Yesterday I shared nine happy predictions about the future of music. Many of you joined with me in the positive vibes. We were happy together—feeling groovy again. It was such a fine and natural sight. But some spoilsports want to burst our bubble—because I announced the resurgence of live music. “What is Ted smoking?” they asked. Everything happens online nowadays—why should music be any different? If you want to support my work, consider taking out a premium subscription (just $6 per month).“The idea flies in the face of the trending changes” points out one reader. “If live shopping, eating out, movies, etc are all going online, why would music trend in the opposite direction?” So is my claim—that live music will be the source of energy, excitement, and profits—just a dream?
Not in the least. Let’s do the math—I think I can prove it to you.
This is where the comparison with other forms of online shopping just fall apart. Most products cost roughly the same if you get them online versus in-person—but in music the amount spent on real world consumption is hundreds of times more than a digital transaction.
And the difference in profitability is even more extreme—because profit margins in streaming are tiny, while ticket sales for live events are very profitable. For many years, streaming generated no profits whatsoever. Spotify didn’t make money until this year—after raising subscription prices. Let’s compare this with the profitability of live music. Here is a recent analysis of the largest concert promoter in the world, Live Nation:
I’m not praising Live Nation—which is abusive in its pricing techniques. But that’s only possible because fans are willing to pay so much for live music. The bottom line is clear and unarguable: Even if just a tiny number of fans embrace live music, it will generate far more cash profits than streaming. The head of Sony Music Group admitted this last week in his interview. He won’t share all the numbers, but said that live music was a “gold mine” and “frankly, more lucrative than streaming.” And I haven’t even included other advantages of live music as a profit generator for musicians.
If you add this up, you see that one fan who goes to a concert is more profitable than ten thousand fans who stream. Of course, none of this was true a few years ago. During the pandemic, live music collapsed. Nobody went to concerts. During that period, everybody in the music industry started chasing clicks and apps. And they’re still doing it—but they are missing the larger picture. Yes, live music is coming back. But it doesn’t need to replace streaming. Even at the current growth rates, it will dominate music business economics.
And when you add to this the obvious energy and excitment that comes from a live event, the conclusion is obvious. Music is different from movies or gaming or other entertainment categories. For a musician, digital is not the answer. In many cases, it’s just a distraction. Musician should forget about chasing clicks—what they really need is loyal flesh-and-blood fans. Those swipe-and-scroll zombies at home can’t change this. They are irrelevant. They don’t spend enough on music to matter. Chasing after them is a waste of time.
You can’t build a music career on zombie listeners glued to their screens. So the future of music really will come from a direct encounter between musician and fans. Silicon Valley will not be able to change that, no matter how many bots and devices and AI-sludge it dumps on the market. You're currently a free subscriber to The Honest Broker. For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
|
Am I Wrong About the Live Music Resurgence?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment