Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Sunday November 30 2014, @02:12AM   Printer-friendly
from the getting-by-while-getting-started dept.

medium.com has an article from musician Jack Conte on the economics of a recent tour with the band Pomplamoose.

Being in an indie band is running a never-ending, rewarding, scary, low-margin small business. In order to plan and execute our Fall tour, we had to prepare for months, slowly gathering risk and debt before selling a single ticket. We had to rent lights. And book hotel rooms. And rent a van. And assemble a crew. And buy road cases for our instruments. And rent a trailer. And….

Pomplamoose is a musical duo, featuring Jack Conte and Nataly Dawn, who primarily distribute their music online, and the article covers the recent 28 day tour and highlights the new economics of the emerging music business away from the traditional major labels, and although the band actually lost money overall on the tour (despite the success of the shows) they view this as the cost of investment in building a fanbase for future tours, and the current model they have of making music as viable.

The point of publishing all the scary stats is not to dissuade people from being professional musicians. It’s simply an attempt to shine light on a new paradigm for professional artistry.

We’re entering a new era in history: the space between “starving artist” and “rich and famous” is beginning to collapse. YouTube has signed up over a million partners (people who agree to run ads over their videos to make money from their content). The “creative class” is no longer emerging: it’s here, now.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by frojack on Sunday November 30 2014, @04:17AM

    by frojack (1554) on Sunday November 30 2014, @04:17AM (#121204) Journal

    although the band actually lost money overall on the tour...

    Wait, aren't we constantly being told by the anti-copyright crowd that performance and patronage is the only way a musician is entitled to earn a living?

    According to wikipedia, These people have been giving it away on youtube for years, they sold approximately 100,000 songs online in 2009 on line, which means about 66 cents per song best possible case, 8 cents if a label was involved.

    Performance is no longer a viable route to an income unless you happen to be incredibly lucky.

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by davester666 on Sunday November 30 2014, @06:07AM

      by davester666 (155) on Sunday November 30 2014, @06:07AM (#121213)

      Welcome to capitalism. Most small businesses fail in the first year. Why should bands be exempt from this fun?

      And musicians, like everybody else not born to wealth, are not "entitled" to earn a living.

      • (Score: 3, Informative) by pnkwarhall on Sunday November 30 2014, @04:42PM

        by pnkwarhall (4558) on Sunday November 30 2014, @04:42PM (#121293)

        welcome to capitalism.

        And musicians, like everybody else not born to wealth, are not "entitled" to earn a living.

        Because of the efforts of Jack Conte and Nataly Dawn, 6 individuals (4 musicians, tour manager, sound guy'r'gal) earned an average of $8000 each (48K in salaries/per diem), for a month's work and a tour credit, which amounts to a tidy profit.

        The business lost money in the short-term campaign, the employees were paid well, and the brand Pomplamoose gained value and residuals, and became a more experienced investment. (Do those terms work for you? :) That sounds like a capitalistic venture to me. In fact from any type of longlived perspective, the tour sounds like a success for everyone involved.

        --
        Lift Yr Skinny Fists Like Antennas to Heaven
        • (Score: 1) by dlb on Sunday November 30 2014, @05:59PM

          by dlb (4790) on Sunday November 30 2014, @05:59PM (#121297)
          Wish I had mod points. (+1 Insightful) You stated it well. They treated people well, made an effort not to take advantage of those who they could, and a youtube band that I liked became a youtube band that I like and respect.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 30 2014, @12:23PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 30 2014, @12:23PM (#121258)

      although the band actually lost money overall on the tour...

      Wait, aren't we constantly being told by the anti-copyright crowd that performance and patronage is the only way a musician is entitled to earn a living?

      Just because a musician thinks they have an audience, does not mean they have a profitable audience. Had you ever heard of these people before this story? Is their youtube audience concentrated enough that many of them could attend a performance? Is their youtube audience passionate enough to pay for a performance? Are their videos popular because of the music or because of clever visuals?

      But I don't think it should be very surprising that the various people who support performance art (ie: venue owners, production rental firms, booking agencies...) price their services to make it difficult for a group to make a profit. I don't think it's very surprising that a group making their first tour should lose money. They haven't discovered the efficiencies. They don't know where their audience is: if they book one or two venues where no one shows up, that can ruin the whole tour.

