores. It's for the common good, for all our health. And why is it you believe in individual freedom but are depending upon the rest of the population to achieve herd immunity so you don't have to get a vaccine, for either Covid-19 or measles? We've got to stop accommodating the crazies.
As for guns...
They must have security features. Forget being able to defend your home, statistics tell us you shoot innocent people, never mind yourself. And if guns are in your home, they must be locked up. Tell me again why an unlocked, unprotected gun is necessary in your home? So your kid can play with it and shoot his brother or sister?
And we need background checks and high penalties and...
A governmental safety net, so if you lose your job you can survive. Lose your gig and you lose not only your salary, but your health insurance! If we had national health care, fewer would shoot up workplaces.
And these independent insurance companies should be forced to pay for mental health care, which even if the law says they should don't, or limit.
But we must attack guns at the source.
Let's start with the Second Amendment. Even if one could interpret it as the right to defend oneself against a militia...we don't fight wars that way anymore. You can't overthrow a government today with personal firearms. The key to victory today is computers. And every adult American has a smartphone. Sure, you can keep your smartphone, but you can't use your gun to defend yourself.
Change the Second Amendment first. Make it clear. Don't tell me it can't be done, think big, put it in the national discussion. Think of the leaders in Silicon Valley, they don't say it can't be done. And isn't it funny that we're using Elon Musk's rockets to go back to the moon. We used to rely on the government, but for forty years the government has been excoriated, but when there's a national disaster, everybody's got their hands out.
But truly, this isn't about guns, this is about Americans. They've been sold a bill of goods. They've been told everyone can be rich and famous even though taxes are low and the school sucks. They've been told that praying will solve problems. They've been told that unless they blindly dig in their heels they'll lose something dear. They're so afraid of losing something that they abhor change, in every walk of life. You're scared you're gonna lose out in the future. And if you do, it's always someone else's fault. It's like everybody wants to go back to the pre-seatbelt, pre-airbag days, after all it's expensive and uncomfortable, shouldn't you have a choice?
No you should not! It's the same deal with motorcycle helmets, you may not want to wear one, but if you crash we're the ones picking up the tab for not only your medical bills, but possibly for welfare in the future when you can't work.
Furthermore, we can't even hold the culprits accountable. We can have hearings over social media, but we're told the companies are self-policing. There can be no restrictions. But then what they say can't be done is, like technology to flag copyright infringement. They kick Trump off of Twitter and calm returns. You can't yell "fire" in a crowded theatre, why can you do so on the internet? Never mind the bankers who blow up the economy and get away without going to jail. Have an air-freshener hanging from your rearview mirror and you might not only end up in jail, you might end up dead, because the rules are different for the rich and the poor, never mind people of color.
Just like with JFK in the sixties, we need to think big. We need moon shot goals. We need to point everybody at the same target. And we must trust government to get things done and government must try to get things done. We should have a ten point list, and then we should do our best to achieve it. And since no one can agree on anything these days, it must come from the individual, one in power.
Come on, how about the elimination of false information on the internet. Why do you need the right to spread bogus info?
Same deal with guns in public. Enough with the hogwash about needing to defend yourself, if anything you've got the cops, which these same people laud, so anxious and trigger-happy that they're shooting innocent people.
Right now there's no control in America. Things are pretty good in California, both economically and virus-wise, but not quite half the population demonizes the Golden State because...exactly why? No one is forcing anyone to move here, and so much of the technological breakthroughs originate here. And California drives the economy of the nation. What's the problem here again?
Big problems demand big solutions, end zone passes. How many people are complaining they can't bypass security at the airport? None. How many people are gonna bitch when everybody is vaccinated and Covid-19 is eradicated? None. People have short attention spans. Deliver success and they forget about their complaints.
But we must take action. We must stop wringing our hands and saying problems are unsolvable, we must stop letting the tail wag the dog. Freedom is being alive and able to live without fear, not being able to do what you want to 24/7 irrelevant of your fellow citizens.
We can make progress. It all depends on leaders, who speak truth, who refuse to worry about naysayers, and are just concerned with doing what is right.
But too many Americans are focused on what is wrong. They're right, you're wrong. Really? There can't be any consensus? Right now we live in a Tower of Babel society, driven by the internet. And nobody with any power seems to realize this. We've lost control. We must use all available tools to bring control back. Otherwise, we're going to lose not only lives, but our nation. I'm willing to sacrifice for the common good, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country!
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
Saturday 17 April 2021
Friday 16 April 2021
The Apple Letter
https://on.wsj.com/32jk1Iq
The people on Spotify are much more active listeners.
The debate has been about money when it should always be about reach, have enough reach and there's plenty of money. In other words, the public has spoken, if you love music, if you just can't get enough of it, you're on Spotify. Never mind that Spotify is the company that continues to push the envelope, never mind this week's car device, how about the extra playlists generated based on your listening history...far superior to Discover Weekly and Release Radar, and the other companies haven't even touched those.
So, Apple pays a penny a stream!
But that's just because there are fewer streams. Apple is for the casual listener, subscribing to the service because they trust Apple, and are scared of laying down their credit card for Spotify. Also, Apple has a great reputation that it just works, and that pays dividends, i.e. signups here.
But the stealth operator is Amazon, which released opaque numbers today. But bottom line, with Amazon it's all about the bundle. Apple is trying this, but failing, it's just not enough of a discount. It is with News, but the further bundles of all their services...they don't incentivize anybody to upgrade, you've got to give me more off.
So Amazon sells you Amazon Prime, which every Amazon customer must have, for the two day delivery, its cost is a no-brainer, and it comes with all that video for free, and it comes with hobbled music for free. And, got to give Amazon credit for offering a higher res music option, which Spotify says it's going to provide, but it hasn't happened yet. In other words, you'd pay for Prime even if nothing else came attached, but you get so much more! Furthermore, Prime also sells so many other streaming platforms... Many people sign up for Disney+ and HBO Max and other channels via Amazon platforms, and therefore Amazon gets even more revenue, read this article:
"How Amazon Strong-Arms Partners Using Its Power Across Multiple Businesses - A heavyweight in retail, cloud computing, digital advertising, streaming and smart speakers, the tech giant compels vendors in one market to engage with it in others": https://on.wsj.com/3tlF9tv
Yes, this article is behind a paywall, but just like you're paying for TV, you'll find you'll have to pay for news. Did you see Reuters just went behind a paywall? This is the evolution of the internet...everything for free? Fuggetaboutit!
Meanwhile, knowing margins are so low on music, and the business doesn't scale, Spotify has diversified to stay alive, podcasts and more, and they're winning here too!
"Spotify podcast listener numbers will surpass Apple's this year": https://bit.ly/3wXyBUh
Apple had a first mover advantage and squandered it. Apple didn't need podcasts, Spotify does, amazing what hunger will have you do.
So, instead of bitching about Spotify, you should be embracing it. The war has been fought, Biden's bringing home the soldiers from Afghanistan, can't you understand that physical and files are dead? (Don't e-mail me about the de minimis numbers of vinyl or the declining numbers at the iTunes Store, that's the definition of an ostrich, someone whose head is so buried in the sand that they can't see the overall picture.)
Spotify can't increase payments, IT CAN'T! If it does, it will go out of business. But try explaining math to a musician, never mind the inane reporters in mainstream publications who eat up and spew out this crap. And in the Apple letter the company says:
"Like others, we have looked at alternative royalty models. Our analysis has shown that they would result in a limited redistribution of royalties with a varied impact to artists. Per play rates would cease to be the same for every play of a song. But more importantly, the changes would not increase what all creators earn from streaming. Instead, these changes would shift royalties towards a small number of labels while providing less transparency to creators everywhere."
Every study says this. I'm not against trying it, and maybe Apple doesn't want to pay for the infrastructure, but Deezer has...but the major labels won't allow them to try it, because the greedy labels hate change when in this case their partner says payments to them will actually go up!
So if you tie up with Apple, get on their homepage, the results will be less, whoever embraces your music will embrace it less. (Of course there are active users on Apple Music, but I'm speaking generally, you get it...or maybe you don't.)
Also, Spotify has its free tier, which killed piracy overnight (10% of the people will never pay, but that same 10% never bought physical either...you know, these were the people who needed to borrow your records to tape.) Free dilutes overall payments, because the rate to rights holders is lower. As is the rate on Pandora and other streaming radio platforms, as opposed to on demand. But you can't teach the truth to someone categorically against it. Hell, what are the odds people can understand how streaming works when they won't even get a Covid-19 vaccine. Yes, I'm so right I'm going to DIE rather than accept the truth!
You're better off getting a lower rate for more listens on Spotify. Because more listens means you have more dedicated fans, and they are what support your career, not those who come for the hit and then disappear. Active, not passive users, never forget it.
And if you're bitching about the per stream rate...you're probably not making that much to begin with, because if you've got hundreds of millions of streams, you're making serious dough.
Also, Spotify has said that the rich are not getting richer on its platform. That the overall share of streams/revenue to top artists has been declining! But rather than acknowledge that and have a sliver of hope, people on the bottom can't stop bitching that instead of their royalty payment being $10, it should be $12. Come on, it doesn't make a difference, $2 won't even buy you a cup of coffee!
As for all those articles saying so and so artist can't survive in music... They wouldn't have had a career at all in the old system, they wouldn't have even been able to participate! But, this generation believes everybody should get a trophy, everybody should win. And the boomers hate change, they keep yearning for the past, many are now adopting streaming, but they're the last on board. They'd prefer to play their favorite CDs, when the truth is both of my computers and my car stereo are CD player free.
So on paper it looks like the one cent per play at Apple Music is superior to the payment at Spotify, but it's not.
Data and transparency are the ethos of the era. I applaud Apple for releasing this information. But please, you must read it all in context, as opposed to applying the Steve Jobs reality distortion field.
And, you must applaud the huge numbers of streaming subscribers, it's good for music, it's good for acts. You can reach people all over the world for almost nothing. If you start a fire, people can feel the heat and go to their platform of choice and immediately listen to your music. And never forget, the recording is just the beginning.
It's hard, I know. But the smarter, the more educated you are, the better you play the game, only losers sit around bitching about streaming payments that they don't fully understand anyway!
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
The people on Spotify are much more active listeners.
The debate has been about money when it should always be about reach, have enough reach and there's plenty of money. In other words, the public has spoken, if you love music, if you just can't get enough of it, you're on Spotify. Never mind that Spotify is the company that continues to push the envelope, never mind this week's car device, how about the extra playlists generated based on your listening history...far superior to Discover Weekly and Release Radar, and the other companies haven't even touched those.
So, Apple pays a penny a stream!
But that's just because there are fewer streams. Apple is for the casual listener, subscribing to the service because they trust Apple, and are scared of laying down their credit card for Spotify. Also, Apple has a great reputation that it just works, and that pays dividends, i.e. signups here.
But the stealth operator is Amazon, which released opaque numbers today. But bottom line, with Amazon it's all about the bundle. Apple is trying this, but failing, it's just not enough of a discount. It is with News, but the further bundles of all their services...they don't incentivize anybody to upgrade, you've got to give me more off.
So Amazon sells you Amazon Prime, which every Amazon customer must have, for the two day delivery, its cost is a no-brainer, and it comes with all that video for free, and it comes with hobbled music for free. And, got to give Amazon credit for offering a higher res music option, which Spotify says it's going to provide, but it hasn't happened yet. In other words, you'd pay for Prime even if nothing else came attached, but you get so much more! Furthermore, Prime also sells so many other streaming platforms... Many people sign up for Disney+ and HBO Max and other channels via Amazon platforms, and therefore Amazon gets even more revenue, read this article:
"How Amazon Strong-Arms Partners Using Its Power Across Multiple Businesses - A heavyweight in retail, cloud computing, digital advertising, streaming and smart speakers, the tech giant compels vendors in one market to engage with it in others": https://on.wsj.com/3tlF9tv
Yes, this article is behind a paywall, but just like you're paying for TV, you'll find you'll have to pay for news. Did you see Reuters just went behind a paywall? This is the evolution of the internet...everything for free? Fuggetaboutit!
Meanwhile, knowing margins are so low on music, and the business doesn't scale, Spotify has diversified to stay alive, podcasts and more, and they're winning here too!
"Spotify podcast listener numbers will surpass Apple's this year": https://bit.ly/3wXyBUh
Apple had a first mover advantage and squandered it. Apple didn't need podcasts, Spotify does, amazing what hunger will have you do.
So, instead of bitching about Spotify, you should be embracing it. The war has been fought, Biden's bringing home the soldiers from Afghanistan, can't you understand that physical and files are dead? (Don't e-mail me about the de minimis numbers of vinyl or the declining numbers at the iTunes Store, that's the definition of an ostrich, someone whose head is so buried in the sand that they can't see the overall picture.)
Spotify can't increase payments, IT CAN'T! If it does, it will go out of business. But try explaining math to a musician, never mind the inane reporters in mainstream publications who eat up and spew out this crap. And in the Apple letter the company says:
"Like others, we have looked at alternative royalty models. Our analysis has shown that they would result in a limited redistribution of royalties with a varied impact to artists. Per play rates would cease to be the same for every play of a song. But more importantly, the changes would not increase what all creators earn from streaming. Instead, these changes would shift royalties towards a small number of labels while providing less transparency to creators everywhere."
Every study says this. I'm not against trying it, and maybe Apple doesn't want to pay for the infrastructure, but Deezer has...but the major labels won't allow them to try it, because the greedy labels hate change when in this case their partner says payments to them will actually go up!
So if you tie up with Apple, get on their homepage, the results will be less, whoever embraces your music will embrace it less. (Of course there are active users on Apple Music, but I'm speaking generally, you get it...or maybe you don't.)
Also, Spotify has its free tier, which killed piracy overnight (10% of the people will never pay, but that same 10% never bought physical either...you know, these were the people who needed to borrow your records to tape.) Free dilutes overall payments, because the rate to rights holders is lower. As is the rate on Pandora and other streaming radio platforms, as opposed to on demand. But you can't teach the truth to someone categorically against it. Hell, what are the odds people can understand how streaming works when they won't even get a Covid-19 vaccine. Yes, I'm so right I'm going to DIE rather than accept the truth!
You're better off getting a lower rate for more listens on Spotify. Because more listens means you have more dedicated fans, and they are what support your career, not those who come for the hit and then disappear. Active, not passive users, never forget it.
And if you're bitching about the per stream rate...you're probably not making that much to begin with, because if you've got hundreds of millions of streams, you're making serious dough.
Also, Spotify has said that the rich are not getting richer on its platform. That the overall share of streams/revenue to top artists has been declining! But rather than acknowledge that and have a sliver of hope, people on the bottom can't stop bitching that instead of their royalty payment being $10, it should be $12. Come on, it doesn't make a difference, $2 won't even buy you a cup of coffee!
As for all those articles saying so and so artist can't survive in music... They wouldn't have had a career at all in the old system, they wouldn't have even been able to participate! But, this generation believes everybody should get a trophy, everybody should win. And the boomers hate change, they keep yearning for the past, many are now adopting streaming, but they're the last on board. They'd prefer to play their favorite CDs, when the truth is both of my computers and my car stereo are CD player free.
