The Spinning Dancer

Spinning Dancer Now for some Friday fun. Take a look at this right brain vs left brain test from PerthNow.

Which way does the dancer spin for you? Clockwise, or counter-clockwise?

For me, she spun counter-clockwise. Then I looked away, looked back, and holy good gravy Batman, she started spinning clockwise!

Steven Levitt, author of Freakonomics, wrote about this on Monday and asked his readers to provide the following information:

Just for fun, list your college major, your occupation, and which way the dancer spins for you. We’ll tally the data and see what we find.

A ton of people have already left their information. It’ll be interesting to see the results.

Don’t Be Afraid To Fail

A line that I try to live by:

I would rather try, and fail, than to walk away and regret never having tried at all.

You’ve no doubt heard the statistic that X number of new business fail in X years. Maybe you’ve heard that the number really isn’t that high, or maybe you’ve heard it’s actually very high. To clear the confusion, according to the US Small Business Administration site:

Starting a small business is always risky, and the chance of success is slim. According to the U.S. Small Business Administration, roughly 50% of small businesses fail within the first five years.

The numbers vary by industry, of course. On the Web, they’re probably much higher—say 60-70% in the first year? (Five years in Web time is a lifetime and the barriers to entry are very low). But the conclusion is the same: You’re more likely to fail than to succeed (especially on the Web).

So my thinking is, if it’s inevitable, why fear it? Embrace it. And go forth with faith and gusto, as Jeremy Liew of Lightspeed, James Hong of Hotornot.com, and Robert Young of GigaOM all advise. In a nutshell: Failure is an option, have the balls to try, and bankruptcy gives you the opportunity to fail and start over again.

Young’s point about bankruptcy is actually a very significant one. “The ability for a U.S. entrepreneur to go bankrupt is actually the most important element of this country’s economic success and wealth,” he writes. How does bankruptcy do this exactly, you ask? According to Wikipedia, the purpose of bankruptcy is:

  1. To give an honest debtor a “fresh start” in life by relieving the debtor of most debts.
  2. To repay creditors in an orderly manner to the extent that the debtor has the means available for payment.

That means if you still have debt, but are out of money, those debts can be erased. This simple rule is part of what makes businesses thrive in the US. In The World is Flat, Thomas Friedman argues that if a nation wants to improve its economy and increase the number of jobs, it needs:

…a regulatory environment that makes it easy to start a business, easy to adjust a business to changing market circumstances and opportunities, and easy to close a business that goes bankrupt, so that the capital can be freed up for more productive uses.

If you are starting your business in the US, you are in luck. You are in such an environment. Happy day!

However, this doesn’t mean you should go about your business in a haphazard fashion and take crazy risks. Failure may be inevitable, but at least be smart about it. Learn to build for it. Paul Hawken advises in his great book Growing a Business:

If you conceive and create a business where everything has to go right, one error, one mishap, can ruin a lot of good work. If you conceive a business where twenty serious mistakes could occur, and then you create safeguards to deal with some or most of these possibilities, you are creating a survivor. In the beginning, survival is more important than success. Survival is staying on the field, playing the game, learning the rules, and beginning to grow.

Another great book about managing and taking calculated risks is Anthony Iaquinto and Stephen Spinelli Jr’s Never Bet The Farm. It presents fifteen common-sense principles that can serve as helpful reminders in times of crisis, such as Principle #9: Don’t Spend a Dollar When a Dime Will Do, and Principle #11: Only Fools Fly Without a Net.

So there you have it. Don’t be afraid to fail. Embrace failure. Go forth with faith and gusto. But be smart about failure. Learn to build for it. And don’t walk away and regret never having tried at all.

Digital Ethnography and Students Today

Digital Ethnography I’m jealous of the students at Kansas State University.

In their class “Introduction to Cultural Anthropology”, assistant professor/cultural anthropologist/media ecologist/student of the world Dr. Michael Wesch has put together some amazing videos derived from what must have been some very interesting discussions in his classes.

He’s known most for his award-winning video The Machine is Us/ing Us which made its rounds in the blogosphere a few months ago. His site, mediatedcultures.net, houses all of his digital ethnography projects.