      Just because performance and patronage are the 'new' way for musicians to make money does not mean that every joker with a guitar can make a living that way.

      • (Score: 2) by fadrian on Monday December 01 2014, @12:09AM

        by fadrian (3194) on Monday December 01 2014, @12:09AM (#121359) Homepage

        Actually, I heard of them about three years ago when they were actually new on the scene.

        They are good in the studio and their videos are interesting (well, at least to those of us who play and record). Natalie's got passable looks in that indie, nerd chick sort of way, while Jack's actually a bit funny (well, more funny than Sonny Bono, at least). They actually have the goods, show-biz-wise.

        Now put that together with good guerilla marketing, wide web exposure, tours that actually look well planned compared with most, sponsorships, music licensing (they were featured on a couple of national auto ads last Christmas), not promoting nerd-rage over piracy or streaming, and they're doing everything they can to make themselves a success. And still they're barely making it.

        Yes, we all know the statistics about new business failure. But is a 90% failure rate sustainable? Even with folks that have as much on the ball as these folks? You're creeping up (dropping down?) to casino levels there. And do you think that basing an economy on what is perhaps a glorified casino is a good thing to do? Especially when the game is rigged in favor of the house whatever happens?

        --
        That is all.
    • (Score: 2) by VLM on Sunday November 30 2014, @12:46PM

      by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Sunday November 30 2014, @12:46PM (#121261)

      These people have been giving it away on youtube for years

      Don't youtube video people make money off ads? Its a reworking of the old broadcast radio model.

      There's a local Irish trad band (trad as in "whiskey in the jar" not U2 covers) that has an even more extreme biz model, as far as I know all their money comes from youtube ads because they do free concerts in parks and do parades and stuff. They do a couple bar appearances a year, donno the financials of that.

    • (Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Sunday November 30 2014, @02:01PM

      by Hairyfeet (75) <{bassbeast1968} {at} {gmail.com}> on Sunday November 30 2014, @02:01PM (#121270) Journal

      Frankly they overspent like crazy so no surprise. 1.- You should NEVER be renting vehicles, if you are gonna be in a band best that one of you get a decent SUV. Don't have to break the bank, you can get a used Silverado or Yukon for a decent price that has plenty of comfortable riding room and decent towing. I lucked into a nice 01 Yukon that was babied for 5k, really not hard to find and with a little thought and TLC will last for years. The same goes for the little trailer to haul the equipment, you can score one of those for less than 1500 and again will last for ages. 2.- If you are gonna be writing music for a 6 piece band? GET A SIX PIECE BAND, no shit when you hire 4 hired guns for a tour its gonna cost. They have no interest in the band or the album so its strictly a paycheck. I've done hired gun in the past and damned straight I wanted more than when I was a part of the band because I wasn't getting a cut of tickets, CDs, shirts, it was strictly a paycheck.

      I could go line by line and tear their tour apart but why bother? There is a right way and a wrong way and a lot of what they are doing is the wrong way. Talk to guys that have been on the road awhile, they'll show you the tricks of the trade, everything from which no tell motels are safe to which cheap greasy spoons have the best food. The fact that they are selling that many tickets and STILL can't figure out how to break even much less make a little? Tells me they are simply spending too much which nearly always comes down to not thinking long term.

      --
      ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 30 2014, @04:36PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 30 2014, @04:36PM (#121292)

        Ah ok it wasnt just me.

        I am not even in this business but I could see they were overspending. Used boxes/cars/whatever let someone else take the hit on the depreciation. People are not showing up for your show because of that oh so nice box you carry around your equipment in. They are there for you. Get there as cheaply as possible.

        You are starting a new business. That does mean you are not necessarily buying the top shelf stuff. You are buying/renting bottom of the barrel stuff when it matters. It means eating tv dinners again. It means you better be doing this because you like it. Not because you think you can make a career out of it. For ever 1 band that 'makes it' there are a hundred just getting by for every hundred getting by there are another hundred breaking up.

        The 70s/80s/90s where an anomaly in the music business. The record cartels had figured out how to create scarcity out of wealth. That means they could charge 15 dollars for 1 CD. That is gone, digital overwhelmed them. It now is back to working the routes and the crap dives. 6 of you piling into a crap car meant for 4 to get to the next town to play at a crap hotel and then again the next night. This never went away. It was just hidden by hundreds of big bands from the cartels drowning it out. For those who say 'oh you will make it back on merch at the concert' you are dreaming. Someone like kid rock or van halen can pull that off because they are already successful. Would you wear some no name bands t-shirt? Most people will not.

        For this sort of band the money is butts in seats. It will be at most 100-200 butts in seats and you may have to split that in the door with the opening band and the owner of the venue.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by pnkwarhall on Sunday November 30 2014, @04:13PM

      by pnkwarhall (4558) on Sunday November 30 2014, @04:13PM (#121289)

      Performance is no longer a viable route to an income unless you happen to be incredibly lucky.

      I'm sure experienced parties [digitalmusicnews.com] would disagree with that statement.

      The main relevance of that link is to point out that successful working musicians tend to have multiple income streams, performance (& accompanying merch sales) rating highly as primary contributors to their income.

      But even more -- what a silly statement that seems to me!

      Performance is the lifeblood of a musician! You need to get out of the basement and go see a group make some good music before your sense of reality is crushed by the Internet. A musician can literally just walk out on the street and perform and people will stop and **give money** to the musician. That's one sign of how valuable and universal a musician's contribution to a society is.

      --
      Lift Yr Skinny Fists Like Antennas to Heaven
      • (Score: 2) by frojack on Sunday November 30 2014, @08:43PM

        by frojack (1554) on Sunday November 30 2014, @08:43PM (#121315) Journal

        A musician can literally just walk out on the street and perform and people will stop and **give money** to the musician.

        Yeah, I walk by those guys every time I go to Safeco Field. One step up from panhandlers. Its questionable whether they even make enough to eat till the next event. Nobody pays them for their music, they throw money in the guitar case for the same reason they pay bums and intersection window washers.

        60s and 70s bands are now touring Indian casinos. The ones with some name recognition can actually draw a crowd. But the one distinguishing factor as to who gets booked seems to be whether or not they had significant record sales.

        --
        No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
  • (Score: 1) by Paradise Pete on Sunday November 30 2014, @06:59AM

    by Paradise Pete (1806) on Sunday November 30 2014, @06:59AM (#121224)

    Although not without its flaws, here's a pretty good response [altpress.com] to the article.

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by choose another one on Sunday November 30 2014, @11:28AM

      by choose another one (515) Subscriber Badge on Sunday November 30 2014, @11:28AM (#121251)

      Couple more here: https://medium.com/@spencerlee/this-story-could-be-told-in-a-much-more-concise-way-that-leaves-the-band-looking-much-less-like-a-ce267daf11b7 [medium.com] and here: http://doktorsewage.com/5-practical-pieces-of-financial-advice-for-pomplamoose/ [doktorsewage.com]

      Warning - both pieces are from real indie musician type people, I think, and they don't hold back on the language or the illustrative pictures...

      Personally I think the accounting stinks - they paid out a load of money to extra musicians and lighting guys fancy van, fancy hotels (me, I always thought starting out indie bands slept _in_ the van on the road), and paid out a very large salary for everyone out of money they weren't making. Purchases that should be capex and included in tour operating expenses and the kicker for me is food budgeted in with hotels and then a per-diem paid out on top. Per-diem expenses are to buy your food out of without the hassle of keeping receipts etc.

      It all looks like trying to have a nice time staying nice places, expensing as much as possible, transferring money to others (possibly friends) in the business and ensuring we make as little money as possible for tax purposes. So they got it slightly wrong and made a small loss for tax (and publicity) purposes instead. No sympathy.

    • (Score: 2) by McGruber on Sunday November 30 2014, @01:11PM

      by McGruber (3038) on Sunday November 30 2014, @01:11PM (#121264)

      No, it is not. The author, Will Stevenson of the Artery Foundation, does not seem to understand tax write-offs.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 30 2014, @04:05PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 30 2014, @04:05PM (#121286)

      From Stevenson's response:

      But why would the rest of you and your band need salaries? If you aren't making the money, why would you pay it out to people? Salaries/payout should be discussed at the end of tour when you figure out what profit you have made as a band after all expenses are taken care of. It blows my mind that a band would set aside money for themselves when they don't even know if they are profiting each night.