So on paper it looks like the one cent per play at Apple Music is superior to the payment at Spotify, but it's not.
Data and transparency are the ethos of the era. I applaud Apple for releasing this information. But please, you must read it all in context, as opposed to applying the Steve Jobs reality distortion field.
And, you must applaud the huge numbers of streaming subscribers, it's good for music, it's good for acts. You can reach people all over the world for almost nothing. If you start a fire, people can feel the heat and go to their platform of choice and immediately listen to your music. And never forget, the recording is just the beginning.
It's hard, I know. But the smarter, the more educated you are, the better you play the game, only losers sit around bitching about streaming payments that they don't fully understand anyway!
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
Undercover
https://bit.ly/2RKRzNP
"Valley of Tears" was too violent for Felice. But I recommend it, it's an Israeli series on HBO Max about the 1973 war, incredibly well done, not that I've finished it yet, I'm six episodes in, and when Felice dropped out I switched to my iPad and it just didn't have the same effect, it needed the big screen, making me wonder how people's perceptions of visual entertainment are affected by the screen they use. This is not about theatre versus home, that ship has sailed, it's about getting a 65" screen that is state of the art or...watching on an old TV. As for movies... If I see one more VOD movie reviewed in the New York or Los Angeles "Times" I'm gonna puke! Do you know how much I'm paying for cable/internet/streaming? Do you really think I want to pay another ten or twenty bucks to see some film? The truth is today I can live without ANYTHING! Other than food and water and shelter, I've got no necessary needs. I can miss anything. But purveyors don't seem to realize this. Put up an extra payment, on your film, on your music, on your newsletter, and I'm out. Do you know how much I subscribe to that I rarely read/watch? I'm not lacking for input, I'm not bored, if anything I wish I had three lives, one to work, one to read and one to watch television, there's just that much out there and I have just that much desire. The papers should be reviewing TV shows, not movies, but the news is always one step behind, even in its own business of journalism.
So checking my list for a new show, I came across "Undercover" on Netflix. It's a Belgian/Dutch series. Yes, you can watch it dubbed, but please turn on the subtitles. It turns out that the flatlands of Belgium are a hotbed of ecstasy production, the world's number one, who knew? And Ferry and his compatriots are ecstasy dealers and...
Now we are not familiar with the actors. But having said that, they perform so well that I believe that's who they are. This is not the casting of America where first we consider your looks and your fame, the people look like those you encounter in real life. And Bob and Kim are cops who move into a trailer park to snare the bad guys and... They believe in their jobs. They'll sacrifice anything for their jobs. And Kim refuses to take a back seat, she's innovative, she tests the limits.
Most people are not passionate about their jobs, no matter how much money they make. It's about the money. Especially if you're in banking...I mean who cares? But in order for life to be fulfilling, you need something to live for. In this case, catching the bad guys, which is very hard to do.
And the bad guys are not dumb. Trust is truly off the table. Ferry knows not to go too big, because then attention is drawn. And just like with the Mafia, once you're in you can't get out, cross Ferry and cronies at your peril. And even if you're innocent, they might still believe you're guilty.
But what makes the show so inviting is the mood. This is not the fast and flat cinematography of typical TV movies, never mind regular shows, the images are rich, they feel real, you've been there, to a camping site where it's not always sunny, but you accept it. And where everybody is not always rich. And it all doesn't look like "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous," because you don't want to draw attention to yourself if you're rich. Trump never got this memo, he was skating on his tax shenanigans, now he's probably going up the river. The nouveau riche think it's about totems, showing off, those with real money, who've been in the game for a while, are low key.
So, what does it take to make friends? Can you read a room? Know when to talk and when not to? Danielle can't, and therefore she's rejected and lonely, ready for Kim/Anouk's entreaties. As for Bob/Peter...he's actually not as skilled as Kim in infiltration, but he's the one who has to snare Ferry. As for Ferry... He's played by Frank Lammers, and he's so good, if this was an American show he'd win an Emmy or a Golden Globe or whatever phony award they're giving out this week. The truth is these criminals rarely look like an Adonis, like they're out of a fashion spread. Ferry is far from classically beautiful, and he's got a beer gut, but he can be intimate and off-putting, he shows the range of all emotions while calculating all the while and...
The hits just keep on coming. Some literal, some figurative, the plot keeps moving forward, and the cops don't always win! In real life it doesn't always go the cops' way, and the truth is to be a really successful criminal you've got to be very savvy, not a hothead, you've got to learn from experience, and keep your eyes open at all times.
"Undercover" is akin to "The Sopranos," but without all the family interactions that made that series the best of all time. But when it comes to the crime, the interaction, that's similar. But Tony and his gang are part of a family, Ferry's organization is independent, and much smaller. And the cops are savvy, but they've got to catch him in the act...you can know someone is guilty, but proving it can be very difficult.
So if you've watched the biggies..."Spiral," "The Bureau," "Borgen," "Prisoners of War"...and you're looking for another intense drama, I highly recommend "Undercover." You'll want to watch it. That's the criterion, all day do you think about when you'll be able to park your butt and watch, if not...it's not a hit. And you feel like you truly know these characters, who are far from one-dimensional, they are not cardboard cutouts, they are patently three-dimensional and real.
As usual, I don't want to tell you plot details, I don't want to ruin it, I want you to be constantly surprised, thinking you've got it figured out, but you don't.
I'd say they could remake "Undercover" as an American show, but there's no need, the original is just a click away on Netflix. And if they did redo it, they'd get famous actors who would overshadow the roles, I've never seen a movie with Meryl Streep where I didn't see Meryl Streep. A few U.S. actors can transcend their real life identity, but not many. Maybe because we make them into stars, when the truth is in other countries there's less money to be made and acting is seen more as a profession.
As is viewing.
We live in an incomprehensible world. All day long we deal with incoming. Even worse, we never feel like we're caught up. We end alienated, disconnected, wondering where we fit in. But when I watch "Undercover" I realize life is really just about your little world, and that most people, no matter how rich, are not instantly recognizable and don't live a life of perks 24/7. We're all the same under the skin. But what profession do we pursue? You don't need an education to be a criminal, but to succeed you've got to be really damn smart. Ferry is sharp, but he's not the Professor in "Money Heist," he's got a violent streak and he runs on feel, on instinct, which can be right, but can also be wrong. Ferry is taking it day by day, just like you and me. As for Bob and Kim? Their lives are their jobs, but they think their jobs have meaning. Do they? I'll let you decide.
"Valley of Tears" was too violent for Felice. But I recommend it, it's an Israeli series on HBO Max about the 1973 war, incredibly well done, not that I've finished it yet, I'm six episodes in, and when Felice dropped out I switched to my iPad and it just didn't have the same effect, it needed the big screen, making me wonder how people's perceptions of visual entertainment are affected by the screen they use. This is not about theatre versus home, that ship has sailed, it's about getting a 65" screen that is state of the art or...watching on an old TV. As for movies... If I see one more VOD movie reviewed in the New York or Los Angeles "Times" I'm gonna puke! Do you know how much I'm paying for cable/internet/streaming? Do you really think I want to pay another ten or twenty bucks to see some film? The truth is today I can live without ANYTHING! Other than food and water and shelter, I've got no necessary needs. I can miss anything. But purveyors don't seem to realize this. Put up an extra payment, on your film, on your music, on your newsletter, and I'm out. Do you know how much I subscribe to that I rarely read/watch? I'm not lacking for input, I'm not bored, if anything I wish I had three lives, one to work, one to read and one to watch television, there's just that much out there and I have just that much desire. The papers should be reviewing TV shows, not movies, but the news is always one step behind, even in its own business of journalism.
So checking my list for a new show, I came across "Undercover" on Netflix. It's a Belgian/Dutch series. Yes, you can watch it dubbed, but please turn on the subtitles. It turns out that the flatlands of Belgium are a hotbed of ecstasy production, the world's number one, who knew? And Ferry and his compatriots are ecstasy dealers and...
Now we are not familiar with the actors. But having said that, they perform so well that I believe that's who they are. This is not the casting of America where first we consider your looks and your fame, the people look like those you encounter in real life. And Bob and Kim are cops who move into a trailer park to snare the bad guys and... They believe in their jobs. They'll sacrifice anything for their jobs. And Kim refuses to take a back seat, she's innovative, she tests the limits.
Most people are not passionate about their jobs, no matter how much money they make. It's about the money. Especially if you're in banking...I mean who cares? But in order for life to be fulfilling, you need something to live for. In this case, catching the bad guys, which is very hard to do.
And the bad guys are not dumb. Trust is truly off the table. Ferry knows not to go too big, because then attention is drawn. And just like with the Mafia, once you're in you can't get out, cross Ferry and cronies at your peril. And even if you're innocent, they might still believe you're guilty.
But what makes the show so inviting is the mood. This is not the fast and flat cinematography of typical TV movies, never mind regular shows, the images are rich, they feel real, you've been there, to a camping site where it's not always sunny, but you accept it. And where everybody is not always rich. And it all doesn't look like "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous," because you don't want to draw attention to yourself if you're rich. Trump never got this memo, he was skating on his tax shenanigans, now he's probably going up the river. The nouveau riche think it's about totems, showing off, those with real money, who've been in the game for a while, are low key.
So, what does it take to make friends? Can you read a room? Know when to talk and when not to? Danielle can't, and therefore she's rejected and lonely, ready for Kim/Anouk's entreaties. As for Bob/Peter...he's actually not as skilled as Kim in infiltration, but he's the one who has to snare Ferry. As for Ferry... He's played by Frank Lammers, and he's so good, if this was an American show he'd win an Emmy or a Golden Globe or whatever phony award they're giving out this week. The truth is these criminals rarely look like an Adonis, like they're out of a fashion spread. Ferry is far from classically beautiful, and he's got a beer gut, but he can be intimate and off-putting, he shows the range of all emotions while calculating all the while and...
The hits just keep on coming. Some literal, some figurative, the plot keeps moving forward, and the cops don't always win! In real life it doesn't always go the cops' way, and the truth is to be a really successful criminal you've got to be very savvy, not a hothead, you've got to learn from experience, and keep your eyes open at all times.
"Undercover" is akin to "The Sopranos," but without all the family interactions that made that series the best of all time. But when it comes to the crime, the interaction, that's similar. But Tony and his gang are part of a family, Ferry's organization is independent, and much smaller. And the cops are savvy, but they've got to catch him in the act...you can know someone is guilty, but proving it can be very difficult.
So if you've watched the biggies..."Spiral," "The Bureau," "Borgen," "Prisoners of War"...and you're looking for another intense drama, I highly recommend "Undercover." You'll want to watch it. That's the criterion, all day do you think about when you'll be able to park your butt and watch, if not...it's not a hit. And you feel like you truly know these characters, who are far from one-dimensional, they are not cardboard cutouts, they are patently three-dimensional and real.
As usual, I don't want to tell you plot details, I don't want to ruin it, I want you to be constantly surprised, thinking you've got it figured out, but you don't.
I'd say they could remake "Undercover" as an American show, but there's no need, the original is just a click away on Netflix. And if they did redo it, they'd get famous actors who would overshadow the roles, I've never seen a movie with Meryl Streep where I didn't see Meryl Streep. A few U.S. actors can transcend their real life identity, but not many. Maybe because we make them into stars, when the truth is in other countries there's less money to be made and acting is seen more as a profession.
As is viewing.
We live in an incomprehensible world. All day long we deal with incoming. Even worse, we never feel like we're caught up. We end alienated, disconnected, wondering where we fit in. But when I watch "Undercover" I realize life is really just about your little world, and that most people, no matter how rich, are not instantly recognizable and don't live a life of perks 24/7. We're all the same under the skin. But what profession do we pursue? You don't need an education to be a criminal, but to succeed you've got to be really damn smart. Ferry is sharp, but he's not the Professor in "Money Heist," he's got a violent streak and he runs on feel, on instinct, which can be right, but can also be wrong. Ferry is taking it day by day, just like you and me. As for Bob and Kim? Their lives are their jobs, but they think their jobs have meaning. Do they? I'll let you decide.
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
Thursday 15 April 2021
Slava Rubin-This Week's Podcast
Slava Rubin was a cofounder and CEO of crowdfunding platform Indiegogo and in addition to being a founder and managing partner of investment firm humbition, he is now executive chairman of Vincent Alternative Investments, check it out: www.withvincent.com We discuss Slava's history, but we also go deep into alternative investments, i.e. NFTs and other assets you can purchase all or just a slice of. If you want to know all about cutting edge investments, this is the place!
https://www.iheart.com/podcast/1119-the-bob-lefsetz-podcast-30806836/
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-bob-lefsetz-podcast/id1316200737
https://open.spotify.com/episode/6dHWEg8ri5PAXczn6KK8ZQ?si=r4x5iybwSi28TUz8onKwMw
https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/9ff4fb19-54d4-41ae-ae7a-8a6f8d3dafa8/The-Bob-Lefsetz-Podcast
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
https://www.iheart.com/podcast/1119-the-bob-lefsetz-podcast-30806836/
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-bob-lefsetz-podcast/id1316200737
https://open.spotify.com/episode/6dHWEg8ri5PAXczn6KK8ZQ?si=r4x5iybwSi28TUz8onKwMw
https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/9ff4fb19-54d4-41ae-ae7a-8a6f8d3dafa8/The-Bob-Lefsetz-Podcast
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
Wednesday 14 April 2021
Patreon/Substack
How small do you want to be?
No one, and I mean NO ONE, has ever grown a larger audience as a result of a crowdfunding campaign or presence on Patreon, it's just a way to milk your already existing fans for more money. And it's fine if you like the cash, but don't delude yourself into thinking your impact is growing, in fact it's declining.
Same deal with Substack, all the hoopla about charging for newsletters. There are fewer than one hand's worth that reach as many...as even I do. Yet, they get all this press. They have an inherently limited audience, and if it's about the message, which it should be, you're shooting yourself in the foot. As with the freemium model.
Come on, Jay Z did an album with Samsung, he got paid, but the exclusive meant most of the public never heard it and it went straight into the dumper. In a world where your goal is to have impact and power, why would you put up a wall? And if you're focusing on business model first, you've forgotten the law of all the startups of the past twenty years... They focused on excellence, building an audience, and then they figured out how to monetize. If it's just about money, why don't you open a hardware store... Oops, scratch that, you can't compete with the big boxes, but there are a hell of a lot easier ways to make bank than as an artist. And no matter what Gene Simmons says, there's not an artist alive whose deepest desire is not to reach more people, it always supersedes money, ALWAYS!
Everything's upside down, and most people have no perspective. The arts are about POWER! Sure, there are a handful of performers making good money, but nowhere near as much as the techies or the bankers, and most artists' commercial peaks are short, their revenue goes down, then again there's no barrier to entry, anybody can do it, but that brings out the worst, try listening to the millions of Spotify tracks with fewer than ten plays, you'll shoot yourself!
