Music for Nothing and the Fans for Free

Consumers won’t pay for recorded music in the future — but fans will pay for music experiences.

When the dust finally settles between the artists, labels, and distribution companies, everyone will finally realize fans are more valuable than recorded music. As traditional monetization models for recorded music sales slowly fade away, new monetization methods centered on the fan will emerge.

How do we know music will become free? The stats point to this trajectory. Total revenues for CDs, vinyl, cassettes, and digital downloads worldwide dropped 25 percent from $38.6 billion in 1999 to $27.5 billion in 2008, according to the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI). The same revenues in the U.S. dropped from a high of $14.6 billion in 1999 to $10.4 billion in 2008.

As the stats show, sales of recorded music are headed one way — down. Sure, digital music sales have been on the rise in recent years, but they have only partially replaced physical sales, so the overall sales figures are still headed south. And it surely isn’t because people are listening to less music. It’s simply because the old adage holds true: why pay for something that you can get for free? In addition, artists, the ones with the talent, aren’t making money off digital sales. Artists get about $0.09 per song sold digitally on iTunes or Amazon. So for a million downloaded hits, an artist earns $90K. Subtract manager, lawyer, agent and other “fees”, and an artist selling one million downloads would barely make minimum wage off of the recording.


Source: CNN, Forrester

Already, there is a deluge of great (and legal!) sites providing free music — including Pandora, YouTube, Spotify, Grooveshark, MOG, Rdio, and other online destinations. This is a big change from the early days of online music, when free meant illegal. Today, music start-ups have caught on to the profit potential in “giving it away.” Companies like Pandora, which generated $67M of revenue in 2011 Q2, and Spotify with over two million paying users, don’t charge for entry-level service. Instead, these music innovators found a way to monetize music indirectly through advertising and other means. Music still comes at great cost — start-ups still pay high licensing fees to labels — but as the economics shift, licensing fees are likely to decline. (Yes, labels will do a lot of kicking and screaming.)

So how will labels offset the decline in recorded music revenue? How will artists capture more value for their creative work? The clear answer is from their fans. Musicians have really never engaged their fans, maybe every three years while they were on tour, but otherwise they just released albums and expected fans to buy them. Myspace was the first experiment with direct musician-fan engagement, and it started a trend that has continued. Now, over 300,000 musicians have BandPages on Facebook. Just about every musician has a Web site, e-commerce site, and a web strategy. Many are putting their music “out there” for discovery and promotion before it’s ever part of an album. Soundcloud has seven million users who upload their music and recordings, for example. YouTube’s most popular videos are music-related. Bands, managers, and labels understand this trend and are finding new and innovative means to monetize fans.

We anticipate a lot of “creative destruction” and changes to the value model based on fan-driven music marketing models. There are ways to make money from the music experience, and those channels — new and old, low- and high-tech — are creating opportunities for artists, labels, and music start-ups.

Here are some of the ways the music industry will make money going forward.

  • Live Music
    While recorded music sales continue to decline, live music revenue has increased in the past few years. The industry has been following this trend closely and focusing more and more on live tours and events. There really isn’t a way to replicate or pirate the live experience. As cellist Zoe Keating joked about piracy at the recent SFMusicTech conference: “Go ahead, try copying me! Just try!”

  • Source: CNN, Forrester as above

  • Patronage
    In the Elizabethan era, artists were supported by wealthy patrons; we’re headed back toward that world. Two models are possible here, and will probably coexist as supplements to the live music monetization. The first is corporate sponsorship, which is already used widely. Take the OK GO music video “This Too Shall Pass,” in which the band discreetly thanks State Farm for making it possible, or the somewhat distasteful product placements ($500K worth) in Britney Spears’s “Hold it Against Me” video. The Black Eyed Peas have become so intertwined with brands that The Wall Street Journal dubbed them the “Most Corporate Band.”

    The other sponsorship model is direct fundraising from fans – also known as crowdsourcing. In 2007, Radiohead released its album “In Rainbows” for free, asking fans to pay as much or little as they pleased. And more recently, Nataly Dawn from Pomplamoose used a Kickstarter campaign to fund her forthcoming solo album. She set out to raise $20,000 but fans overfunded her project by $104,788. This may not seem like a huge sum, but crowdsourcing will make all the difference for indie artists worrying how to pay their rent.

