jcharrington.tumblr

music, startups, design and other random stuff

Posts tagged thoughts

Notes &

How to Pick a Great Co-Founder

Awesome post on picking a co-founder by Vin Vicanti, one of the two founders of Yipit.  Not having a true co-founder was my biggest mistake with TenthRow.  I really should have found two - a technical co-founder and a music industry person who was more familiar with working with bands, labels, etc.  Never again will I start a company without at least one co-founder (mark my words…).

Filed under thoughts startups

0 notes &

Survey: Music Streaming Decreases Filesharing, Increases Music Discovery

This is why subscription streaming services make A TON of sense.  This has been my experience exactly, except for the fact that I now buy less music instead of stealing less music (I haven’t used filed-sharing services since college).  

But do you think there are more people out there who steal music or more people who buy music?

No brainer.  More people steal by far.  This is why subscription streaming services could be a big deal for the music industry (if they fully embrace the model).  They may sell less music (in the form of downloads), but they’ll also convert users of file-sharing networks (who aren’t paying for music today) to paying customers.  My hunch is that they’ll make more money net-net.  The gross revenue will never come close to what they were making when CDs were the standard, but that’s okay - it’s a lot cheaper to deliver digital so profits can still be made.

Here are my other posts on this topic:

Filed under music industry thoughts

Notes &

Why I love running

  1. If you just keep running, you’ll get there eventually.
  2. The faster you run, the sooner you’ll get there (and the pain will be over).

With the embedded assumptions that you need to (a) stay focused and heading towards your destination and (b) pace yourself to some degree.

Filed under thoughts

0 notes &

Michael Robertson: Surveying Crowded Music Subscription Sector

Great survey of the subscription music sector and some key insights as to how Apple is uniquely positioned to offer a differentiated service.  Specifically, the ability to integrate the service with a user’s personal collection of music, which is something that I would personally put a lot of value on (because no music service is ever going to have all the music that I have on my computer).

Filed under music industry thoughts stuff worth reading

Notes &

On the importance of not reacting too quickly to new information

This post from Seth Godin really resonated with me today:

It’s (always) too soon to know for sure

The big takeaway for me was the danger in reacting too quickly to a new piece of news, especially when the news isn’t very reliable.  The example that comes to mind for me was the announcement of a new competitor coming to market with a very similar product / service.  In short, this company was really good at marketing but not very good at delivering a product.  Not only were they about 6 months late in launching their website, but they launched with something that was horribly disappointing vs. what they had suggested they were going to launch with (in my estimation, but I think most people would agree with me).

But when these guys first started talking about what they were doing, I freaked out.  I thought we were cooked.  And there was nothing helpful about this.  It not only hurt my confidence, but my team’s.  Luckily for me, one of my colleagues was able to calm me down - he reminded me that talk is cheap and that we had no idea how good their product was going to be until they launched it.  Thanks to that person, I remembered that we couldn’t worry about them, all we could do is worry about ourselves.

At the end of the day, I got over it, and it had only a minor impact on the direction of the company (it just suggested to me that our site should look a little more exciting, which I think was a good change for us - I had been a little too focused on black & white before then).  But it taught me a very important lesson that Seth talks about in his post above - don’t react too quickly to new news.  It tends to be unreliable, and making decisions based on early / unreliable information (which often tends to be wrong), is a great way to destroy your business, project, etc.  Always be aware of and informed of what’s going on in your space, but don’t make big decisions too quickly.  On the other hand, as Seth points out, you have to be careful not to move too slowly either.  So be patient but not too patient, and always make sure that the information you’re acting on is fairly reliable.  The cost of waiting a day or a week to allow yourself to be better informed is never as big as it initially appears to be.

But Seth makes the point much better than I do.  Well worth reading his whole post.

Filed under thoughts stuff worth reading

Notes &

Pandora: Not Long Tail. But Very Long on Subscribers...

I think Pandora’s filtering strategy is very smart and is an important part of its success.  Given how much choice there is out there, music fans, especially casual ones, need someone to tell them which bands are the good ones (and there are A LOT of them, but there are also a lot of bands that aren’t as good).