Meanwhile, Patreon is run by Jack Conte, who used to be half of Pomplamoose. He's now telling creators to do what he couldn't, i.e. make money from his art, even though Pomplamoose was actually pretty good, and very innovative with its marketing. If you want to make money, follow Jack's lead, get out of the creative sphere completely, sell tools! Kinda like those people selling shovels and tents during the gold rushes, they're the ones who made all the money.
And why even put forth the illusion there's any value to what you're doing. OnlyFans is much better than Patreon, just put up nude pictures. And you'd be stunned how many women are doing this, they're all over Reddit and other social media platforms trolling for bucks. And the truth is almost none of them are making money, it's a buyers market. So, Patreon really only works if you've already got an audience, and now your plan is to limit it, because Patreon's model is you provide exclusive content, and once it's no longer freely available...
As for all the writers leaving publications for Substack... Did you notice that Ezra Klein left Vox for the "New York Times"? Ezra started Vox, but it just didn't work, he was at a major paper previously, the "Washington Post," and now he's gone back. Same deal with Kara Swisher, she started her own company Recode with old "Wall Street Journal" friends and then jumped to the "Times," where she has much more impact.
In a Tower of Babel world, you want to be on the platform with the most impact. Which is why all the holdouts eventually went on the iTunes Store and then Spotify. Why limit your audience?
Sure, there are a few stars. But they're very few. Andrew Sullivan was going it alone and had a limited audience, then he went to "New York" and had a guaranteed income and reached many more. Sure, he was fired from "New York" for his views, but now he's got an independent newsletter and I ask you...other than reading how much money he is making doing it, has anybody talked about his content recently? No!
Do you know how hard it is to reach people these days, to build an audience, NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE! Conte left Pomplamoose to build Patreon, and his other half in life and music, Nataly Dawn, continued making music under her own name...to crickets! People knew Pomplamoose, not Nataly Dawn, she was almost starting all over!
If you're not paying attention, right now there's a fight over the future and soul of newspapers. Does "Tribune" sell to Alden, which maintains its margins until extinction, i.e. cuts costs, i.e. reporters and more, until there's nothing left and then they throw it away, or do you sell to someone who wants to maintain the newsroom, hopefully invest money in head count. The "Washington Post" was in a slide to irrelevance and then Jeff Bezos came along and bought it and invested money in it and it is now solidly in the big three, i.e. the "Times," the "Wall Street Journal" and itself. Meanwhile, have you been reading about the "Journal"? Behind a paywall with aged readers it is sliding into irrelevance, so they commissioned a study talking about changes necessary to interest the younger generation and women and what did the publisher do...IGNORE IT! https://nyti.ms/3uO4ahi God, we saw this in the music business, if you think the ball doesn't move, hopefully you've got enough money to retire, because you're gonna be gone soon.
You want to be on the platform with the most eyeballs. The "Times" heavily promotes its podcasts. What do you know, listenership is high, the "Daily" is almost always in the top five. That's the power of the platform. And speaking of the platform, Nate Silver decamped from the "Times" to his own site, which ESPN/ABC/Disney is trying to sell, but no one will pony up the bucks, and now he's barely relevant, never mind miscalling election after election.
There was a time when you went independent and built... BUT THAT WAS ALMOST TWENTY YEARS AGO! Now you want to be with the platform, to give you a leg up, to give you visibility.
As for charging, limiting your audience... I make much more money than I did when I charged. Because of forwardability! There's no friction online, if you like something, you send it on, and that leads to more subscribers and further opportunities for me! And I make more money than just about all the people selling their newsletters, as their revenue goes down, because old customers fall off and new customer acquisition is so damn expensive. But since the people writing about Substack, etc., are in the news business, writing for these publications, they can't see the forest for the trees, they're just wondering whether there's money for them.
Come on, Jim Fusilli was the music critic for the "Wall Street Journal" forever, I haven't seen his name in years since he left the paper. The platform has the power, not him! Same deal with radio and streaming platforms, radio can survive quite well without Morgan Wallen, these platforms don't need any act, they survive and thrive anyway.
Never forget, it's not about the crumbs. If you're going for the crumbs, you're thinking too small, and to make it as an artist you've got to think big, VERY BIG! You've got to go for the whole enchilada, not just a bite. And you have to maximize your options. Come on, rappers put out free mixtapes, gave it away for free on Soundcloud, and now hip-hop dominates streaming platforms. Rock is a joke, rockers are still demonizing streaming. If someone moves your cheese you go where it went, otherwise you STARVE!
Turns out most people chronicling the game have not idea what it is, never mind how it's played. At best they've been trained in their vertical. But if you hang with the truly powerful, who are oftentimes rich, it's a better lesson than any college class ever, because they can see the entire landscape, they're two steps ahead of the other insiders, and so far ahead of the hoi polloi that they're ultimately unreachable. If I write about anybody in the world, ANYBODY, they read it. They might not like it, they might not ever read anything I write ever again, but they know who I am and they're aware of my message, never mind those who like my message and spread it further. Could any of this happen if I went behind a paywall...OF COURSE NOT!
Don't cut off your nose to spite your face. If you're not willing to starve in pursuit of all the marbles, stop right now, you're doing it wrong. Sure, you can survive on the crumbs of gigs at local performance spaces and in hospitals, if you like it, more power to you, but never ever confuse yourself with the people dominating the conversation. Dream of being big enough to become a platform yourself, while you're tying in with other platforms, making your wares easily accessible to all.
Kinda like Spotify. Turns out the old people making it before the internet... Most people don't want to listen to their music, they want to hear that of the stars, not those propped up by the labels who never hit. But the oldsters can't accept their fate, refuse to reinvent themselves, meanwhile the young wankers glom on to their legion of complaints, and the powerful become more powerful.
Distribution is king, NEVER EVER FORGET IT! You never want to limit your distribution, NEVER EVER! So go behind a paywall at your peril.
No one, and I mean NO ONE, has ever grown a larger audience as a result of a crowdfunding campaign or presence on Patreon, it's just a way to milk your already existing fans for more money. And it's fine if you like the cash, but don't delude yourself into thinking your impact is growing, in fact it's declining.
Same deal with Substack, all the hoopla about charging for newsletters. There are fewer than one hand's worth that reach as many...as even I do. Yet, they get all this press. They have an inherently limited audience, and if it's about the message, which it should be, you're shooting yourself in the foot. As with the freemium model.
Come on, Jay Z did an album with Samsung, he got paid, but the exclusive meant most of the public never heard it and it went straight into the dumper. In a world where your goal is to have impact and power, why would you put up a wall? And if you're focusing on business model first, you've forgotten the law of all the startups of the past twenty years... They focused on excellence, building an audience, and then they figured out how to monetize. If it's just about money, why don't you open a hardware store... Oops, scratch that, you can't compete with the big boxes, but there are a hell of a lot easier ways to make bank than as an artist. And no matter what Gene Simmons says, there's not an artist alive whose deepest desire is not to reach more people, it always supersedes money, ALWAYS!
Everything's upside down, and most people have no perspective. The arts are about POWER! Sure, there are a handful of performers making good money, but nowhere near as much as the techies or the bankers, and most artists' commercial peaks are short, their revenue goes down, then again there's no barrier to entry, anybody can do it, but that brings out the worst, try listening to the millions of Spotify tracks with fewer than ten plays, you'll shoot yourself!
Meanwhile, Patreon is run by Jack Conte, who used to be half of Pomplamoose. He's now telling creators to do what he couldn't, i.e. make money from his art, even though Pomplamoose was actually pretty good, and very innovative with its marketing. If you want to make money, follow Jack's lead, get out of the creative sphere completely, sell tools! Kinda like those people selling shovels and tents during the gold rushes, they're the ones who made all the money.
And why even put forth the illusion there's any value to what you're doing. OnlyFans is much better than Patreon, just put up nude pictures. And you'd be stunned how many women are doing this, they're all over Reddit and other social media platforms trolling for bucks. And the truth is almost none of them are making money, it's a buyers market. So, Patreon really only works if you've already got an audience, and now your plan is to limit it, because Patreon's model is you provide exclusive content, and once it's no longer freely available...
As for all the writers leaving publications for Substack... Did you notice that Ezra Klein left Vox for the "New York Times"? Ezra started Vox, but it just didn't work, he was at a major paper previously, the "Washington Post," and now he's gone back. Same deal with Kara Swisher, she started her own company Recode with old "Wall Street Journal" friends and then jumped to the "Times," where she has much more impact.
In a Tower of Babel world, you want to be on the platform with the most impact. Which is why all the holdouts eventually went on the iTunes Store and then Spotify. Why limit your audience?
Sure, there are a few stars. But they're very few. Andrew Sullivan was going it alone and had a limited audience, then he went to "New York" and had a guaranteed income and reached many more. Sure, he was fired from "New York" for his views, but now he's got an independent newsletter and I ask you...other than reading how much money he is making doing it, has anybody talked about his content recently? No!
Do you know how hard it is to reach people these days, to build an audience, NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE! Conte left Pomplamoose to build Patreon, and his other half in life and music, Nataly Dawn, continued making music under her own name...to crickets! People knew Pomplamoose, not Nataly Dawn, she was almost starting all over!
If you're not paying attention, right now there's a fight over the future and soul of newspapers. Does "Tribune" sell to Alden, which maintains its margins until extinction, i.e. cuts costs, i.e. reporters and more, until there's nothing left and then they throw it away, or do you sell to someone who wants to maintain the newsroom, hopefully invest money in head count. The "Washington Post" was in a slide to irrelevance and then Jeff Bezos came along and bought it and invested money in it and it is now solidly in the big three, i.e. the "Times," the "Wall Street Journal" and itself. Meanwhile, have you been reading about the "Journal"? Behind a paywall with aged readers it is sliding into irrelevance, so they commissioned a study talking about changes necessary to interest the younger generation and women and what did the publisher do...IGNORE IT! https://nyti.ms/3uO4ahi God, we saw this in the music business, if you think the ball doesn't move, hopefully you've got enough money to retire, because you're gonna be gone soon.
You want to be on the platform with the most eyeballs. The "Times" heavily promotes its podcasts. What do you know, listenership is high, the "Daily" is almost always in the top five. That's the power of the platform. And speaking of the platform, Nate Silver decamped from the "Times" to his own site, which ESPN/ABC/Disney is trying to sell, but no one will pony up the bucks, and now he's barely relevant, never mind miscalling election after election.
There was a time when you went independent and built... BUT THAT WAS ALMOST TWENTY YEARS AGO! Now you want to be with the platform, to give you a leg up, to give you visibility.
As for charging, limiting your audience... I make much more money than I did when I charged. Because of forwardability! There's no friction online, if you like something, you send it on, and that leads to more subscribers and further opportunities for me! And I make more money than just about all the people selling their newsletters, as their revenue goes down, because old customers fall off and new customer acquisition is so damn expensive. But since the people writing about Substack, etc., are in the news business, writing for these publications, they can't see the forest for the trees, they're just wondering whether there's money for them.
Come on, Jim Fusilli was the music critic for the "Wall Street Journal" forever, I haven't seen his name in years since he left the paper. The platform has the power, not him! Same deal with radio and streaming platforms, radio can survive quite well without Morgan Wallen, these platforms don't need any act, they survive and thrive anyway.
Never forget, it's not about the crumbs. If you're going for the crumbs, you're thinking too small, and to make it as an artist you've got to think big, VERY BIG! You've got to go for the whole enchilada, not just a bite. And you have to maximize your options. Come on, rappers put out free mixtapes, gave it away for free on Soundcloud, and now hip-hop dominates streaming platforms. Rock is a joke, rockers are still demonizing streaming. If someone moves your cheese you go where it went, otherwise you STARVE!
Turns out most people chronicling the game have not idea what it is, never mind how it's played. At best they've been trained in their vertical. But if you hang with the truly powerful, who are oftentimes rich, it's a better lesson than any college class ever, because they can see the entire landscape, they're two steps ahead of the other insiders, and so far ahead of the hoi polloi that they're ultimately unreachable. If I write about anybody in the world, ANYBODY, they read it. They might not like it, they might not ever read anything I write ever again, but they know who I am and they're aware of my message, never mind those who like my message and spread it further. Could any of this happen if I went behind a paywall...OF COURSE NOT!
Don't cut off your nose to spite your face. If you're not willing to starve in pursuit of all the marbles, stop right now, you're doing it wrong. Sure, you can survive on the crumbs of gigs at local performance spaces and in hospitals, if you like it, more power to you, but never ever confuse yourself with the people dominating the conversation. Dream of being big enough to become a platform yourself, while you're tying in with other platforms, making your wares easily accessible to all.
Kinda like Spotify. Turns out the old people making it before the internet... Most people don't want to listen to their music, they want to hear that of the stars, not those propped up by the labels who never hit. But the oldsters can't accept their fate, refuse to reinvent themselves, meanwhile the young wankers glom on to their legion of complaints, and the powerful become more powerful.
Distribution is king, NEVER EVER FORGET IT! You never want to limit your distribution, NEVER EVER! So go behind a paywall at your peril.
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
Easy Sleazy
https://bit.ly/3slTJ2K
Somewhere Keith Richards is smiling, if not outright laughing. Without him, Mick Jagger appears completely out of touch with no soul. Mick may be the front man, but who is behind him turns out to be the essence of his success.
This is not the first time Mick has tried to go solo. And he always fails, even with the biggest push behind him. His Columbia albums of yore were too slick, anything but down and dirty, as if made by a posh guy who went to the London School of Economics... Whew, that's what he did, right? Is that who he is? Has he been hanging with the rich and famous so long that he has lost his perspective?
Even worse is Dave Grohl. This track reveals the flaws of Mr. Rock Music up front and center... Dynamics? THERE ARE NONE! So, it's loud and in your face, but it's easy to reject, easy not to pay attention, furthermore, it's all so SAFE! Rock and roll used to be dangerous, but Dave Grohl is the guy you want to bring home to mom, explain that to me please.
Of course this track has no traction, not even a million plays on YouTube as I write this, the fact that he's a Stone is irrelevant in a marketplace where status and hype are secondary, if relevant at all, to the music itself. The penumbra has never meant less, can you deliver the goods?
Where has Mick been camping all these days? We're looking for something gritty, insightful, that captures our feelings. Instead we've got a rich guy playing the guitar expressing emotions...not at all. Yes, the lyrics say something, but the delivery is all one note.
As for the lyrics... He almost appears to be pulling a Van Morrison, anti-lockdown. But upon further reflection it appears... Well, it's not exactly clear what he is saying, other than lockdown is ending. But I'd rather dance in the streets to Martha and the Vandellas than this crap.
And it's not the 1960s anymore, where I'm forced to listen to what I don't like until maybe I do, like it that is. It's painful to make it all the way through "Easy Sleazy," I only did because I wanted to make sure I didn't miss something, so that I could write this screed with full authority, but you aren't missing anything if you check out early.
And "sleazy"? That's not a word I think of when I contemplate the covid lockdown, nor emergence from it. Sleazy is late night in the dark high on drugs, it's never sleazy with the bright lights on, and this track is nothing if not bright.
