In spite of all that ink, I have to admit that the key to making money from recorded music going forward, is not advertising. The key is to monetize the time people spend listening to recorded music.
The focus on TSL has been a theme of the blog and it is even our motto. Yet, with all the recent writing on ad-supported music (precipated by the Qtrax fiasco) I think now is good a good time to re-examine our first principle of TSL.
Here is some data:
Teenagers spend the most time listening to recorded music.
People 14-27 spend a lot of time listening to recorded music.
Even people as old as 40 spend considerable time listening to recorded music.
Now lets make the connection to advertising - I can think of no better way to monetize TSL with recorded music than by selling advertising. Monetizing time spent with media by integrating and selling advertising is what made TV, radio, and even the Internet into industries with revenues measured in the tens of billions of dollars. Why couldn't it do the same for recorded music
As the charts above show, people spend more time with recorded music than with most other media. Look at the revenue earned by the major ad-supported media and I think you will agree that locked in the aggregate TSL to recorded music is more money than the recorded music industry has ever seen.
If you know of a better way than advertising to monetize recorded music TSL, let me know and I will change the name and focus of this blog.
5 comments:
That sounds great! Keep it up!
"Monetizing time spent with media by integrating and selling advertising is what made TV, radio, and even the Internet into industries with revenues measured in the tens of billions of dollars. Why couldn't it do the same for recorded music" - Those ads are supporting the medium, TV etc. We have Radio, which is essentially ad supported music in the same way that TV is ad supported shows. I think watching a show, browsing the internet are completely different experiences than listening to music. Ads in music are much more intrusive to the experience in my opinion.
To be effective advertising must be intrusive. If it isn't no one will pay attention to the ad. If you are getting content for free, intrusiveness is the price you pay.
There is a lot of hoopla now about Internet ads that are not intrusive. I believe that in time these ads will also prove to be non-effective.
Having said that, the ads must still be interesting and must leave the user feeling that the overall experience is a fair price to pay for the free music.
The other thing to remember is that ad-supported music and consumer paid music are not mutually exclusive. One can use both for different reasons.
Thanks for the comment.
To be effective advertising must be intrusive. If it isn't no one will pay attention to the ad. If you are getting content for free, intrusiveness is the price you pay. - I agree. I just think that the "music experience" is one that people will have less tolerance for the intrusion than with TV, Internet etc. Will definitely require a paradigm shift. From my own perspective, I would prefer pay for the music monetarily than through ad intrusion. It would be interesting to see numbers on “free” ad based music vs. music paid for. I am sure that there is room for both models in the space right now.
Incredible breakthrough!
You've just invented RADIO...
Post a Comment