Pandora’s strategy is just one approach.  Another is to give users access to a greater variety of bands and then let their friends and the service’s community provide the filters.  This is what rdio does, and it’s very effective as well.  After all, most people still rely on their friends for music discovery.

The point is, given how much noise is out there to today, people need filters.  And Pandora has provided this in a very smart / cost-efficient (for them) way. 

Filed under thoughts music industry

Notes &

Subscription streaming services as the future of the music industry

Great article by The Telegraph from the other day:

Record labels should make MP3s free, and freely shareable

I strongly agree with a lot of the points this article makes, but I don’t totally agree with the article’s main point - that giving away music for free is the answer.  Yes, record labels should stop suing their customers, that’s a given, and giving away some music for free is good business, but I think subscription streaming services are the answer that the industry has been looking for all these years.  

Record labels should be licensing ALL of the music in their catalogues to these services.  Like today.  Now.  Yesterday.  It’s not that this will instantly eradicate file sharing networks (those are never going away), but I think subscription services will get a lot of people to start spending money on music again, and some money is better than no money.  As the Telegraph says:

Piracy cannot be eradicated. It doesn’t matter if every BitTorrent tracker is shut down, every server hosting every torrent directory seized. Determined pirates will just switch to a new type of technology – such as streaming via sites like RapidShare – and the mainstream will eventually follow. (It’s already happening in France, where streaming is the new file-sharing.)

You can’t stop the activity of free file sharing itself so there’s no point in suing people to try to discourage that behavior.  Instead, you need to give people a better option - a “free” file sharing product that’s drastically more convenient that consumers are actually willing to pay for.  

In my view, giving music away for free is only part of the answer.  It’s not that the music itself is worthless as that implies.  What really needs to happen is for the price of music to be adjusted, and that’s exactly what subscription streaming services do (since you’re paying what you used to pay for a single album - about $10 - for monthly all you can eat access).  The Telegraph acknowledges this, but I think the point deserves greater emphasis.

I personally believe that subscription services are the future now that technology has advanced to such a point as to make these services very user-friendly and convenient (the iPhone, iOS4, Android, apps that play in the background, and downloads for offline listening).  Using rdio for the last month has convinced me of this, and the popularity of Spotify overseas further supports this idea.  Subscription services are just a lot more convenient than file sharing networks in a lot of ways.  And the good ones, like rdio, have discovery and social features that make them very engaging, which gets even casual music fans listening to more music (and a greater variety of music).  So people will pay for these services because they’re more convenient than file sharing networks, and some revenue is better than zero revenue for record labels.  Also, if these services don’t have to worry as much about licensing, they’ll be free to innovate and make their services even more engaging over time, further discouraging the use of file sharing networks.

I don’t think it’s wrong to ask people to pay for the music itself - the music itself has tremendous value - it’s just that the pricing is currently way too high.  Subscription services offer a way to adjust the price of music to be more inline with market forces, to turn previously chunky expenditures on music into recurring revenue streams, and to get people engaged with artists so they’ll spend their music dollars on other products (such as vinyl, DVDs / videos, merch, and concert tickets).

I’m not saying that record labels shouldn’t also give away a lot of music for free.  They totally should - bands should tweet free MP3 downloads to get people to come to their websites, record labels should put out free music samplers, etc.  But they should also make all this music available on subscription services - like as soon as the record’s released.  People consume music in a lot of different ways (and this isn’t going to change anytime soon) so the music should be in as many places as possible so it’s being discovered by more people.  Record labels should be licensing their music to just about every subscription service there is, or at least the good ones, like rdio, MOGSpotifyGoogle Music when it launches, and whatever Apple’s been working on since it acquired Lala.  Now that the industry has established price points that everyone more or less agrees on ($5 / month for all you can eat browser-based streaming, and $10 / month for mobile access), I think we’re going to see subscription services start to take off.

In fact, in my experience, subscription services almost feel free.  If you’re used to buying multiple $8-10 albums in a given month, than $10 a month is nothing - you’re saving a ton of money by subscribing (I already have).  And even if you don’t spend a lot of money on music, the $10 gets charged to your credit card each month automatically so you don’t even think about it.  $10 is nothing in the context of your monthly spending - that’s like two drinks at the bar on Thursday (if you’re lucky / don’t live in New York).