Come on, listen to the intro to "Gimmie Shelter"... "Easy Sleazy" is just the opposite, but one can argue today is darker than yesterday, now is not the time to be mindless.
As for singing about what is happening now... It works with gravitas, just ask Neil Young, with "Ohio," never mind Marvin Gaye with "What's Going On." As for more recent numbers capturing the zeitgeist...it's hard to find them, at least successful ones. We're told by the successful to write a song with a score of people and dress well so you can tell the audience what they're missing out on, so they can envy you, when the truth is they should run in the opposite direction. There's no truth-telling like there was with N.W.A. and Ice-T and the seers of yore. I mean the cops just killed somebody in Minnesota, shouldn't the song be about that instead of partying?
Once upon a time Mick Jagger captured the zeitgeist, now it's nowhere to be found in his life or his lexicon, he's lost touch. Now is when you make a statement, this track no different from George Bush telling everybody after 9/11 to go out and shop, to keep the economy humming, the real issues? Oh, of course "Easy Sleazy" goes deeper than that, but its message is so confusing, there's so much irony, that it goes straight over the heads of those who do listen, and it's not like the focus is on the lyrics anyway, they're overwhelmed by the buzzing guitar sound.
A sound Keith Richards never employed.
Keith Richard was the anti-gunslinger, the anti-guitar hero. Forget playing a lot of notes in a small period of time, he frequently played no notes at all! It was about chords, sound, closer to the Edge than Yngwie Malmsteen.
You see most of creativity, most of excellence, happens between the ears. That's the essence of rock and roll, that's the essence of the Ramones, you don't need to be highly skilled to get your message down, to make a great record, but you certainly have to think about it. It's about channeling God, capturing lightning in a bottle, if you do it right the zeitgeist is right there in the grooves. If you find the zeitgeist in "Easy Sleazy" you don't know what it is, do you, Mr. Jones.
Come on, compare Nirvana with Foo Fighters, Cobain with Grohl. And this is less of a put-down of Grohl than an exaltation of Cobain. Anybody can go through the motions, but to ascend to the pantheon you need a certain vision, a certain attitude, a willingness to push buttons and test limits...can you say "John Lennon"?
You can also say "Keith Richards."
Keith has led anything but a perfect life. Better to watch the movie than live it. But he's never wavered from his focus on creating the best music, with the essence of life, attitude and truth involved. Has he always succeeded? No, but he's never failed on the level of Mick Jagger.
Mick needs Keith's pull to keep him in line, to focus him, to bring him down to earth. Just like Bono needs the Edge. It's Edge's guitarwork that anchors U2, not Bono's lyrics, they're just the cherry on top. Bono goes out and tries to save the world, but he'd have no voice if it weren't for the Edge, who's got almost no voice at all.
Mick thinks being a rock star is being famous. Riding the crest of the wave, being held up by the people. But if he did a solo show he wouldn't be able to crowdsurf, no one would hold him up! Especially the ancient who are only going on name value.
"Easy Sleazy" is drivel. And the best thing about today is drivel can be completely ignored, can fall out of sight nearly instantly. Which this will do.
Mick... Check with Keith, check with someone with their feet truly on the ground before you take action, make another misstep.
As for Mr. Grohl... So you played with a Stone, who cares? At this point we've all had brushes with greatness, this song is barely better than a selfie. Now it's about the work.
And you've got to work harder.
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
Somewhere Keith Richards is smiling, if not outright laughing. Without him, Mick Jagger appears completely out of touch with no soul. Mick may be the front man, but who is behind him turns out to be the essence of his success.
This is not the first time Mick has tried to go solo. And he always fails, even with the biggest push behind him. His Columbia albums of yore were too slick, anything but down and dirty, as if made by a posh guy who went to the London School of Economics... Whew, that's what he did, right? Is that who he is? Has he been hanging with the rich and famous so long that he has lost his perspective?
Even worse is Dave Grohl. This track reveals the flaws of Mr. Rock Music up front and center... Dynamics? THERE ARE NONE! So, it's loud and in your face, but it's easy to reject, easy not to pay attention, furthermore, it's all so SAFE! Rock and roll used to be dangerous, but Dave Grohl is the guy you want to bring home to mom, explain that to me please.
Of course this track has no traction, not even a million plays on YouTube as I write this, the fact that he's a Stone is irrelevant in a marketplace where status and hype are secondary, if relevant at all, to the music itself. The penumbra has never meant less, can you deliver the goods?
Where has Mick been camping all these days? We're looking for something gritty, insightful, that captures our feelings. Instead we've got a rich guy playing the guitar expressing emotions...not at all. Yes, the lyrics say something, but the delivery is all one note.
As for the lyrics... He almost appears to be pulling a Van Morrison, anti-lockdown. But upon further reflection it appears... Well, it's not exactly clear what he is saying, other than lockdown is ending. But I'd rather dance in the streets to Martha and the Vandellas than this crap.
And it's not the 1960s anymore, where I'm forced to listen to what I don't like until maybe I do, like it that is. It's painful to make it all the way through "Easy Sleazy," I only did because I wanted to make sure I didn't miss something, so that I could write this screed with full authority, but you aren't missing anything if you check out early.
And "sleazy"? That's not a word I think of when I contemplate the covid lockdown, nor emergence from it. Sleazy is late night in the dark high on drugs, it's never sleazy with the bright lights on, and this track is nothing if not bright.
Come on, listen to the intro to "Gimmie Shelter"... "Easy Sleazy" is just the opposite, but one can argue today is darker than yesterday, now is not the time to be mindless.
As for singing about what is happening now... It works with gravitas, just ask Neil Young, with "Ohio," never mind Marvin Gaye with "What's Going On." As for more recent numbers capturing the zeitgeist...it's hard to find them, at least successful ones. We're told by the successful to write a song with a score of people and dress well so you can tell the audience what they're missing out on, so they can envy you, when the truth is they should run in the opposite direction. There's no truth-telling like there was with N.W.A. and Ice-T and the seers of yore. I mean the cops just killed somebody in Minnesota, shouldn't the song be about that instead of partying?
Once upon a time Mick Jagger captured the zeitgeist, now it's nowhere to be found in his life or his lexicon, he's lost touch. Now is when you make a statement, this track no different from George Bush telling everybody after 9/11 to go out and shop, to keep the economy humming, the real issues? Oh, of course "Easy Sleazy" goes deeper than that, but its message is so confusing, there's so much irony, that it goes straight over the heads of those who do listen, and it's not like the focus is on the lyrics anyway, they're overwhelmed by the buzzing guitar sound.
A sound Keith Richards never employed.
Keith Richard was the anti-gunslinger, the anti-guitar hero. Forget playing a lot of notes in a small period of time, he frequently played no notes at all! It was about chords, sound, closer to the Edge than Yngwie Malmsteen.
You see most of creativity, most of excellence, happens between the ears. That's the essence of rock and roll, that's the essence of the Ramones, you don't need to be highly skilled to get your message down, to make a great record, but you certainly have to think about it. It's about channeling God, capturing lightning in a bottle, if you do it right the zeitgeist is right there in the grooves. If you find the zeitgeist in "Easy Sleazy" you don't know what it is, do you, Mr. Jones.
Come on, compare Nirvana with Foo Fighters, Cobain with Grohl. And this is less of a put-down of Grohl than an exaltation of Cobain. Anybody can go through the motions, but to ascend to the pantheon you need a certain vision, a certain attitude, a willingness to push buttons and test limits...can you say "John Lennon"?
You can also say "Keith Richards."
Keith has led anything but a perfect life. Better to watch the movie than live it. But he's never wavered from his focus on creating the best music, with the essence of life, attitude and truth involved. Has he always succeeded? No, but he's never failed on the level of Mick Jagger.
Mick needs Keith's pull to keep him in line, to focus him, to bring him down to earth. Just like Bono needs the Edge. It's Edge's guitarwork that anchors U2, not Bono's lyrics, they're just the cherry on top. Bono goes out and tries to save the world, but he'd have no voice if it weren't for the Edge, who's got almost no voice at all.
Mick thinks being a rock star is being famous. Riding the crest of the wave, being held up by the people. But if he did a solo show he wouldn't be able to crowdsurf, no one would hold him up! Especially the ancient who are only going on name value.
"Easy Sleazy" is drivel. And the best thing about today is drivel can be completely ignored, can fall out of sight nearly instantly. Which this will do.
Mick... Check with Keith, check with someone with their feet truly on the ground before you take action, make another misstep.
As for Mr. Grohl... So you played with a Stone, who cares? At this point we've all had brushes with greatness, this song is barely better than a selfie. Now it's about the work.
And you've got to work harder.
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
Live Nation Signs
"We Stand For Democracy": https://nyti.ms/3tmZK0o
This cements Michael Rapino's stature as the most powerful man in the music business.
That's right, for decades the power laid with the labels. But now it's all in touring, the events business, where people can have a human experience in a land of impersonal digital. You may see a list of top-streaming songs and scratch your head, but if you look at the acts grossing the most on the road, they'll be much more familiar. Sustaining is hard, but it's what it's all about. Having enough mindshare that people want to experience your music again and again and again. And so many of the big grossers never even had a hit! You see they're selling an experience, they're in tune with the times, unlike those running the record companies.
Risk. Boldness. Those are cornerstones of not only corporate preservation, but creative activity. What did Bob Dylan say..."he not busy being born is busy dying"? Where is the birth at the three major label groups? They sign very few acts and in most cases only sign that which has established itself. The acts take the initial risk, by forming and playing, staking a claim online. But really it's the touring industry that comes next, the agents and the promoters. And CAA and UTA signed this statement, but not WME... Why? You'd expect Ari Emanuel would be there first, after all his brother Rahm worked in the White House and was mayor of Chicago.
Was Rahm too busy? That's no excuse, politics, democracy, is the story of today, not corporate profits and entertainment. When you're fighting for the soul of your country you pick up a rifle, you don't stay home. But you might offend someone, a potential audience member. But if you're not willing to offend a potential customer, you're not willing to bond to another. As for being passive... Come on, even corporations making inert items signed on, why not those who base their revenue on creative activities?
Maybe Michael Rapino is out front because he's Canadian, where the American dream is more alive than it is south of the border. There's less of a sense of elitism in the Great White North, more of a sense of being in it together, never mind the country supporting its people with health care and its musicians with grants. Yes, Canada knows the power of music. The U.S? Not so much.
So here's the story. All these new voting laws are based on misinformation spread by our old fabulist in chief, Donald Trump. The lieutenant governor of Georgia even said so! https://cnn.it/3wUnFXi Yes, that's the world we now live in, where legislation is based on a lie. It was the most secure election in history, Biden clearly won, but Trump refused to accept this and via the disinformation portal known as Fox, never mind Newsmax and underground online outposts, the falsehood was further disseminated, to the point where people believed it, and still believe it. That's the country we now live in, where emotions trump facts, never mind facts being fungible.
But it gets worse. Are you following Tucker Carlson's recent promotion of replacement theory? And then he doubled-down when castigated by the Anti-Defamation League. Then again, you're not Jewish. But very few are pure white, you came from somewhere, and they're eventually gonna come for you, just you wait. The same way you're against masks and vaccines until papa gets Covid-19, or anti-abortion until little Janey gets pregnant. But then you're on your own, no one is listening to you. After all, isn't this the essence of freedom, having the state tell you how to live your life? Yes, the contradictions are plentiful, don't try to make sense of them, because you can't.
And the Republicans learned that they could not overturn Roe v. Wade in the Supreme Court, so they attacked on a state level. You may live in a blue state, but all the meanies are red, and in so many red states it's essentially impossible to get an abortion. The clinic is far away, you've got to go twice, you've got to be able to afford the procedure... These are the exact same hurdles these laws are trying to put in place for voting. Sure, you can get abortion... Sure, you can vote... We're just making sure it's all official, that no one slips through the cracks. But the end result is the procedure is impinged upon, there's a huge attrition factor, of people who just don't have the time and the money to jump through all the hoops. In other countries they vote on Sunday, when most people are off work. But if it's Tuesday and you work all day and at the polling place you go to there's a multiple hour line and the governor doesn't extend the voting hours...are you really gonna stand there? Which is why you could vote by mail, but that's un-American, you must vote in person, on Tuesday, the same way you must listen to CDs and watch network television. But even the right have streaming outlets and smartphones... Can't we at least live in the present?
Innovation... We've learned that you lead the audience, that if you get ahead you are safe, if you're behind you're constantly challenged. This is how the labels missed disruption twenty years ago, they chafed at it, tried to stop it, railed against it. But did they win? Of course not! It wasn't until Spotify came along, a product that some people still cannot understand, and the people came to it and streaming won and revenues went up.
Which is why Live Nation keeps trying to push the envelope. Tickets on smartphones. And there will be vaccine passports, just you wait. The point being that this is best for the AUDIENCE! As for being best for the acts... Live Nation gives almost all of the ticket revenue to the performers, this is the reverse of the major label model. Furthermore, the company gets heat that Ticketmaster is ripping off the public with its fees when everybody inside knows the only profit is in the fees, because the acts take all the ticket money. And Ticketmaster doesn't take anywhere near all those fees, the building must get paid, and the promoter, and sometimes even the act itself! But we live in a post-truth society. And it's the acts who want it this way, they want the blame to go to Ticketmaster. And the fans are even worse... StubHub built in the fees and sales went down. People always want to spend the lowest amount, even if it turns out they're paying the same damn amount. Crazy. As for developing acts playing clubs... At least Live Nation books them, as for the fees...at least the band is still getting paid, and the club has to stay in business or there's nowhere to play. But never underestimate the ability of a wannabe or those on the way up to complain that the world is unfair and they're not adequately compensated. We see this with streaming/Spotify daily. Yes, major news outlets keep saying Spotify should pay less successful acts more. HOW? You can't pay a penny a track. Why don't you pay a penny to your cable company for every minute you use the internet? Add it up, you'll go broke!
So in a world where the acts are mercenary, it falls on the corporation to do the right thing. And now, more than ever, it's the edifice that remains, not the act. I mean how many tickets can Lil Nas X sell? It's a train-wreck, a novelty act. I'm not disrespecting it, I give him credit for pulling an Alice Cooper and pissing off the ancient populace, but you slow down to see the commotion, and then you accelerate right out of there, you've seen it, there's no reason to see it again.
And there's all this news about Universal going public. Now let me see, are the acts going to participate in this upside? OF COURSE NOT! Work in Silicon Valley and you get stock options, sign to the label and you get a bad deal and the company ends up owning your work in perpetuity. There's no manufacturing, no shipping, no returns...but the labels still pay crappy royalty rates. Furthermore, they want 360 deals. Which is why they have less power and less impact than ever before. A ton of their market share comes from distributing indie labels.
So, the labels' business circles the drain while Live Nation throws the long ball. Without their catalogs, the labels are moribund, that's their true asset, and despite all the hoopla about the Spotify Top 50, the profits are in the catalogs. But there is no catalog in live performance. You're fighting the battle each and every day, you can't rest on your laurels. Also, in the live sphere, the company willing to pay the most gets the act. You can steal any act from Live Nation, just be willing to pay more!