A recent project, which began as a brainstorming exercise about “how students learn, what they need to learn for their future, and how our current educational system fits in”, culminated in the stirring video A Vision of Students Today:

Here are some of the statistics shown in the video:

  • My average class size is 115.
  • 18% of my teachers know my name.
  • I complete 49% of the readings assigned to me. Only 26%… relative to my life.
  • I will read 8 books this year, 2300 web pages, and 1281 facebook profiles.
  • I will write 42 pages for class this semester. And over 500 pages of email.

These numbers come from the collaborative effort of his 200 students, a shared Google Document, 367 edits, and a student-created survey that 133 of them answered. While not entirely scientific, it’s a fascinating snapshot.

And it sounds like a fun class too!

Via: Scobleizer

Pretty Independent Machine: New Opportunities

Ths music industry has been on my mind this week. First, it was NIN and Radiohead going independent, then it was how free songs were going to effect musicians.

Now I’m wondering: What will the role of record labels be if songs become freely available to the public, as opposed to within paid CDs or digital files?

And to that, I also wonder: Are there any helpful comparisons to make with the fields of writing, painting, photography, acting, or filmmaking? Perhaps, in these comparisons, there will be a demonstrated example of needing, or not needing, a record label.

All are creative fields with professionals seeking to make a living. So I’m sure there are some similarities, which I’m going to simplify into the need for marketing and distribution. And in all of these fields, the way to get the proper marketing and distribution (as well as other connections) is through representation by some kind of agent or manager.

(Disclaimer: I’m not a professional in any of these fields, so please let me know if anything I write here is incorrect.)

Writers

Representation
This is handled by literary agents. They are generally considered to be crucial, since they hold the key to the marketing and distribution channels. Blogging and online publishing is rapidly becoming an alternative means of self-publishing, diminishing the need for representation.
Marketing
This is handled by publishers. They have access to large budgets, teams of graphic designers, and marketing channels such as book tours and merchandising. Some business-savvy bloggers are beginning to learn how to market themselves, diminishing the need for publishers.
Distribution
This is handled by publishers. They have access to economies of scale, book production, and distribution channels such as bookseller chains. Blogging and online publishing provides a natural distribution alternative: the Web, diminishing the need for publishers.

Painters/Illustrators

Representation
This is handled by artist agents. They aren’t commonly used, since some artists aren’t aware they exist, don’t know how to find them, or prefer to go it alone.
Marketing
This is handled by art galleries. Larger galleries are able to offer some advertising, though the gallery itself is the main marketing vehicle. Some web-savvy artists also use the Web as a supplementary marketing channel, but still rely heavily on art galleries.
Distribution
This is handled by art galleries and, if the photographer chooses this means of income, stock illustration services. They provide an aggregation point for artwork, making it easier for buyers to find and purchase the art. Some web-savvy artists also set up online stores as a supplementary distribution channel, but still rely heavily on art galleries or stock illustration services.

Photographers

Representation
This is handled by photo agents. They aren’t commonly used, since some photographers aren’t aware they exist, don’t know how to find them, or prefer to go it alone.
Marketing
This is handled by art galleries and photography magazines. Larger galleries are able to offer some advertising, though the gallery itself is the main marketing vehicle. Many web-savvy photographers are increasingly using the Web as their primary marketing channel, especially with the rise of sites like Flickr.
Distribution
This is handled by art galleries and, if the photographer chooses this means of income, stock photography houses. They provide an aggregation point for photographs, making it easier for buyers to find and purchase them. Many web-savvy photographers are increasingly using the Web as their primary distribution channel, though there are difficulties in digital rights, since it’s easy to make digital copies of photographs.

Actors/Actresses

Representation
This is handled by talent agents. They are generally considered to be crucial, since they hold the key to the marketing and distribution channels. There have been no viable alternatives to talent agents in this field.
Marketing
This is also handled by talent agents. They are the ones who promote and sell their clients to various “customers” such as casting directors and production companies. There have been no viable marketing alternatives to talent agents in this field.
Distribution
Since the “product” is the person him/herself, there is no need for a distribution channel, per se.