So there’s just no point in fighting it anymore.  It’s going to happen.  Not quickly, but over time.  The point is, record labels and bands should be both giving away their music for free (for promotional purposes) AND licensing it to subscription services (where they’ll get paid something).  Together, these two strategies will go a long way towards reducing “illegal” file sharing and allow record labels to once again benefit from pure music consumption, either promotionally or monetarily.

Filed under thoughts music industry

Notes &

Interesting online video monetization approach: bait and switch

Here’s an interesting monetization approach from Karsha Flash Player.  Here’s how it works, according to TechCrunch:

Instead of forcing the viewer to commit to paying up front for content that they may not yet consider worth their cash, Karsa allows for it to be viewable for free for a set amount of time, after which the video pauses and the user is prompted for payment. Once paid-for, playback of the video can be resumed.

This makes a lot of sense to me - let the viewer sample the first 10-50% of a video to decide if it’s worth watching, and then ask them to pay for it.  It totally de-risks the experience for the user, which is fantastic.  You should be able to tell if you’re into something if you’re allowed to watch a decent portion of it, and if it’s worth watching, I’m guessing you’d be willing to pay something for it.  Seems to me like there are few keys to making this work:

  1. Clearly communicate to the user that they’re going to be asked to pay to watch the full video, but that they can watch the first 10%-50% for free to decide if it’s worth paying for.  ”Bait and switch” isn’t really the right term for it - you’re not telling the user it’s free and then saying “just kidding, you actually have to pay to watch the rest of it”.  Make sure users understand what they’re getting into - I think most users will appreciate getting the opportunity to try out a video before they buy it.
  2. Get people hooked during that first 10-50%.  It’s got to be good / entertaining content, and you have to leave people with a cliffhanger of sorts.  Make them almost desperate to find out what happens next.  I think I read this in Made To Stick, but people just like to know “how it’s going to end”.  Use this.
  3. But then deliver.  The last 90-50% needs to be worth the money they paid.  If you front-loaded all the good stuff and the last half is boring / not as good, you’re going to lose the viewers’ trust, and then they’re pretty unlikely to come back and give you another chance.  As the authors of Inbound Marketing emphasize, the content must be remarkable.
  4. Make it really easy to pay for it.  If the payment process itself is a big pain, you’re going to lose people. Looks like Karsa Player is using PayPal for transaction processing, which is probably fine, but not ideal - PayPal tends to be fairly slow and tedious in my experience (and I know it well because we use it for TenthRow).  Maybe Amazon PayPhrase would be a better option, especially if third party sites can utilize 1 click purchasing (not sure if they can).

It’ll be interesting to see how this works, but I think it would make a ton of sense for other pay-per-view (vs. subscription) video on demand services (such as Amazon Video On Demand, iTunes, or even cable companies) to offer this.  Right now, most of these services offer a trailer to entice people to pony up $4-5 dollars for a movie.  Allowing users to watch the first 10-20 minutes for free could be an even more effective conversion strategy - get them hooked on the story, getting to know the characters, and make them really want to find out how it ends.  Not that this should be the only option - some people know what they want to watch and are happy to pay for it upfront (so they’re viewing experience isn’t interrupted).  But for people who are on the fence, this could be a great way to get more people to convert.  Based on my experience, most movies are naturally set up this way…just about every scene entices you to want to watch the next one, which is why it’s so hard to stop watching a movie once you’ve started.  Pay-per-view VOD services should be using this!

Filed under thoughts new media

Notes &

Don't let being CEO get in your way of working on the product

Another great post from Sachin Agarwal.  I strongly agree with this and feel like it’s one of the big mistakes I made with TenthRow.  I put too much distance between myself and the product (our website), which is the thing I enjoyed the most about TenthRow.  I was too busy filming and editing videos and dealing with bands and labels, which was important stuff to be doing, but it left very little time for me to work on the product itself.  I should have gotten another 1-2 people involved to handle or help me handle the video production, sales, and legal stuff. 

Now that I’m close to the product again (designing, writing HTML & CSS, and product managing), I’m much happier than I used to be.  And I think the product is benefitting from it as well.

Filed under stuff worth reading startups thoughts