AEG didn't sign this letter, probably because Phil Anschutz is a right winger. But just like they out gay people, now they out right wing people, who think they can fly under the radar as they donate money to politicians to pay fewer taxes as they fly these elected officials around on their jets and load 'em up with perks so they can never say no. It's called leverage. And in a world where no one wants to sacrifice... God, even Jeff Bezos endorsed higher corporate tax rates, but the record labels on democracy...CRICKETS!
We waited for an antiwar anthem, then we waited for an equal rights/BLM anthem...and they never came. It's hard to write something universal when your entire appeal is niche. And the truth is the acts are smaller than ever before, their reach is nowhere near what it was in the pre-internet era. You can hype people, but that does not mean they're paying attention, that they're listening...
So it falls upon the umbrella organization to make a stand. It falls upon the company which reaches everybody to stand up and do what is right.
And what are the risks really?
Sure, a radio station can survive without playing the Dixie Chicks or Morgan Wallen, but are fans really gonna stay home and go to no shows because the promoter is Live Nation? Hell, Ticketmaster is the most hated company in America and that hasn't stopped the live industry from booming, at least before Covid. That's the truth... You can talk about deleting your Facebook account, or stopping purchases at Amazon, but the reality is those companies are too embedded in the national fabric for people to give them up, boycotts don't work... Like Trump saying to boycott Coke with a Diet Coke on his desk!
You've got to push to get what you want in this world. You've got to take a stand. You've got to be informed, you've got to do what is right. It's the Democrats who are asleep, not the Republicans. Yes, Biden won and has a left wing agenda, but the statehouses are overwhelmingly red, and the Republicans increased their numbers in the House of Representatives. And Moscow Mitch single-handedly tilted the Supreme Court to represent a minority of the population, just like the red state officials in the Senate. And now these same "losers" are tilting the playing field even more in their favor, in plain sight, but self-centered unwilling to risk wankers are so afraid of offending the ignorant that they refuse to stand up for what is right, to protect their business interests in the future! Yes, this country falters and your business will go downhill. You think chaos/a revolution can't happen? Did you believe a virus could shut down business in excess of a year?
Used to be we relied on artists to tell us the truth, to pull us in the right direction. But today's artists are all about money and lifestyle. They're vapid. In petty conflicts. The message is be mindless and try to get in bed with a brand that will pay you. It's hysterical, no, it's sad when you pull back the lens and see the landscape. The well to do, the elite, the upper middle class and beyond, all buy insurance via education and relationships, they're not only ahead, but they're never left behind. Meanwhile, those without hope, at the bottom, are playing the lottery, wasting their money trying to become rich and famous, doing their best to sell out to the elite. And when they don't succeed, instead of looking at the game, they pounce on straw men like Spotify and Ticketmaster, which are really just fronts for more heinous players paid by them, like the labels and promoters and the acts. And it's not like the story is not out there, but people just won't believe it. Which is why you've got so many people believing the last election was riddled with fraud. If things don't go your way...it can't be you, it can't be your message, it must be the system and those in control of it, how can you lose?
Very easily.
This cements Michael Rapino's stature as the most powerful man in the music business.
That's right, for decades the power laid with the labels. But now it's all in touring, the events business, where people can have a human experience in a land of impersonal digital. You may see a list of top-streaming songs and scratch your head, but if you look at the acts grossing the most on the road, they'll be much more familiar. Sustaining is hard, but it's what it's all about. Having enough mindshare that people want to experience your music again and again and again. And so many of the big grossers never even had a hit! You see they're selling an experience, they're in tune with the times, unlike those running the record companies.
Risk. Boldness. Those are cornerstones of not only corporate preservation, but creative activity. What did Bob Dylan say..."he not busy being born is busy dying"? Where is the birth at the three major label groups? They sign very few acts and in most cases only sign that which has established itself. The acts take the initial risk, by forming and playing, staking a claim online. But really it's the touring industry that comes next, the agents and the promoters. And CAA and UTA signed this statement, but not WME... Why? You'd expect Ari Emanuel would be there first, after all his brother Rahm worked in the White House and was mayor of Chicago.
Was Rahm too busy? That's no excuse, politics, democracy, is the story of today, not corporate profits and entertainment. When you're fighting for the soul of your country you pick up a rifle, you don't stay home. But you might offend someone, a potential audience member. But if you're not willing to offend a potential customer, you're not willing to bond to another. As for being passive... Come on, even corporations making inert items signed on, why not those who base their revenue on creative activities?
Maybe Michael Rapino is out front because he's Canadian, where the American dream is more alive than it is south of the border. There's less of a sense of elitism in the Great White North, more of a sense of being in it together, never mind the country supporting its people with health care and its musicians with grants. Yes, Canada knows the power of music. The U.S? Not so much.
So here's the story. All these new voting laws are based on misinformation spread by our old fabulist in chief, Donald Trump. The lieutenant governor of Georgia even said so! https://cnn.it/3wUnFXi Yes, that's the world we now live in, where legislation is based on a lie. It was the most secure election in history, Biden clearly won, but Trump refused to accept this and via the disinformation portal known as Fox, never mind Newsmax and underground online outposts, the falsehood was further disseminated, to the point where people believed it, and still believe it. That's the country we now live in, where emotions trump facts, never mind facts being fungible.
But it gets worse. Are you following Tucker Carlson's recent promotion of replacement theory? And then he doubled-down when castigated by the Anti-Defamation League. Then again, you're not Jewish. But very few are pure white, you came from somewhere, and they're eventually gonna come for you, just you wait. The same way you're against masks and vaccines until papa gets Covid-19, or anti-abortion until little Janey gets pregnant. But then you're on your own, no one is listening to you. After all, isn't this the essence of freedom, having the state tell you how to live your life? Yes, the contradictions are plentiful, don't try to make sense of them, because you can't.
And the Republicans learned that they could not overturn Roe v. Wade in the Supreme Court, so they attacked on a state level. You may live in a blue state, but all the meanies are red, and in so many red states it's essentially impossible to get an abortion. The clinic is far away, you've got to go twice, you've got to be able to afford the procedure... These are the exact same hurdles these laws are trying to put in place for voting. Sure, you can get abortion... Sure, you can vote... We're just making sure it's all official, that no one slips through the cracks. But the end result is the procedure is impinged upon, there's a huge attrition factor, of people who just don't have the time and the money to jump through all the hoops. In other countries they vote on Sunday, when most people are off work. But if it's Tuesday and you work all day and at the polling place you go to there's a multiple hour line and the governor doesn't extend the voting hours...are you really gonna stand there? Which is why you could vote by mail, but that's un-American, you must vote in person, on Tuesday, the same way you must listen to CDs and watch network television. But even the right have streaming outlets and smartphones... Can't we at least live in the present?
Innovation... We've learned that you lead the audience, that if you get ahead you are safe, if you're behind you're constantly challenged. This is how the labels missed disruption twenty years ago, they chafed at it, tried to stop it, railed against it. But did they win? Of course not! It wasn't until Spotify came along, a product that some people still cannot understand, and the people came to it and streaming won and revenues went up.
Which is why Live Nation keeps trying to push the envelope. Tickets on smartphones. And there will be vaccine passports, just you wait. The point being that this is best for the AUDIENCE! As for being best for the acts... Live Nation gives almost all of the ticket revenue to the performers, this is the reverse of the major label model. Furthermore, the company gets heat that Ticketmaster is ripping off the public with its fees when everybody inside knows the only profit is in the fees, because the acts take all the ticket money. And Ticketmaster doesn't take anywhere near all those fees, the building must get paid, and the promoter, and sometimes even the act itself! But we live in a post-truth society. And it's the acts who want it this way, they want the blame to go to Ticketmaster. And the fans are even worse... StubHub built in the fees and sales went down. People always want to spend the lowest amount, even if it turns out they're paying the same damn amount. Crazy. As for developing acts playing clubs... At least Live Nation books them, as for the fees...at least the band is still getting paid, and the club has to stay in business or there's nowhere to play. But never underestimate the ability of a wannabe or those on the way up to complain that the world is unfair and they're not adequately compensated. We see this with streaming/Spotify daily. Yes, major news outlets keep saying Spotify should pay less successful acts more. HOW? You can't pay a penny a track. Why don't you pay a penny to your cable company for every minute you use the internet? Add it up, you'll go broke!
So in a world where the acts are mercenary, it falls on the corporation to do the right thing. And now, more than ever, it's the edifice that remains, not the act. I mean how many tickets can Lil Nas X sell? It's a train-wreck, a novelty act. I'm not disrespecting it, I give him credit for pulling an Alice Cooper and pissing off the ancient populace, but you slow down to see the commotion, and then you accelerate right out of there, you've seen it, there's no reason to see it again.
And there's all this news about Universal going public. Now let me see, are the acts going to participate in this upside? OF COURSE NOT! Work in Silicon Valley and you get stock options, sign to the label and you get a bad deal and the company ends up owning your work in perpetuity. There's no manufacturing, no shipping, no returns...but the labels still pay crappy royalty rates. Furthermore, they want 360 deals. Which is why they have less power and less impact than ever before. A ton of their market share comes from distributing indie labels.
So, the labels' business circles the drain while Live Nation throws the long ball. Without their catalogs, the labels are moribund, that's their true asset, and despite all the hoopla about the Spotify Top 50, the profits are in the catalogs. But there is no catalog in live performance. You're fighting the battle each and every day, you can't rest on your laurels. Also, in the live sphere, the company willing to pay the most gets the act. You can steal any act from Live Nation, just be willing to pay more!
AEG didn't sign this letter, probably because Phil Anschutz is a right winger. But just like they out gay people, now they out right wing people, who think they can fly under the radar as they donate money to politicians to pay fewer taxes as they fly these elected officials around on their jets and load 'em up with perks so they can never say no. It's called leverage. And in a world where no one wants to sacrifice... God, even Jeff Bezos endorsed higher corporate tax rates, but the record labels on democracy...CRICKETS!
We waited for an antiwar anthem, then we waited for an equal rights/BLM anthem...and they never came. It's hard to write something universal when your entire appeal is niche. And the truth is the acts are smaller than ever before, their reach is nowhere near what it was in the pre-internet era. You can hype people, but that does not mean they're paying attention, that they're listening...
So it falls upon the umbrella organization to make a stand. It falls upon the company which reaches everybody to stand up and do what is right.
And what are the risks really?
Sure, a radio station can survive without playing the Dixie Chicks or Morgan Wallen, but are fans really gonna stay home and go to no shows because the promoter is Live Nation? Hell, Ticketmaster is the most hated company in America and that hasn't stopped the live industry from booming, at least before Covid. That's the truth... You can talk about deleting your Facebook account, or stopping purchases at Amazon, but the reality is those companies are too embedded in the national fabric for people to give them up, boycotts don't work... Like Trump saying to boycott Coke with a Diet Coke on his desk!
You've got to push to get what you want in this world. You've got to take a stand. You've got to be informed, you've got to do what is right. It's the Democrats who are asleep, not the Republicans. Yes, Biden won and has a left wing agenda, but the statehouses are overwhelmingly red, and the Republicans increased their numbers in the House of Representatives. And Moscow Mitch single-handedly tilted the Supreme Court to represent a minority of the population, just like the red state officials in the Senate. And now these same "losers" are tilting the playing field even more in their favor, in plain sight, but self-centered unwilling to risk wankers are so afraid of offending the ignorant that they refuse to stand up for what is right, to protect their business interests in the future! Yes, this country falters and your business will go downhill. You think chaos/a revolution can't happen? Did you believe a virus could shut down business in excess of a year?
Used to be we relied on artists to tell us the truth, to pull us in the right direction. But today's artists are all about money and lifestyle. They're vapid. In petty conflicts. The message is be mindless and try to get in bed with a brand that will pay you. It's hysterical, no, it's sad when you pull back the lens and see the landscape. The well to do, the elite, the upper middle class and beyond, all buy insurance via education and relationships, they're not only ahead, but they're never left behind. Meanwhile, those without hope, at the bottom, are playing the lottery, wasting their money trying to become rich and famous, doing their best to sell out to the elite. And when they don't succeed, instead of looking at the game, they pounce on straw men like Spotify and Ticketmaster, which are really just fronts for more heinous players paid by them, like the labels and promoters and the acts. And it's not like the story is not out there, but people just won't believe it. Which is why you've got so many people believing the last election was riddled with fraud. If things don't go your way...it can't be you, it can't be your message, it must be the system and those in control of it, how can you lose?
Very easily.
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
Tuesday 13 April 2021
The Power Of Fan Bases
"When Anti-Asian Parody Targeted BTS, the Boy Band's Fan Army Mobilized": https://nyti.ms/2OKoZe3
What kind of crazy, fucked-up world do we live in where a boy band singing in a foreign language has more credibility than all the American acts in the hit parade? One in which a foreign power realizes you build fan bases from the bottom, not the top, and you superserve those who care and not those who do not.
It's like today's hit music is a missile site. All these wankers shooting off every damn day to get us to pay attention, to the point where their names turn us off. We're never gonna listen to their music, we don't care, we no longer live in the monoculture of eighties MTV, but these acts and their purveyors believe we still do. I'm not sure all publicity is good publicity, unless you're an airhead Kardashian ripping off the brain dead. Music must represent something, say something, to stick.
Like BTS's.
HUH? You mean those dancing fool Koreans?
ABSOLUTELY!
This is about culture, the culture of the act itself. All the members of BTS have personalities, they have rough edges, they express themselves, to the point that fans feel they know them and become attached to them. We all need something to believe in, and what we believe in most is humanity, that which touches our souls. But in America today it's constantly tribal warfare, a zero-sum game, I hate what you like and vice versa, and you must like what I like or you're a worthless piece of shit. And we see this argument not only minute by minute online, but second by second!
But the most powerful army in the music world operates in stealth mode. You remember stealth, when the U.S. wanted to hide its jets so that they could go unnoticed until they bombed the landscape, made a big impact, they designed stealth aircraft, that's a much better strategy than constant carpet bombing, the music model of the last few decades, make me puke. Come on, there are acts that we hate in principle, because of overexposure, even though we've never heard a lick of their music.
Now a fan base can become one of the aforementioned warring tribes. What they do is spam and insult everyone who speaks ill of their master, it's scorched earth, and also laughable, because these fans are operating in a knee-jerk fashion, there's no thinking at all, that's one of the big problems in America today, the lack of thinking, analysis, we don't teach it in school and most people believe they can function and win without it, but it's nearly impossible.
So, the BTS team, i.e. Bit Hit Entertainment, now called HYBE, takes a classic construction and reformulates it for the present. Why does vision always come from outside? He may have been a crook, but Lou Pearlman was absolutely brilliant, he built the biggest bands in the land, in the world!, outside the traditional system, he saw a hole when no one else did. Then we had One Direction. The band didn't win the "X Factor," proving that winning is secondary, a false triumph, that it's the talent, the songs, the je ne sais quoi that puts something over the top. Unlike 'N Sync and the Backstreet Boys, One Direction didn't dance, but that's one of the reasons it succeeded, the members were perceived to be three-dimensional, to the point where Harry Styles is still a giant today. And One Direction wasn't built on radio, but online, there were almost no hits, but they sold out stadiums. So BTS comes up with an act that grows online, that does not depend on radio, whose members evidence rich identities while dancing...AND THEY BECOME GIGANTIC!