Filmmakers

Representation
This is handled by talent agents. Independent filmmakers generally don’t use them, preferring instead to go it alone. Online publishing is rapidly becoming an alternative means of self-publishing, diminishing the need for representation.
Marketing
This is handled by movie studios. They have access to large budgets, marketing departments, and marketing channels such as television and billboards. Some web-savvy filmmakers are increasingly using the Web as their primary marketing channel, such as sites like YouTube, diminishing the need for movie studios.
Distribution
This is handled by movie studios. They have access to economies of scale, production facilities, and distribution channels such as movie theater and DVD rental chains. The Web provides a natural distribution alternative, diminishing the need for movie studios. There are difficulties in digital rights, however, since it’s easy to make digital copies of movies.

Musicians

Representation
This is handled by music managers. They are considered crucial by some, though a few are beginning to publish music on their own, diminishing the need for representation.
Marketing
This is handled by record labels. They have access to large budgets, marketing and design departments, and marketing channels such as television and magazines. Some web-savvy musicians are increasingly using the Web as their primary marketing channel, such as MySpace, diminishing the need for record labels.
Distribution
This is handled by record labels. They have access to economies of scale, recording studios, and distribution channels such as online and offline music store chains. Some web-savvy musicians are increasingly using the Web as their primary distribution channel, though there are difficulties in digital rights, since it’s easy to make digital copies of music.

My Prediction for the Music Industry

So what does this mean? A lot of creative professions are experimenting with the Web as a new marketing and distribution channel. For some, it makes sense; for others, it doesn’t—at least, not with the current state of their industry.

I don’t believe the marketing and distribution providers will ever go away completely. Not all creative professionals are business- or web-savvy, nor do they want to be. Some want to concentrate on creating their art, and nothing else. For those professionals, there will always bee a need for someone handling their marketing and distribution needs.

The current entities handling the marketing and distribution will need to evolve, however, if they want to survive. Going back to the music business, record labels have realized that they need new revenue vehicles as CD sales continue to drop. So they’ve been cutting into the musicians’ pockets, as stated in Jeff Leeds’s New York Times article “Squeezing Money From the Music“:

Lately, the major labels have in effect tried to move into the talent management business by demanding that new artists seeking record contracts give their label a cut of concert earnings or T-shirt and merchandise revenue – areas that had once been outside the labels’ bailiwick.

No wonder musicians hate record labels. As much as musicians need marketing and distribution services, record labels that do this are going to chase away more and more musicians. They’re killing the golden geese that lay the golden eggs, so to speak.

What this means is an opportunity for smart competition—i.e. independent record labels who are willing to take on experimental business models. Although the largest record labels still dominate mainstream marketing and distribution channels, as they lose artists (and consequently, revenue), they’ll lose market share in favor of new and evolved players.

Digital rights will also be a concern, though if digital songs become a marketing tool, then digital rights are moot.

New Potential Business Ideas

Here’s a new business idea: You the musician can hire me for a percentage of sales (or a flat reoccurring fee), while I help you market and distribute your music. This could be as simple as operating a web site to getting your songs onto P2P networks. I’d have to have a lot of clients in order to turn a profit however, since margins will be slim. Or a business like iTunes could offer such services.

Another new business idea: Not every musician will have the expertise to create polished, well-edited music. So you can hire me to help you handle the recording and editing of it. Come to my recording studio, or hire me to teach you how to do this on your own. Maybe I can sell you some of the equipment and software too. The margins here are a little better. This isn’t quite an alternative for record labels, but aspiring entrepreneurs could sure consider it. People who can do this well will be in high demand, just as current music producers are.

Another evolved-business idea: You’ll still need someone to manage your gigs, merchandise, commercial licensing, and other revenue streams. I’m basically still your music manager, though with a slightly revised set of responsibilities. Or I could write some software, like Quickbooks, to help you manage your finances. Such software exists already, but none dominate the market or are widely-known.

Evolving industries always means new opportunities. Exciting times, indeed!