  • Curation, Discovery and Network effect
    MP3 players were around for years before the iPod took them from the technophiles to the masses. Likewise, music services spread when they are easy to use and approachable. Pandora has managed to attract tens of millions of users to its radio service because of the KISS principal (keep it simple, stupid). While this sounds easy, it took them years to develop the music genome and “taste” algorithms that analyze billions of thumbs up/down votes to offer effortless music curation.

    Upstart Spotify made access and friends the top priority for its music service, and has unseated Rhapsody as the top dog in on-demand listening. Others like Turntable let listeners do the heavy lifting — letting anyone be a DJ and mix tracks via a competitive, social, cartoony environment. And still others, such as the Hype Machine, rely on the old-school expertise of hardcore music junkies, letting bloggers curate their own selections. The ad-supported model is all about building audiences, and it’s an ongoing cat-and-mouse game where new methods continue to emerge.

  • Whales
    One dirty little secret in the free-to-play online gaming world is that “whales” — to use a Las Vegas term for big spenders — often account for a significant portion of the revenue. In many examples in the free-to-play world, the top 10 percent often contribute 50 percent or more of the revenue for virtual goods, game play, tokens, premium versions and more. In one recent example, one happy gamer spent more than $76K on a single social game buying the accessories he needed to build his fortress. Would “whale” fans of Arcade Fire spend tens of thousands of dollars to sit in on a studio recording session? Yes, and I’m offering!

    And beneath the mega-whales, there is a larger base of dedicated fans willing to pay to be a part of the experience, even if they don’t have thousands to spend. “Baby whales” mostly tend to buy merchandise: T-shirts, caps, branded toys, etc. These baby whales are still a small share of any overall fan base, but collectively, an extra $50 each from a small percentage of fans can really add up.

  • Unique Experiences
    People love to engage with unique experiences — things you just can’t replicate — and will often pay top dollar for them. Concerts are one kind of unique music experience, but there are others. Nataly Dawn’s Kickstarter campaign offered big donors rewards, like their choice of a song for her to cover, early prerelease access to her album, and even a private in-house concert. In addition, there are now countless apps that let you be a part of the music, from the T-Pain auto tune app to ShapeMix’s tool that lets you remix songs yourself with isolated melody/bass/drums/vocal stems and post those to your friends. While, selling these extra experiences may not be a major monetization method, such methods do allow indie artists to generate income, and top artists to experiment with new avenues to engage and grow their fan bases.
  • The Bottom Line
    Music is getting closer and closer to free. Distribution is becoming commoditized, so monetization must change. To this end, artists will have to pull out the stops to engage with fans more directly, and actively seek out fans and benefactors willing to pay more than usual for their work. The music startups that will make money over the long term are those that will connect artists with fans, help people filter and discover new music they love, and offer unique experiences. People will never stop listening to music — they’ll just change how they find it, hear it, and pay for it.

Hany Nada is a founding partner of GGV Capital (www.ggvc.com), a $1B venture capital firm with a dual focus on China and the U.S. Some of GGV’s investments include Alibaba Group, Pandora Media, YY, RootMusic, Buddy Media, Tudou, SuccessFactors, Square, and 21ViaNet.


comments so far. Add yours.

  • Anonymous

    Interesting take on this. Some time back, Planet Money on NPR did a program on a particular code monkey who began writing satirical songs about software writers, put it up for download after self-promotion on some tech blogs, and now makes a handsome living writing, producing and posting his songs for download on his website. I am pretty sure if any number of alternative and hip hop bands did the same, they could sell their wares without a cut to Apple, a record company, or anyone other than the web host and coder. If someone took the time to create a web based portal for new talent to offer samples, that might well be enough to get this ball rolling and allow performers to crawl out from under everyone trying to get a piece of them.