Think about that, Big Hit/HYBE is making an act for today.
And unlike all the American labels signing the prepubescent and trying to have them hit on their first vapid track, Big Hit/HYBE plays the long game, there is no credibility unless you play the long game, you make fans one by one, they spread the word, if everybody knows about it no one talks about it, fans want to own the group, and in today's world it can be huge but appear small, because it's not constantly self-promoting in the media. You trust another fan, you don't trust the media, not only in music.
And since the BTS Army is operating online, which major news outlets still don't understand, it's a stealth operation. It's off the radar until there's a surgical strike, like the demand for tickets for that Trump rally back in Oklahoma. Everybody, I mean EVERYBODY, thought that many Trumpers wanted to brave possible Covid-19 infection to hear the Donald's words, a secondary stage was even constructed outside the arena for overflow. But it was far from a full house, and big media didn't realize what had happened until after the speech was over, when the BTS Army told them.
This isn't an I hate you, no I hate YOU Twitter war, this is a campaign more akin to the sixties than the twenty first century. Remember when part of being a revolutionary was having a sense of humor? Not only Abbie Hoffman, but the "National Lampoon"...you had to question authority, make fun of it, and only the hip people got the joke. Once everybody can get the joke, it loses its power.
So, needless to say, BTS is Korean. And when a Chilean TV program made racist, anti-Asian comments, their army swarmed in. Yes, all the fans are linked, unlike in the pre-internet days, a campaign can be organized and executed nearly instantaneously. Old people have to call, and you wonder why young people never talk on the phone...WHO WANTS TO WASTE THAT MUCH TIME!
For far too long rappers' beef has been with each other, come on, they're shooting each other and...those in power just don't care, they truly don't. But if said rappers focused their ire on those in power...whoa, just you wait.
The truth is you can organize online and your ranks can be instantly visible, illustrating the power they truly have. Forget polls that get it wrong. Powerful people in the straight world are all about holding on to power, they look backward, not forward. But the youth have no allegiance to the past, no assets to protect, especially in an on demand world where so much is virtual, and they can strike power's vulnerable hot spots and make a difference.
Come on... Elected officials first and foremost must be elected. And to run a campaign, they use data. This is what is happening in Michigan right now, Covid-19 is raging, but Governor Whitmer is afraid to lock down because of the vocal backlash she received from right wingers the last time. But if there were a bigger, more organized army...
This is one of AOC's points, and dismiss the message at your peril, you advertise online now, that's how you reach people:
"A 'Super PAC' Says Spending By Democrats Was Unwise": https://nyti.ms/3dfDtvV
Old thinking is you make it obvious, you dumb it down so anybody can understand it...and anybody can ignore it. You don't cry in plain sight, you don't bitch to the powers-that-be, you organize your fans for a surgical strike...your fans are so dedicated to the cause that they can form their own agenda, off the radar, that ends up surprising people, demonstrating how those who have been disregarded previously are huge in number, and as a result wield power and change hearts and minds.
We are living in the 2020s, and the music business and mainstream media are still operating in the 1980s, complaining ad infinitum that someone is moving their cheese. It's time these enterprises decamped to today.
No one has universal mindshare. Everything happens online. Look at Trump, he lost his Twitter power and now most people don't even get the message. It's the personal tools online that have power, the one to many. If you're not singular, if you don't own your own identity, if you don't think for yourself, you've got no army, at best you've just got a bunch of blind followers, and others shrug when they deign to wield their "power." But it's different when the fan base represents a thinking enterprise, that cannot be dismissed out of hand. It's the difference between AM and FM...but both mean little today, it all happens online, did you read the latest research? Read it: https://bit.ly/3a4gTEH It's the antidote to all the self-serving press radio puts out that it's still king.
We need more BTS armies. We need more acts that generate this passion. And you may laugh at BTS, but the past always comes back, but with a twist!
Maybe there is hope. Maybe music still does have power.
But it's got to be done completely different from today.
Money is secondary to power, and if you have power there's plenty of money. But in greedy America, no one seems to realize this, but it's still the truth. The BTS army has power, and unlike the army of most nations, it can turn on a dime, take action without endless debate. This is the future, whether you want to go there or not.
What kind of crazy, fucked-up world do we live in where a boy band singing in a foreign language has more credibility than all the American acts in the hit parade? One in which a foreign power realizes you build fan bases from the bottom, not the top, and you superserve those who care and not those who do not.
It's like today's hit music is a missile site. All these wankers shooting off every damn day to get us to pay attention, to the point where their names turn us off. We're never gonna listen to their music, we don't care, we no longer live in the monoculture of eighties MTV, but these acts and their purveyors believe we still do. I'm not sure all publicity is good publicity, unless you're an airhead Kardashian ripping off the brain dead. Music must represent something, say something, to stick.
Like BTS's.
HUH? You mean those dancing fool Koreans?
ABSOLUTELY!
This is about culture, the culture of the act itself. All the members of BTS have personalities, they have rough edges, they express themselves, to the point that fans feel they know them and become attached to them. We all need something to believe in, and what we believe in most is humanity, that which touches our souls. But in America today it's constantly tribal warfare, a zero-sum game, I hate what you like and vice versa, and you must like what I like or you're a worthless piece of shit. And we see this argument not only minute by minute online, but second by second!
But the most powerful army in the music world operates in stealth mode. You remember stealth, when the U.S. wanted to hide its jets so that they could go unnoticed until they bombed the landscape, made a big impact, they designed stealth aircraft, that's a much better strategy than constant carpet bombing, the music model of the last few decades, make me puke. Come on, there are acts that we hate in principle, because of overexposure, even though we've never heard a lick of their music.
Now a fan base can become one of the aforementioned warring tribes. What they do is spam and insult everyone who speaks ill of their master, it's scorched earth, and also laughable, because these fans are operating in a knee-jerk fashion, there's no thinking at all, that's one of the big problems in America today, the lack of thinking, analysis, we don't teach it in school and most people believe they can function and win without it, but it's nearly impossible.
So, the BTS team, i.e. Bit Hit Entertainment, now called HYBE, takes a classic construction and reformulates it for the present. Why does vision always come from outside? He may have been a crook, but Lou Pearlman was absolutely brilliant, he built the biggest bands in the land, in the world!, outside the traditional system, he saw a hole when no one else did. Then we had One Direction. The band didn't win the "X Factor," proving that winning is secondary, a false triumph, that it's the talent, the songs, the je ne sais quoi that puts something over the top. Unlike 'N Sync and the Backstreet Boys, One Direction didn't dance, but that's one of the reasons it succeeded, the members were perceived to be three-dimensional, to the point where Harry Styles is still a giant today. And One Direction wasn't built on radio, but online, there were almost no hits, but they sold out stadiums. So BTS comes up with an act that grows online, that does not depend on radio, whose members evidence rich identities while dancing...AND THEY BECOME GIGANTIC!
Think about that, Big Hit/HYBE is making an act for today.
And unlike all the American labels signing the prepubescent and trying to have them hit on their first vapid track, Big Hit/HYBE plays the long game, there is no credibility unless you play the long game, you make fans one by one, they spread the word, if everybody knows about it no one talks about it, fans want to own the group, and in today's world it can be huge but appear small, because it's not constantly self-promoting in the media. You trust another fan, you don't trust the media, not only in music.
And since the BTS Army is operating online, which major news outlets still don't understand, it's a stealth operation. It's off the radar until there's a surgical strike, like the demand for tickets for that Trump rally back in Oklahoma. Everybody, I mean EVERYBODY, thought that many Trumpers wanted to brave possible Covid-19 infection to hear the Donald's words, a secondary stage was even constructed outside the arena for overflow. But it was far from a full house, and big media didn't realize what had happened until after the speech was over, when the BTS Army told them.
This isn't an I hate you, no I hate YOU Twitter war, this is a campaign more akin to the sixties than the twenty first century. Remember when part of being a revolutionary was having a sense of humor? Not only Abbie Hoffman, but the "National Lampoon"...you had to question authority, make fun of it, and only the hip people got the joke. Once everybody can get the joke, it loses its power.
So, needless to say, BTS is Korean. And when a Chilean TV program made racist, anti-Asian comments, their army swarmed in. Yes, all the fans are linked, unlike in the pre-internet days, a campaign can be organized and executed nearly instantaneously. Old people have to call, and you wonder why young people never talk on the phone...WHO WANTS TO WASTE THAT MUCH TIME!
For far too long rappers' beef has been with each other, come on, they're shooting each other and...those in power just don't care, they truly don't. But if said rappers focused their ire on those in power...whoa, just you wait.
The truth is you can organize online and your ranks can be instantly visible, illustrating the power they truly have. Forget polls that get it wrong. Powerful people in the straight world are all about holding on to power, they look backward, not forward. But the youth have no allegiance to the past, no assets to protect, especially in an on demand world where so much is virtual, and they can strike power's vulnerable hot spots and make a difference.
Come on... Elected officials first and foremost must be elected. And to run a campaign, they use data. This is what is happening in Michigan right now, Covid-19 is raging, but Governor Whitmer is afraid to lock down because of the vocal backlash she received from right wingers the last time. But if there were a bigger, more organized army...
This is one of AOC's points, and dismiss the message at your peril, you advertise online now, that's how you reach people:
"A 'Super PAC' Says Spending By Democrats Was Unwise": https://nyti.ms/3dfDtvV
Old thinking is you make it obvious, you dumb it down so anybody can understand it...and anybody can ignore it. You don't cry in plain sight, you don't bitch to the powers-that-be, you organize your fans for a surgical strike...your fans are so dedicated to the cause that they can form their own agenda, off the radar, that ends up surprising people, demonstrating how those who have been disregarded previously are huge in number, and as a result wield power and change hearts and minds.
We are living in the 2020s, and the music business and mainstream media are still operating in the 1980s, complaining ad infinitum that someone is moving their cheese. It's time these enterprises decamped to today.
No one has universal mindshare. Everything happens online. Look at Trump, he lost his Twitter power and now most people don't even get the message. It's the personal tools online that have power, the one to many. If you're not singular, if you don't own your own identity, if you don't think for yourself, you've got no army, at best you've just got a bunch of blind followers, and others shrug when they deign to wield their "power." But it's different when the fan base represents a thinking enterprise, that cannot be dismissed out of hand. It's the difference between AM and FM...but both mean little today, it all happens online, did you read the latest research? Read it: https://bit.ly/3a4gTEH It's the antidote to all the self-serving press radio puts out that it's still king.
We need more BTS armies. We need more acts that generate this passion. And you may laugh at BTS, but the past always comes back, but with a twist!
Maybe there is hope. Maybe music still does have power.
But it's got to be done completely different from today.
Money is secondary to power, and if you have power there's plenty of money. But in greedy America, no one seems to realize this, but it's still the truth. The BTS army has power, and unlike the army of most nations, it can turn on a dime, take action without endless debate. This is the future, whether you want to go there or not.
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
Joel Selvin-SiriusXM This Week
Joel Selvin has a new book, "Hollywood Eden," which investigates the genesis of the Southern California sound. Stunningly, after all this time, Selvin has excavated stories about Jan Berry and Nancy Sinatra and others in the early to mid-sixties that have never been told before. Tune in to hear some and more!
Tune in today, April 13th, to Volume 106, 7 PM East, 4 PM West.
Phone #: 844-6-VOLUME, 844-686-5863
Twitter: @lefsetz or @siriusxmvolume/#lefsetzlive
Hear the episode live on SiriusXM VOLUME: siriusxm.us/HearLefsetzLive
If you miss the episode, you can hear it on demand on the SiriusXM app: siriusxm.us/LefsetzLive
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
Tune in today, April 13th, to Volume 106, 7 PM East, 4 PM West.
Phone #: 844-6-VOLUME, 844-686-5863
Twitter: @lefsetz or @siriusxmvolume/#lefsetzlive
Hear the episode live on SiriusXM VOLUME: siriusxm.us/HearLefsetzLive
If you miss the episode, you can hear it on demand on the SiriusXM app: siriusxm.us/LefsetzLive
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
Monday 12 April 2021
Endless Fearless-Taylor's Version
The more this story morphs, the more I think of the scene in Woody Allen's Love and Death when his character needs to travel to Minsk. When his carriage is leaving, the village idiot hitches a ride. When they get to Minsk, there's a big banner "Welcome Village Idiots". Those already there are wearing dunce caps and dancing in the town square.
This is a perfect metaphor for the preposterous kerfuffle on Taylor and the sale of Big Machine's masters (yes, people, she never owned them).
As one of your oldest readers, I feel the onus of reminding your readers that the consolidation of the record business from hundreds of labels to two and a half majors means that HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of artist masters have been sold to third parties. Can any of your readers (or Taylor Swift fans) name one artist who complained that selling their CREATIVE work caused them a hysterical and public nervous breakdown?
I haven't seen one comment mention that screenwriters have to transfer ownership of their creative work in perpetuity to movie studios, including sequels, remakes, merchandising, AND the rights to all the characters in the script.
Remember that Taylor had three ways to get back her masters: 1. resigning with Big Machine, 2. buying Big Machine and 3. exercising her termination rights under copyright law.
The narrative by Taylor has been disingenuous, malicious, and at odds with industry practice since the late 1800's.
I am reminded of the schmuck with earlaps, Donald Trump, who lost the election and simply created a false narrative that it had been stolen from him.
Of course, Trump's lies are a lot more consequential than Taylor's but hers still trouble me. Hey, Tay, the underdog role doesn't fit well and, oh, by the way, your new record company is now 20% owned by a hedge fund but you haven't mentioned that.
Lance Grode
__________________________________________
Hi Bob - Long time listener, first time caller. I have enjoyed your newsletter for several years and have often resisted the urge to reply. For context - I am a 45 yr old white male who is not a long-time Taylor fan. I do however appreciate that she is extremely talented. Like many others, Folklore touched me and I thought the songwriting was deeply compelling. It was absolutely the right album at the right time for me.
The amount of negativity that your original post has generated is truly sad. Of all the terrible things in the world today, this is what we have time to rail against? Despite the massive talent of those who replied, much of the rhetoric came off as extremely tone deaf. I get this may be Marketing, but she could certainly be using influence and time in much worse ways. Maybe this is what Taylor has been fighting against all along?
Feel free to ignore. I am just a "nobody" who thinks it's disturbing how much our society continues to be threatened by a young woman with power...
Tim Hussey
__________________________________________
I just listened to the new Taylor Swift recording with my 16 year old daughter who is a big fan. I think the new versions sound great and they are not exactly the same as the originals. You can hear the confidence of a more mature artist who is much more comfortable with herself and is making these recordings with joy. I applaud her efforts to take control of her material and as an early skeptic of her music I have come to appreciate what she does and how much she has grown. That's what being an artist is, the freedom to grow, change, and express your unique vision of the world. I believe we should celebrate any artist having more control on how their music is presented.