Pretty Independent Machine: Songs as Promotions

TechCrunch vs Profy.Com This Tuesday’s post about NIN and Radiohead going independent has been on my mind. So here’s a part 2.

Now, I’m not the biggest fan of current CD prices. I don’t think anybody is. So when I read TechCrunch articles like Michael Arrington’s “The Inevitable March of Recorded Music Towards Free“, I’m filled with glee.

He’s basically arguing that the economics of recorded music will eventually drive all music to be free.

His argument has been met with some criticism, however, most notably from Paul Glazowski of Profy.Com. Glazowski argues in his post, “TechCrunch’s Founder Says Recorded Music To Eventually Be ‘Free’; Here’s Why He’s Wrong“, that there is still a cost to recording music, which will prevent it from being completely free.

This discussion got me thinking. If digital songs become free, how will that effect musicians? Listeners will love it because, hey, who doesn’t love free stuff? But how will it effect the livelihood of professional musicians?

As I understand it, a musician makes money from:

  • Album & song sales (CDs, iTunes, etc)
  • Live performances
  • Merchandising (t-shirts, posters, etc)
  • Commercial licensing (using your songs for commercials)

Not all of these provide income at the same levels. I don’t think there’s a common ratio, but album sales generally account for a small percentage, while the others offer more, according to Chris Arnold’s NPR article, “Band Tries to Make It Big Without Going Broke“.

So if songs become free, that shouldn’t gravely effect their livelihoods—since paid songs don’t effect their livelihood much already.

Also, if song distribution is no longer a means of revenue, its value changes. It becomes… perhaps… a new marketing channel?

Such is already the case in China, where music pirating has made profits from CD sales drop to zero, so writes Kevin Maney for USA Today in the article, “If pirating grows, it may not be the end of music world“, written in May 2005.

Yu Quan, like every music act in China, gets almost no income from CD sales, even though millions of its CDs have been sold. As soon as a CD is made, the pirates are on the street, offering them for a fraction of the retail price. Stores sell pirate copies. Legitimate CDs all but vanish.

So artists have to regard CDs as essentially promotional tools, not as end products. Yu Quan makes money by performing concerts, getting endorsement deals and appearing in commercials. If people hear and like Yu Quan’s songs on pirated CDs, at least they’ll be more likely to come to the concerts and buy what the duo endorses.

The primary revenue vehicles are now live performances, merchandising, commercial licensing—and even commercial endorsements and corporate sponsorships (though only the most popular acts can tout those).

So I agree with Arrington that the price of digital songs is being driven to free. But I don’t believe it’s just the economics of the situation.

My guess is that piracy and P2P networks figure larger in the equation than he thinks, especially since teenagers (and younger) are such prolific users. They are the audience of tomorrow; their habits now will lay the foundation for the landscape we’ll soon be facing.

A paradigm shift from looking at digital songs as promotional vehicles instead of income sources will also precipitate the drive to free. And this, in my opinion, is a good thing—especially for musicians, though maybe not record labels. If musicians don’t need a record label to package their CDs and market them anymore, what will they need them for, if they need them at all?

I think I have an answer for that, which I’ll write about tomorrow. (Ah, the suspense.)

Pretty Independent Machine

NIN and Radiohead So it begins.

Trent Reznor from Nine Inch Nails just announced that they are now an independent entity, apart from any music label or recording contract:

Hello everyone. I’ve waited a LONG time to be able to make the following announcement: as of right now Nine Inch Nails is a totally free agent, free of any recording contract with any label. I have been under recording contracts for 18 years and have watched the business radically mutate from one thing to something inherently very different and it gives me great pleasure to be able to finally have a direct relationship with the audience as I see fit and appropriate. Look for some announcements in the near future regarding 2008. Exciting times, indeed.

This is the second A-List band to do this. Radiohead‘s recording contract expired after their last release in 2003, and they never sought to get another contract. Then, just a week ago, they announced that their next album will be released as a digital download only. In an interview with Time Magazine, Singer Thom Yorke said:

“I like the people at our record company, but the time is at hand when you have to ask why anyone needs one. And, yes, it probably would give us some perverse pleasure to say ‘Fuck you’ to this decaying business model.”