      This makes me think Stevenson started out in attack mode without really reading the original piece. The musicians are a duo, not a band. They hired four extra musicians to provide a more exciting musical experience for their fans. Conte and Down did not draw a salary themselves.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 30 2014, @09:02AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 30 2014, @09:02AM (#121239)

    Sorry pal but you're 50 years too late.

    And since you're all rights reserved, JavaScript required and adware I'm not least bit interested.

    Good luck...

  • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Sunday November 30 2014, @11:51AM

    by Phoenix666 (552) on Sunday November 30 2014, @11:51AM (#121254) Journal

    YouTube has signed up over a million partners (people who agree to run ads over their videos to make money from their content). The “creative class” is no longer emerging: it’s here, now.

    I was just commenting elsewhere on a story about Netflix's CEO predicting the death of network TV by 2030. When I cut the cord 8-9 years ago we mostly watched Netflix. Then we supplemented with bittorrent. But now we mostly watch stuff off YouTube. There's infinitely more variety there and the quality has improved by leaps and bounds from 10 years ago, probably because of the wider availability of production tools/software and how to's. It has been quite uplifting to see that talent and creativity are not the sole province of an elite few in Hollywood, but something that's widely distributed throughout humanity. And a great deal of the content I actually learn from, such that when I'm done watching I have the beginnings of a new skill.

    So the quote above about the creative class seems apropos.

    --
    Washington DC delenda est.
    • (Score: 2) by pnkwarhall on Sunday November 30 2014, @03:35PM

      by pnkwarhall (4558) on Sunday November 30 2014, @03:35PM (#121282)

      It has been quite uplifting to see that talent and creativity are not the sole province of an elite few in Hollywood, but something that's widely distributed throughout humanity.

      I take for granted that talent and creativity are something humans are good at. The real change is in distribution methods, and the question is whether the inexpensive ease of digital distribution will create opportunities for individuals and small groups to **make a living** from their creative work.

      Despite the negative responses, this type of information about expenses related to implementing "alternative distribution" (read non-label-backed touring and merchandising) is a valuable share. On the other hand, bands have been doing this for years, and I'm sure many of them would be willing to share both hard data and insight with truly interested parties. And I'm sure [digitalmusicnews.com] most experienced parties would not agree with the sentiment that

      Performance is no longer a viable route to an income unless you happen to be incredibly lucky.

      --
      Lift Yr Skinny Fists Like Antennas to Heaven
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 30 2014, @04:16PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 30 2014, @04:16PM (#121291)

        They did 24 shows in 28, in front of what looked like pack houses for at least some of them (four photos in the story). And the commentaries where like "You should've done Motel-6 instead of Best Western... why did you rent such a high end van... $10 per diem instead of $20 maybe wouldn't have been enough, but that would've saved $80 per day" etc. I'd say the duo made a pretty good case.

        • (Score: 2) by pnkwarhall on Sunday November 30 2014, @04:49PM

          by pnkwarhall (4558) on Sunday November 30 2014, @04:49PM (#121294)

          ha! if someone's idea to cut costs is to make a miserable per diem, I'd be finding a new tour manager.

          --
          Lift Yr Skinny Fists Like Antennas to Heaven
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 30 2014, @07:57PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 30 2014, @07:57PM (#121309)

    Techdirt has written up these guys [techdirt.com] several times in the past, as an example of a band making it without a record label deal.

    I noticed Techdirt likes to blog on stories that advance their ideology/POV though, and I guess this latest posting from the duo/band doesn't do that particularly well.

  • (Score: 2) by dcollins on Tuesday December 02 2014, @06:40PM

    by dcollins (1168) on Tuesday December 02 2014, @06:40PM (#121958) Homepage

    Aux Magazine makes the point today that the piece was really a veiled advertisement for Patreon, a new crowdfunding site for artists, in which the author/band member Jack Conte is a co-founder. And recipient of $17M in venture-capital funding. Broadly speaking the theme of that article was, "Even with national exposure we still can't make a profit, but thanks to Patreon we are saved and so will you", without disclosing the exact connection.

    http://www.aux.tv/2014/12/sob-story-from-band-that-lost-11000-was-actually-a-marketing-stunt/ [www.aux.tv]