Joe Fletcher
__________________________________________
Wow, Bob. I can not believe that all these old white guys feel authorized to express their opinions, which nobody cares about but other old white guys, about a young artist who has proved her exceptional talent again and again and has the balls go to up against Scooter and the other robber barons who expected her to give up after they gleefully fucked her over. Any man who had his music stolen by an arrogant dick at a record company would come out guns blazing—why do men disparage a female artist for trying to get hers? And what have any of these guys ever done that was even close to comparable to Taylor's achievements? Not a thing, guaranteed.
Honestly, I'm not a Taylor fan, but the comments in this column made me so mad that now I'm going to buy the rerelease.
Bonnie Hayes
__________________________________________
A few mentioned catching lightening in a bottle with the originals and it's so true. The re-recordings are done in spite and not for artistry. Imagine if Springsteen had re-recorded the first 3 LPs after settling with Mike Appel. Would never had been the same...especially on Born To Run. I believe Max Weinberg said he still can't match Ernest Boom Carter's drums on the title track. And what did El Jefe do at his RRHOF induction? He invited Appel to the soirée since he knows without Appel's guerilla management he would not be where he is now.
T-Swiz's deal seems to be about ownership and licensing with her fans a lower priority. Yeah she will says it's all about her fans but it's all about the wallet. I fear now we will have her songs shoved down our throats in commercials and films. Lastly i do hope the producers and original studio musicians get their due cut on this. They made that original so-called lightening in a bottle.
Brian Helgesen
Philly PA
__________________________________________
I've read through the many comments about TS's re-records and feel compelled to say how disappointing it is that the business of music has become more important than the music itself. It degrades us.
There's always a deal to be made and there is no "standard deal". We are in the information age. No reason exists why TS couldn't have participated in the capital liquidation of her BM master recordings and/or been granted an administrative right over their ongoing use.
This binary all or nothing, I either own or don't own my masters bullshit, belies the enormous hard work of many people whose participation matters in creation of any real success and reiterates the historical lack of vision by industry executives. This entire shit show is about juvenile egos and their continued focus which diminishes our entire industry.
-Tony Gottlieb
__________________________________________
re-interpretations are the norm in classical and jazz. Are the 'original' versions of pop songs inherently better because of a listener's emotional attachment to them?
Taylor notwithstanding, maybe an artist has something further to contribute a few years down the line. Consider Kate Bush re-recording 'Wuthering Heights'
And if you don't like it, fine. Don't listen!
sofu_gan
__________________________________________
I have no dog in this fight, but out of sheer curiosity I listened and compared. Yuk. Just yuk. The re-recordings remind me of those science fiction movies, where a human is cloned but has no soul inside them….and in just the same way as Frankenstein's monster, it's actually kind of grotesque, in terms of artistry. I understand why she's doing it, but come on.. it's totally nuts as far as the fans are concerned. The fans don't benefit, they lose, because Taylor is now about to go about recording and selling a huge body of music with no soul, because as you rightly point out Bob: 'you cannot capture lightning twice'. And now on YouTube there are lyric versions entitled 'Taylor's Version', but the real truth is that these aren't purely 'Taylor's versions'…they're actually a Xerox of 'Taylor AND Nathan's' version (her co-producer on the originals). So if this is all about 'intellectual property', I sure hope Nathan Chapman is being looked after, and receiving producer royalties, because the original 'lightning in a bottle' that was captured and made her a global and rich mega star, is actually half Nathan's. And if I were him, I would be really saddened by this, because the two of them really did capture some magic and record it. I can't respect Taylor for doing this, because the art should always come before the money… which she already has plenty of. Ok, so she's pissed off at a record company… WHO ISN'T?!?!
Simon Hosford.
__________________________________________
Might be time to issue a retraction or apologize. It doesn't even matter if she's worth 400 million. The money has nothing to do with it although it means most of the world disagrees with you. Listen to Fearless (Taylor's version) and then rethink everything you thought you knew. She was young. And raw. I'm a singer and when you can't hear yourself on stage it makes for what you heard at the grammys. But now is 31. And clearly been working on her voice since your words took hold of her. As a fan of hers I might even give you credit for changing her. But whatever you think of her voice she is a talented soprano with a low range that most sopranos do not have. And a talent for writing that even you wish you had. So no, you aren't an asshole. Mean.. maybe or just honest. 16 year old Taylor doesn't exist anymore. That Taylor is dead. This one is a woman with a voice...maybe one that deserves you giving her another listen.
Steve Brown
__________________________________________
I completely agree with Thomas Flood's statement that this is a canny business maneuver and not particularly about the art. Taylor will own new versions of her earlier works that will "compete" with the previous versions for commercial use, streams, etc. devaluing the earlier catalog. I suspect that fact was considered by Scooter and it may have motivated him to move the catalog quickly to a private equity owner. Taylor Swift is first and foremost an astute businessperson.
Bob Cavalieri
__________________________________________
It's about licensing and owning your own material.
It's good business.
Ron Stone
__________________________________________
The letters reminded me of Richard Hell's multiple efforts to revise his second album, Destiny Street. Unhappy with the original engineering (as well as his drug-impaired musical contributions), and with the masters thought to be lost, he used a cassette of the rhythm tracks and re-recorded everything else for Destiny Street Repaired. The results might not satisfy those who internalized the original, but given the market in which the album operates, it was clearly an artist revising for art's sake, rather than for cash. Many years later, three of the four multitrack master reels were found, and Hell remixed them into Destiny Street Remixed, and released the results alongside the original and the Repaired edition as Destiny Street Complete, along with added demos. The package is interestingly satisfying as an artist's aural essay of his early work and later maturity.
hyperbolium
__________________________________________
I'm not familiar with any of Taylor Swift's output, so I googled up this youtube comparison of Love Story
2008 and 2021.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osLG1XnYkbQ
Immediate impression.
I only had to listen to a few seconds, the 2021 intro switching to 2008 - it was a switch from nothing-special-par-for-the-course-2021-sonic clarity to an instance groove, feel and atmosphere.
The creatively honest course of action would be to write a Love Story 2 reflecting her current "maturity".
Overly focusing on separation and clarity of instruments/vocals as most reviewers tend to do, is a red herring. In fact most reviews I've read are strong on the surrounding non-musical narrative and weak on actually listening to what's in front of them - but as Lee Abrams and others know know all to well, it's targeted narratives that sell.
antgimel
__________________________________________
Taylor has expended how much energy, lost time and needless struggle over her battles with Big Red Machine, resorting to (attempted and ultimately failed) cannibalism. A word that truly irks me but it applies.
Anyone remember the 70s? The acts would put out 3 studio LPs, tour and build a fan base - and clean up with a live LP. There was little cannibalism and instead the fans had two versions of one song, that was like 1+ 1 = 3, multiplied by the tracks put on the live LP
Because when you tired of one version, you flipped back to the other.
I don't have all night to list all the records that come to my mind but let's just say Kiss Alive and Frampton Comes Alive and Live Silver Bullet and Cheap Trick in Budokan and One More From the Road, while immensely sparking catalog sales, independently served as the amongst the respective biggest albums, fan favorites, in the repertoire.
True true true, that was when owning records was the only means of on demand and we had nothing but time, to marinate in catalogues and go back and pick up early studio albums after the live LP blew new breath on them, and nowadays another LP is pinched for space in our day, but the point is still applicable - rather than try to cleave listeners from a studio track by trying to take that track in a studio, bust out the best live version you have and run with it.
You don't do this, why? It's not about the music or the fans. Oh, my, it's your ego. You just can't let it go. Believe me - you're doing so will get across more becoming.
Dennis Pelowski
__________________________________________
She's doesn't care what we think and it's working!
She in person is one of the nicest people we've met and last minute she's asked Echosmith to be her musical surprise and it sometimes was only 2-3 hours before a stadium show and we never sent our rider yet everything on our rider was there plus a bottle of finest champagne and a hand written letter.
She's brilliant and kind and writing her own story!
We get one life so do what you want!
Jeffery David
__________________________________________
I like the new Fearless, and even better… I LOVE THAT WE ARE ALL TALKING ABOUT IT. It feels more current, more fresh, more NOW. And we are talking about it!
Lizzz Kritzer
__________________________________________
Her generation and fans respect her fight and independence to stand up to the "Rank & File".
This is bigger than the music. She is leading and does not care what the Old Farts in the industry say.
Duff Rice
__________________________________________
So interesting to hear what Philip Paul Adam Steve Colin Anders Matt Don Bob Andrew Rick Rich etc etc etc all had to say about one of the premier living female musicians!
Paula Franceschi
__________________________________________
Hi Bob - through 80 percent of this and really have no issue with it. I actually would have not pulled it up on Deezer ( yes - you should discuss the other streaming services) if you had not mentioned it. Not a bad soundtrack to Saturday night in Canada....
Thanks,
John Hayes
__________________________________________
In a 2004 interview with the New York Times, Stephen Hawking was asked what his IQ was.
He said: "I have no idea. People who boast about their IQ are losers."
Jim Carroll
__________________________________________
I'm sure you've noticed a correlation between the stupidity of the comments and the grammatical tragedies. Ok, the tempo's are the same, with all do respect.
By the way, my IQ was measured at 168 and I'm stupid as fuck.
Eric Bazilian
This is a perfect metaphor for the preposterous kerfuffle on Taylor and the sale of Big Machine's masters (yes, people, she never owned them).
As one of your oldest readers, I feel the onus of reminding your readers that the consolidation of the record business from hundreds of labels to two and a half majors means that HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of artist masters have been sold to third parties. Can any of your readers (or Taylor Swift fans) name one artist who complained that selling their CREATIVE work caused them a hysterical and public nervous breakdown?
I haven't seen one comment mention that screenwriters have to transfer ownership of their creative work in perpetuity to movie studios, including sequels, remakes, merchandising, AND the rights to all the characters in the script.
Remember that Taylor had three ways to get back her masters: 1. resigning with Big Machine, 2. buying Big Machine and 3. exercising her termination rights under copyright law.
The narrative by Taylor has been disingenuous, malicious, and at odds with industry practice since the late 1800's.
I am reminded of the schmuck with earlaps, Donald Trump, who lost the election and simply created a false narrative that it had been stolen from him.
Of course, Trump's lies are a lot more consequential than Taylor's but hers still trouble me. Hey, Tay, the underdog role doesn't fit well and, oh, by the way, your new record company is now 20% owned by a hedge fund but you haven't mentioned that.
Lance Grode
__________________________________________
Hi Bob - Long time listener, first time caller. I have enjoyed your newsletter for several years and have often resisted the urge to reply. For context - I am a 45 yr old white male who is not a long-time Taylor fan. I do however appreciate that she is extremely talented. Like many others, Folklore touched me and I thought the songwriting was deeply compelling. It was absolutely the right album at the right time for me.
The amount of negativity that your original post has generated is truly sad. Of all the terrible things in the world today, this is what we have time to rail against? Despite the massive talent of those who replied, much of the rhetoric came off as extremely tone deaf. I get this may be Marketing, but she could certainly be using influence and time in much worse ways. Maybe this is what Taylor has been fighting against all along?
Feel free to ignore. I am just a "nobody" who thinks it's disturbing how much our society continues to be threatened by a young woman with power...
Tim Hussey
__________________________________________
I just listened to the new Taylor Swift recording with my 16 year old daughter who is a big fan. I think the new versions sound great and they are not exactly the same as the originals. You can hear the confidence of a more mature artist who is much more comfortable with herself and is making these recordings with joy. I applaud her efforts to take control of her material and as an early skeptic of her music I have come to appreciate what she does and how much she has grown. That's what being an artist is, the freedom to grow, change, and express your unique vision of the world. I believe we should celebrate any artist having more control on how their music is presented.
Joe Fletcher
__________________________________________
Wow, Bob. I can not believe that all these old white guys feel authorized to express their opinions, which nobody cares about but other old white guys, about a young artist who has proved her exceptional talent again and again and has the balls go to up against Scooter and the other robber barons who expected her to give up after they gleefully fucked her over. Any man who had his music stolen by an arrogant dick at a record company would come out guns blazing—why do men disparage a female artist for trying to get hers? And what have any of these guys ever done that was even close to comparable to Taylor's achievements? Not a thing, guaranteed.
Honestly, I'm not a Taylor fan, but the comments in this column made me so mad that now I'm going to buy the rerelease.
Bonnie Hayes
__________________________________________
A few mentioned catching lightening in a bottle with the originals and it's so true. The re-recordings are done in spite and not for artistry. Imagine if Springsteen had re-recorded the first 3 LPs after settling with Mike Appel. Would never had been the same...especially on Born To Run. I believe Max Weinberg said he still can't match Ernest Boom Carter's drums on the title track. And what did El Jefe do at his RRHOF induction? He invited Appel to the soirée since he knows without Appel's guerilla management he would not be where he is now.
T-Swiz's deal seems to be about ownership and licensing with her fans a lower priority. Yeah she will says it's all about her fans but it's all about the wallet. I fear now we will have her songs shoved down our throats in commercials and films. Lastly i do hope the producers and original studio musicians get their due cut on this. They made that original so-called lightening in a bottle.
Brian Helgesen
Philly PA
__________________________________________
I've read through the many comments about TS's re-records and feel compelled to say how disappointing it is that the business of music has become more important than the music itself. It degrades us.
There's always a deal to be made and there is no "standard deal". We are in the information age. No reason exists why TS couldn't have participated in the capital liquidation of her BM master recordings and/or been granted an administrative right over their ongoing use.
This binary all or nothing, I either own or don't own my masters bullshit, belies the enormous hard work of many people whose participation matters in creation of any real success and reiterates the historical lack of vision by industry executives. This entire shit show is about juvenile egos and their continued focus which diminishes our entire industry.
-Tony Gottlieb
__________________________________________
re-interpretations are the norm in classical and jazz. Are the 'original' versions of pop songs inherently better because of a listener's emotional attachment to them?
Taylor notwithstanding, maybe an artist has something further to contribute a few years down the line. Consider Kate Bush re-recording 'Wuthering Heights'
And if you don't like it, fine. Don't listen!
sofu_gan
__________________________________________
I have no dog in this fight, but out of sheer curiosity I listened and compared. Yuk. Just yuk. The re-recordings remind me of those science fiction movies, where a human is cloned but has no soul inside them….and in just the same way as Frankenstein's monster, it's actually kind of grotesque, in terms of artistry. I understand why she's doing it, but come on.. it's totally nuts as far as the fans are concerned. The fans don't benefit, they lose, because Taylor is now about to go about recording and selling a huge body of music with no soul, because as you rightly point out Bob: 'you cannot capture lightning twice'. And now on YouTube there are lyric versions entitled 'Taylor's Version', but the real truth is that these aren't purely 'Taylor's versions'…they're actually a Xerox of 'Taylor AND Nathan's' version (her co-producer on the originals). So if this is all about 'intellectual property', I sure hope Nathan Chapman is being looked after, and receiving producer royalties, because the original 'lightning in a bottle' that was captured and made her a global and rich mega star, is actually half Nathan's. And if I were him, I would be really saddened by this, because the two of them really did capture some magic and record it. I can't respect Taylor for doing this, because the art should always come before the money… which she already has plenty of. Ok, so she's pissed off at a record company… WHO ISN'T?!?!