You can download their new album, In Rainbows, anytime after October 10. Also, you only have to pay whatever you want. That’s right: You name the price.

(Another small independent artist, a female vocalist, did this first, about a year ago. I can’t find her site or any info about her though. Anyone know who she is?)

It’s interesting to see these large acts go the way of smaller, independent musicians, such as Jonathan Coulton, who is one of the larger independent acts on the web. He’s most known for his songs Code Monkey, Baby Got Back (a Sir Mix-a-Lot cover), and Re: Your Brains. Coulton has a significant cult following and sells his MP3s for only one US dollar each. This, plus his live performances and various other projects, haven’t earned him a gold-plated Rolls Royce yet. Though, according to an interview with Quick Stop, Coulton says “…in some parts of the country, I’d be making a decent living.”

So being an independent musician without a record label or contract, what does Coulton think about all this? In regards to the Radiohead move, he writes:

I think this is a great move for them, and at the very least it’s an experiment the rest of us can learn from – I hope they’ll be forthcoming about the numbers they get. If I had to guess I’d say this plan will get the music to more ears, possibly generate less gross revenue on digital sales, but vastly improve their bottom line – their profit margin is going to be a lot higher than it would be with a label/distributor, plus this is likely to drive plenty more people to live shows and merchandise.

Exciting times, indeed.

Ads Like No Other

In case you didn’t know, Sony (SNE) BRAVIA is a collection of high-definition visual and audio devices. They include LCD and front & rear projection televisions. In fact, BRAVIA stands for Best Resolution Audio Visual Integrated Architecture.

Didn’t know that, did you? Me neither. I thought it was a bunch of colorful balls, paint, or bunny rabbits.

Play-Doh

Just this past Thursday, Sony unveiled its latest BRAVIA TV ad, featuring 200 colorful Play-doh bunnies hopping around Thomas Paine Park in Lower Manhattan.

I would have loved to have been there while they were filming this. According to the article “Sony goes from balls to bunnies” from MediaGuardian.co.uk:

“Technically this is the most difficult thing I have ever done,” said the ad’s director, Frank Budgen. “It is an incredibly difficult situation to control. You have New Yorkers wandering through frames and you have no say over it because we’re doing it for real.”

Heh. I can imagine. It’s kind of funny seeing random bystanders in the commercial. Did you catch the kid making a face at the camera? I would have totally done that too.

Balls

Back in July 2005, Sony BRAVIA did something similar in San Francisco as well. They sent 250,000 multi-colored superballs down a hilly street—I’m guessing somewhere in Portrero Hill?

According to Sony, this took two days and twenty-three video cameras to shoot.

An entire block was closed off and special compressed-air cannons shot the balls into the air, while earth moving equipment poured thousands down the street. Not that you’d know it from the finished product, but these balls can do some damage, so all the cars were props and crew members went so far as to having protective shields and crash helmets.

I would have loved to have seen this too. I wonder if the dog in the commercial was a prop or just a lucky coincidence. The river of balls must have been awesome. It kind of makes me want to buy a bunch of superballs and unleash them in North Beach—right into the tourists at Fisherman’s Wharf. Muhahaha!

Paint

Sony BRAVIA hasn’t limited their fun to the US though. In July 2006 they visited Glasgow, Scotland to blast 70,000 liters of non-toxic water-based paint all over a couple of buildings. Sounds crazy, right? Watch:

Now that looks awesome. Paint and explosions. How cool is that. This effect required over 1,400 separate explosions and 250 people over the course of ten days. All that paint needed twenty people to mix it on-site. According to Sony, cleaning it up was a royal pain too.

The effect was stunning, but afterwards a major clean-up operation was required to clear away all that paint!

The cleaning took 5 days and 60 people. Thankfully, the use of a special water-based paint made it easy to scrape-up once the water had evaporated.

I’ve got to hand it to the Sony BRAVIA advertising team. They’ve done some amazing work! Must have cost Sony a fortune too.

Though, after watching all these commercials, I still had to look up Sony BRAVIA to find out what they were really selling…