  • Anonymous

    A couple of more points to make on the decline of song sales. One is that people won’t pay for crap. When industry (not artist) still had a stranglehold on it all, when there was no talent they’d market an “artist” based on 1 hit and 9 other flops on the CD. And, since industry already lied about CD costs eventually declining over time for the fans, the cost of the average CD was $15. Take into account that industry colluded to eliminate LPs, phase out cassettes, and eliminate the “single”, they were forcing consumers to drop $15 for that CD with ONE decent song. Instant multimillionaires were made in industry off the backs of the fans and artists. So when we read the artist gets 9 cents per sale of the dollar on iTunes, it can tend to continue to breed that loathing. We’d rather go pay to see the artists live, where industry gets the short straw. And about not paying for crap, try to name 10 “worthy acts” that came out in the last decade.m do the same exercise with any prior decade. See the difference? Industry: you’re not selling CDs anymore because you don’t know what musical talent is anymore.

  • Crosbie Fitch

    Fans WILL pay for recorded music. What they won’t pay for is copies of it – or rather, they’ll either make their own copies or they’ll buy copies at cost (cost of the copy, not the recording).

    If a thousand fans will pay a musician to perform in a concert hall, there’s no reason why they won’t pay them to perform in a recording studio. You just have to give up on the idea of selling copies, and focus instead on selling tickets to the recording  (which, no, doesn’t have to be attended).

  • Oliver Stahl

    That’s an interesting take on the future of commercial music.
    One thing that is really sad about the concept is that (in my opinion) the majority of recent musicians are either horrible performers or plainly can’t sing.
    Think of all the electro genre, the Britney Spears, even top seller Jay-Z sounds nothing like in his recordings.
    This experience has in fact led to me going to even less shows in the last years.

    Artists will have to improve on that OR EVEN BETTER – let this be a cleansing process in which all those so called artists who don’t deserve that name get flushed out of the business.

  • http://www.getbehindmesanta.com Jon from Get Behind Me Santa

    i love your movies 

  • Anonymous

    Very interesting article.  One point of correction though – MySpace (2003) was surely not the first direct to fan model.  Remember MP3.com (IPO 1999)?  Much of the reason Vivendi Universal acquired them was their ability to distribute content, implement marketing tools/direct to fans and analytics.  MySpace also did that.  

    I find the Kickstarter model somewhat interesting and your classification of “whales”.  Thanks for that!

    This plays right into …. you need to be really good at your craft and work your but off.  I can go to Sears and buy Craftsman tools but that doesn’t make me a mechanic or entitled to enjoy the lifestyle of a mechanic.  AND just because you can go to Guitar Center, buy Logic or ProTools, buy some gear and a computer and then post them on Root Music, doesn’t mean you can or should be entitled to a life a professional musician.  

    Work hard, play hard and consistently, build fans and if, and only if the stars are in alignment, you might get lucky :)  It’s a worthwhile pursuit for many, but not the faint-harted.

  • Phil Hood

    All true. I’d like to point out that OK Go is a terrible band, and the Black Eyed Peas even worse. The upside of this is that fans and artists know each other more. The downside of this new model is that artists have to be jacks-of-all-trades and they’ll make less money overall. I’ve known a lot of great musicians personally. They got that way by sitting in their room alone working on their art, practicing scales, and generally sacrificing their life to music. They didn’t have time to tweet, build web pages, and pretend they liked their music used for a bank commercial. The really great artists are not like OKGo. They don’t do focus groups. I don’t expect a Dylan, a Billie Joe, a Joni MItchell, or Chuck D to put out this awful corporate focus-group music.

  • Anonymous

    There’s nothing wrong with this mind-set as long as an artist isn’t interested in making music for a living. If they want to make a living from the business however, they have to play the game…and yes this means tweeting, having a website, etc. Call it selling out or whatever but the music industry is a business. They have to make time to do the things you mention above and more if they’re going to make it…that’s just the way things are.

  • http://tomdavenport.co.uk PlayMusic

    Really poor observations – if you deduce from that graph that recorded music income will drop to free, you need to go back to school. And how on earth did you miss music publishing opportunities? This is a major source of income for musicians talented and flexible enough to look beyond a low-income genre, but instead you suggest bands will be happy for fans to pay and sit in on a recording session. If you’ve ever been on a long studio project, you’d know this is a ridiculous idea.