Simon Hosford.
__________________________________________
Might be time to issue a retraction or apologize. It doesn't even matter if she's worth 400 million. The money has nothing to do with it although it means most of the world disagrees with you. Listen to Fearless (Taylor's version) and then rethink everything you thought you knew. She was young. And raw. I'm a singer and when you can't hear yourself on stage it makes for what you heard at the grammys. But now is 31. And clearly been working on her voice since your words took hold of her. As a fan of hers I might even give you credit for changing her. But whatever you think of her voice she is a talented soprano with a low range that most sopranos do not have. And a talent for writing that even you wish you had. So no, you aren't an asshole. Mean.. maybe or just honest. 16 year old Taylor doesn't exist anymore. That Taylor is dead. This one is a woman with a voice...maybe one that deserves you giving her another listen.
Steve Brown
__________________________________________
I completely agree with Thomas Flood's statement that this is a canny business maneuver and not particularly about the art. Taylor will own new versions of her earlier works that will "compete" with the previous versions for commercial use, streams, etc. devaluing the earlier catalog. I suspect that fact was considered by Scooter and it may have motivated him to move the catalog quickly to a private equity owner. Taylor Swift is first and foremost an astute businessperson.
Bob Cavalieri
__________________________________________
It's about licensing and owning your own material.
It's good business.
Ron Stone
__________________________________________
The letters reminded me of Richard Hell's multiple efforts to revise his second album, Destiny Street. Unhappy with the original engineering (as well as his drug-impaired musical contributions), and with the masters thought to be lost, he used a cassette of the rhythm tracks and re-recorded everything else for Destiny Street Repaired. The results might not satisfy those who internalized the original, but given the market in which the album operates, it was clearly an artist revising for art's sake, rather than for cash. Many years later, three of the four multitrack master reels were found, and Hell remixed them into Destiny Street Remixed, and released the results alongside the original and the Repaired edition as Destiny Street Complete, along with added demos. The package is interestingly satisfying as an artist's aural essay of his early work and later maturity.
hyperbolium
__________________________________________
I'm not familiar with any of Taylor Swift's output, so I googled up this youtube comparison of Love Story
2008 and 2021.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osLG1XnYkbQ
Immediate impression.
I only had to listen to a few seconds, the 2021 intro switching to 2008 - it was a switch from nothing-special-par-for-the-course-2021-sonic clarity to an instance groove, feel and atmosphere.
The creatively honest course of action would be to write a Love Story 2 reflecting her current "maturity".
Overly focusing on separation and clarity of instruments/vocals as most reviewers tend to do, is a red herring. In fact most reviews I've read are strong on the surrounding non-musical narrative and weak on actually listening to what's in front of them - but as Lee Abrams and others know know all to well, it's targeted narratives that sell.
antgimel
__________________________________________
Taylor has expended how much energy, lost time and needless struggle over her battles with Big Red Machine, resorting to (attempted and ultimately failed) cannibalism. A word that truly irks me but it applies.
Anyone remember the 70s? The acts would put out 3 studio LPs, tour and build a fan base - and clean up with a live LP. There was little cannibalism and instead the fans had two versions of one song, that was like 1+ 1 = 3, multiplied by the tracks put on the live LP
Because when you tired of one version, you flipped back to the other.
I don't have all night to list all the records that come to my mind but let's just say Kiss Alive and Frampton Comes Alive and Live Silver Bullet and Cheap Trick in Budokan and One More From the Road, while immensely sparking catalog sales, independently served as the amongst the respective biggest albums, fan favorites, in the repertoire.
True true true, that was when owning records was the only means of on demand and we had nothing but time, to marinate in catalogues and go back and pick up early studio albums after the live LP blew new breath on them, and nowadays another LP is pinched for space in our day, but the point is still applicable - rather than try to cleave listeners from a studio track by trying to take that track in a studio, bust out the best live version you have and run with it.
You don't do this, why? It's not about the music or the fans. Oh, my, it's your ego. You just can't let it go. Believe me - you're doing so will get across more becoming.
Dennis Pelowski
__________________________________________
She's doesn't care what we think and it's working!
She in person is one of the nicest people we've met and last minute she's asked Echosmith to be her musical surprise and it sometimes was only 2-3 hours before a stadium show and we never sent our rider yet everything on our rider was there plus a bottle of finest champagne and a hand written letter.
She's brilliant and kind and writing her own story!
We get one life so do what you want!
Jeffery David
__________________________________________
I like the new Fearless, and even better… I LOVE THAT WE ARE ALL TALKING ABOUT IT. It feels more current, more fresh, more NOW. And we are talking about it!
Lizzz Kritzer
__________________________________________
Her generation and fans respect her fight and independence to stand up to the "Rank & File".
This is bigger than the music. She is leading and does not care what the Old Farts in the industry say.
Duff Rice
__________________________________________
So interesting to hear what Philip Paul Adam Steve Colin Anders Matt Don Bob Andrew Rick Rich etc etc etc all had to say about one of the premier living female musicians!
Paula Franceschi
__________________________________________
Hi Bob - through 80 percent of this and really have no issue with it. I actually would have not pulled it up on Deezer ( yes - you should discuss the other streaming services) if you had not mentioned it. Not a bad soundtrack to Saturday night in Canada....
Thanks,
John Hayes
__________________________________________
In a 2004 interview with the New York Times, Stephen Hawking was asked what his IQ was.
He said: "I have no idea. People who boast about their IQ are losers."
Jim Carroll
__________________________________________
I'm sure you've noticed a correlation between the stupidity of the comments and the grammatical tragedies. Ok, the tempo's are the same, with all do respect.
By the way, my IQ was measured at 168 and I'm stupid as fuck.
Eric Bazilian
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
Where Are The Record Companies?
"More than 100 corporate executives hold call to discuss halting donations and investments to fight controversial voting bills": https://wapo.st/3wRNWFw
"Will Smith's production pulls out of Georgia, citing the state's voting law.": https://nyti.ms/3wOJmYG
And Live Nation and AEG? Spotify? And even the Grammy organization?
For far too long the corporations, the entities behind the acts, have chosen to remain faceless and out of the fray, letting the acts make the moves and take the heat. But no act today has the power of a corporation, especially economically. Solidarity yields results. But the enterprise with the most mindshare, that is rooted in the Black experience, stays silent. Why?
Yes, music affects hearts and minds more than any other entertainment enterprise. It's directly from the act to the public without interference. Well, this century the heavy hand of the label is too often involved, interfering in the artistic enterprise, talking about the cost of marketing and... If it's about business, why can't these same companies look outward and aid the public at large?
Yes, a look at the chart tells you that hip-hop, a Black-originated and dominated musical format, rules. Yet, once again, the white-run companies refuse to stand up for these musicians and what they represent as they rake in the dough. They'll take their money, they just won't stand behind their causes, they won't defend them. The perspective is the acts are independent contractors. But is that really the case when the label owns the recording? Yes, the labels treat the performers like slaves on a plantation, but when push comes to shove they say the musicians don't work for them. How exactly do you explain this? And I'd say the labels should provide health care, which they should, but really the government should provide health care for all.
Oh, the right doesn't agree with that. But isn't music inherently about taking a stand? I mean Coke is inert, not music. But Coke is taking a stand, and it's based in Atlanta!
And Atlanta is an epicenter of hip-hop music.
Now Stacey Abrams is against boycotts, saying it hurts the people who live there, who it is trying to save, but every situation and every state is different, and it turns out the only thing these legislators promulgating these heinous voting laws seem to understand is economics and publicity. And the music industry spends and generates dollars, and has light years more publicity value than the corporations trying to move the needle on voting rights.
At least the music industry titans could get together and ponder this, like the "straight" companies above.
An act goes on a stadium tour, any tour, they can't play every market. How about a list of markets to go unplayed because of voter right legislation?
How about no festivals in these states? Or pulling the festivals and placing them in a new location? Come on, this is not forever, couldn't SXSW and ACL announce they're leaving Austin for a year?
And record companies could say they're not footing the bill for any studio time in these states, never mind not investing in infrastructure.
The rank and file will howl! And this gets to legislators, they're operating under the illusion that the public is behind them, when oftentimes it is not.
Spotify, where the rubber meets the road, the retail point, could have a promo/info splash on their home page EVERY DAY! It doesn't have to be music free. Maybe it can be passed from the three major labels to the indies on a rotating basis, but the content has to address the anti-voter legislation. The wheels of the Fortune 500 move slowly, as does the impact, whereas music can turn on a dime and start impacting people next week! Also, this will demonstrate the power and economic impact of music, delivering the respect it never gets.
Let's start with ads in every major newspaper, at least the ones that still exist and have an audience. Wherein not only the companies but also the stars who agree put their names down in ink, stating their position. And TV too.
Then conversation about pulling live gigs. This will get more coverage than anything Coca-Cola does. And time is of the essence, this isn't forever.
Sure, people knew who Tommy Mottola was, but that was the nineties, today's execs are happily faceless, and that is good, but they're also hiding behind their titles as they make millions, and when we're fighting for the soul of our country that is unconscionable.
And music when done right has an edge, so no bland publicity. And if music has an edge, why can't the political position?
And if someone comes around to our viewpoint, that we want to make it easier to vote, not harder, WE MUST EMBRACE THEM! This is what is wrong with the Morgan Wallen situation, cancel culture, if someone realizes the error of their ways we should not ostracize them forever, we must include them and then use them as poster people for our position. Come on, if we told Morgan Wallen we'd reinstate all his canceled gigs, his position on radio playlists, he'd do ANYTHING! Even if we promised nothing he'd do anything. But no, he must pay forever as the music industry sits self-satisfied accomplishing little.
It is time. And it must be led by the corporations, not the individuals. Individuals have less power than ever before, especially in a music world where the goal is to sell out to a brand. If the goal is to get involved with the corporation, why not put the corporation first? And the corporations the acts want to attach themselves to first are record labels and touring enterprises... Not to mention agencies, the multi-headed behemoths WME, CAA and UTA are not just talent brokers anymore, they've taken private equity money, they can have impact too. No UFC in states impinging on voting rights...you get the picture.
It's your responsibility, not someone else's. How about being on the right side of history, doing what is right for both your business and your country. Come on, music has the best spokespeople in the world, how about pulling them into the conversation as opposed to lying steadfast in the weeds?
This is very doable, very quickly. With impact.
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
"Will Smith's production pulls out of Georgia, citing the state's voting law.": https://nyti.ms/3wOJmYG
And Live Nation and AEG? Spotify? And even the Grammy organization?
For far too long the corporations, the entities behind the acts, have chosen to remain faceless and out of the fray, letting the acts make the moves and take the heat. But no act today has the power of a corporation, especially economically. Solidarity yields results. But the enterprise with the most mindshare, that is rooted in the Black experience, stays silent. Why?
Yes, music affects hearts and minds more than any other entertainment enterprise. It's directly from the act to the public without interference. Well, this century the heavy hand of the label is too often involved, interfering in the artistic enterprise, talking about the cost of marketing and... If it's about business, why can't these same companies look outward and aid the public at large?
Yes, a look at the chart tells you that hip-hop, a Black-originated and dominated musical format, rules. Yet, once again, the white-run companies refuse to stand up for these musicians and what they represent as they rake in the dough. They'll take their money, they just won't stand behind their causes, they won't defend them. The perspective is the acts are independent contractors. But is that really the case when the label owns the recording? Yes, the labels treat the performers like slaves on a plantation, but when push comes to shove they say the musicians don't work for them. How exactly do you explain this? And I'd say the labels should provide health care, which they should, but really the government should provide health care for all.
Oh, the right doesn't agree with that. But isn't music inherently about taking a stand? I mean Coke is inert, not music. But Coke is taking a stand, and it's based in Atlanta!
And Atlanta is an epicenter of hip-hop music.
Now Stacey Abrams is against boycotts, saying it hurts the people who live there, who it is trying to save, but every situation and every state is different, and it turns out the only thing these legislators promulgating these heinous voting laws seem to understand is economics and publicity. And the music industry spends and generates dollars, and has light years more publicity value than the corporations trying to move the needle on voting rights.
At least the music industry titans could get together and ponder this, like the "straight" companies above.
An act goes on a stadium tour, any tour, they can't play every market. How about a list of markets to go unplayed because of voter right legislation?
How about no festivals in these states? Or pulling the festivals and placing them in a new location? Come on, this is not forever, couldn't SXSW and ACL announce they're leaving Austin for a year?
And record companies could say they're not footing the bill for any studio time in these states, never mind not investing in infrastructure.
The rank and file will howl! And this gets to legislators, they're operating under the illusion that the public is behind them, when oftentimes it is not.
Spotify, where the rubber meets the road, the retail point, could have a promo/info splash on their home page EVERY DAY! It doesn't have to be music free. Maybe it can be passed from the three major labels to the indies on a rotating basis, but the content has to address the anti-voter legislation. The wheels of the Fortune 500 move slowly, as does the impact, whereas music can turn on a dime and start impacting people next week! Also, this will demonstrate the power and economic impact of music, delivering the respect it never gets.
Let's start with ads in every major newspaper, at least the ones that still exist and have an audience. Wherein not only the companies but also the stars who agree put their names down in ink, stating their position. And TV too.
Then conversation about pulling live gigs. This will get more coverage than anything Coca-Cola does. And time is of the essence, this isn't forever.
Sure, people knew who Tommy Mottola was, but that was the nineties, today's execs are happily faceless, and that is good, but they're also hiding behind their titles as they make millions, and when we're fighting for the soul of our country that is unconscionable.
And music when done right has an edge, so no bland publicity. And if music has an edge, why can't the political position?
And if someone comes around to our viewpoint, that we want to make it easier to vote, not harder, WE MUST EMBRACE THEM! This is what is wrong with the Morgan Wallen situation, cancel culture, if someone realizes the error of their ways we should not ostracize them forever, we must include them and then use them as poster people for our position. Come on, if we told Morgan Wallen we'd reinstate all his canceled gigs, his position on radio playlists, he'd do ANYTHING! Even if we promised nothing he'd do anything. But no, he must pay forever as the music industry sits self-satisfied accomplishing little.
It is time. And it must be led by the corporations, not the individuals. Individuals have less power than ever before, especially in a music world where the goal is to sell out to a brand. If the goal is to get involved with the corporation, why not put the corporation first? And the corporations the acts want to attach themselves to first are record labels and touring enterprises... Not to mention agencies, the multi-headed behemoths WME, CAA and UTA are not just talent brokers anymore, they've taken private equity money, they can have impact too. No UFC in states impinging on voting rights...you get the picture.
It's your responsibility, not someone else's. How about being on the right side of history, doing what is right for both your business and your country. Come on, music has the best spokespeople in the world, how about pulling them into the conversation as opposed to lying steadfast in the weeds?
This is very doable, very quickly. With impact.
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)