  • http://twitter.com/JohnMichaelHowa John Michael Howard

    This article seems slightly pretentious, biased, and somewhat skewed Mr. Venture capitalist investor in Pandora Media. I personally went for years without buying a CD (pre-napster) and have never spent more money on recorded music as I have since I started using iTunes. There are a lot of music lovers who simply use these free services to find new music that they like.  And the artists who only get 10 or 11 Cents per download (not 9, Not to mention that many downloads are now $1.29) are only artists on major labels and they tend to sell a lot more copies than indie artists which makes a big difference. You may sell 80,000 copies at 10cents each or  5,000 copies at 55cents each. Not vouching for major labels but they do open up connections and exposure and endorsement deals that otherwise may never be attained.  

    The whole tone of this article sounds like a white paper, sales pitch for Pandora and similar services. This is at best a self serving, cherry picking, SEO opinion piece being passed off as a prophetic foretelling of the future of music.  Its really a bit much. 

    And furthermore, you left out one important control, certain economic conditions that have been created over the past 10 years since 2001 in the U. S. not to mention our current global recession over the past 4 years. I would say these figures are slightly off and would be a lot different in better economic times. 

    You are also forgetting that even when consumers/fans (or advertisers) are paying for services such as Spotify they are still paying to listen or broadcast music that was at some point, previously RECORDED. And if they are anything like me, the quality of the recording matters. Bottom line is that most Consumers will pay for the best quality of recorded music that their expendable income will allow for.

  • http://twitter.com/BigJoeBurke Big Joe Burke

    Interesting, but suggesting that musicians are making money from live performances is presumptuous at best. Most venues will no longer offer a guarantee of any kind, more and more municipalities are creating untenable regulations prohibiting new venues from opening and making it harder for existing ones to stay open. Crowds at live performances are lower at this point than I can remember in over 25 years and many establishments are relying on big screen TVs, not live performance to put bodies in the seats.

    And let’s not forget the costs of touring. Gas is at an all time high and not going down anytime soon. Border crossings are no longer guaranteed and bands can’t rely on sales of CDs anymore because no one buys them. (see article)There may indeed be ways to generate the kind of revenue required to keep producing new music, but without a solid day job (or very low standards) making a living as a musician has become almost an impossible dream on any scale. 

    In the end, I don’t believe it’s music piracy that is making it difficult for the average working musician, it’s the fact that even a great band can be lost in the never-ending sea of online availability. You are either one of the major acts with hundreds of thousands of dollars in marketing behind you or one of the hundreds of thousands of independents struggling just to be heard above the din.

    The more things change the more they stay the same.

  • jonathan segel

    exactly. I responded to this very article from the past, it seems:
    http://digitalaudioinsider.blo.....amper.html

  • http://twitter.com/DaveAtFight Dave Allen

    What a horrible, ill-informed, self-serving article.

  • http://casio-cdp100.com casio cdp 100

    Agree 100% 

    the record labels along with the artists need to put the fans first instead of treating them like groveling peseants.  If you give value then I believe that you will get value in return.  

    The industry as you said will definetly change AGAIN.

    It has no choice but to change because of the influence of how people get music and the internet.

Must-Reads from other Web sites

Camille Dodero

“Gary Jones” Wants Your Nudes

Jenna Wortham

Are We Addicted to Facebook? It’s Complicated.

Brad Stone and Douglas MacMillan

How Mark Zuckerberg Hacked the Valley

Dominique Browning

Why Cell Phones Are Bad for Parenting

Alex Ben Block

Why Kids’ TV Is Scrambling to Stay Afloat

About Voices

Along with original content and posts from across the Dow Jones network, this section of AllThingsD includes Must-Reads From Other Web Sites — pieces we’ve read, discussions we’ve followed, stuff we like. Six posts from external sites are included here each weekday, but we only run the headlines. We link to the original sites for the rest. These posts are explicitly labeled, so it’s clear that the content comes from other Web sites, and for clarity’s sake, all outside posts run against a pink background.

We also solicit original full-length posts and accept some unsolicited submissions.

Voices is edited by Beth Callaghan.

Latest Video

View all videos »

Search »