The Personalized Payola Pump - it’s logical, righteous, disruptive and almost here.
Bruce Warila |
Thu, September 25, 2008 |
Disruptive Technology,
End of Paid Downloads,
Music Industry Commentary,
Music Information Retrieval,
The Free Music Option,
The Substitution Challenge Yet another music proposition for consumers launches and I’m yawning again. I examine and consider just about every consumer-music offering on earth. From my perspective, the thing consumers want, the thing independent artists need, and the thing that's disruptive to just about everyone in the music retailing and promotion business, hasn’t been uncorked yet.
The thing we all want and need is the Personalized Payola Pump (PPP), and I can’t wait until this product launches. The PPP is the only logical, righteous and disruptive product that I can get excited about. Before I describe the PPP, here are eight of my core assumptions:
- For 99% of the artists on earth, MP3s are not, and never will be a moneymaker.
- It’s nearly impossible to justify investing in the creation and promotion of music if you plan on recovering your investment through the sale or streaming of MP3s, and if multiple hands are dipping into your MP3 pot, forget it.
- The companies selling and streaming MP3s are the only ones really making…a truckload of money.
- You will soon generate much more profit from non-MP3, bundled digital music products. Read my previous posts on this.
- You can’t sell anything, including these new products, unless you obtain exposure.
- Getting on the radio is just about the best way to obtain mass exposure.
- iPods, mobile phones, and MP3 players in general, ARE THE NEW RADIO that everyone carries in their pockets now.
- Every artist has to obtain multiple spins on the NEW RADIO to convert listeners into paying fans.
When most of the artists on earth reach these conclusions/assumptions, what happens next? What happens next is the only logical alternative, and it’s exactly what consumers’ want: FREE MP3s - NO ADS, NO DRM, NO STRINGS ATTACHED. However, since dealing with 20,000,000 MP3s would be a boondoggle for both artists and consumers, we all need the Personalized Payola Pump to make it work.

I am a consumer. I want a magic (PPP) box that does the following:
A - I tell it the songs I like (my seed songs).
B - I tell it the songs I don’t like (my negative seed songs).
C - It gives me a controlled supply of FREE, filtered new songs that match my preferences (seed songs).
D - I can do whatever I want with the found songs - no strings/advertising attached.
E - I can tighten and loosen the proximity to my selection criteria (seed songs).
F - I can filter out crap by forcing the pump to send me songs that resemble other clusters of songs; such as hits from last year, or hits from the last twenty years, or popular songs on rock radio in London last month…
I am an artist. I want a magic (PPP) box that does the following:
A - I put my song into the magic box network.
B - The magic box company only charges me a small, annual flat fee.
(Payola to deliver songs to the new radio - get it?)
C - My song is delivered to those that want to hear it.
D - The magic box company tells me if anyone is looking for songs like mine.
E - The magic box company tells me what my chances are for obtaining spins on the new radio.
F - The more people that like my song, the more the magic box company recommends it.
When listeners convert into fans, fans buy my bundled digital music products.
The magic PPP box is disruptive to record labels.
I think the PPP is disruptive to labels in two ways. First, out of a million new songs created each year, there’s going to be a lot of great new songs, and these songs will be filtered, found and substituted for songs controlled by labels; this is what I have referred to as the substitution dilemma, and I still say this is the biggest challenge labels face (ear-share gets divided). Second, labels play the role of über filter for consumers and act as gateways to mass-market exposure. The PPP changes all this; in this system, a filtered new song is a filtered new song; it doesn’t matter where it comes from; moreover the PPP eventually negates the need for mass-market exposure.
The PPP is disruptive to music retailers, promoters and promotion gurus.
If you sell MP3s or stream MP3s, (cash or ad-based) the PPP obsoletes your MP3 business. You can only cling to old, major-label content for so long. Music promoters and promotion experts are equally affected. What’s the point if consumers can easily and legally, filter and find, anything they want for free? On a positive note, new bundled digital music products will be great for retailers (higher margins), and I am sure there will be a cottage industry that sells services/advice on how to package bundled assets (see Topspin for example).
The Personalized Payola Pump is coming…
Transition/change occurs along a spectrum. As you can imagine, the pump has more value for consumers when it can accurately pump a lot of free, filtered songs. Artists are just starting to realize that they need to have a free song strategy, and new bundled digital music products are just entering the marketplace. My company and several others are working on the “pump” (no that’s not the name of our product). If you would like to talk with us (seriously) about investing in the “magic box company” (another fictional name) please contact me directly.

Reader Comments (11)
Nice article - definitely the clearest explanation of your vision for the music industry that I've read so far (and I've been reading your blog for a few months now). One question: Is this the way you hope the industry goes, or the way you think it's destined to go, or both? Thanks
Ken,
I plan to deliver everything I write about. It may take a bit, but that is my intention.
-Bruce
Bruce, after a year or so intently reading/pondering your ideas here and MTT, must say I have come to agree w/points 1-8 (gradually, even somewhat reluctantly, but ya wore me down!). So, GREAT to hear tangible solutions are coming together...congrats and can't wait to hear more. Keep up the hard work - the world is waiting!!
Bruce,
I really think that out of one million new songs, most of them will suck.
But I like your optimism.
If you ask me, in a few years, it'll be business as usual. Label's will catch up with the tech gap, and they'll be on top again.
Mike,
2% of 1,000,000 = 20,000 songs
That's 1,166 hours of listening time (@ 3.5 minutes per song).
You don't need much more than that.
Cut it down to .05%, (5,000 songs) and you still have more than enough...
Actually, .01% (a tenth of a percent) = 1,000 songs - that even works...
Hi Bruce,
What sort of ideas do you have for the bundled digital music products?
Pat,
Here's what I have been working on since 2001-2002 (http://www.unsprungmedia.com/fat-decks/). My stuff is mostly patents and some software at this point. I am not the only person/company working on similar products.
-Bruce
I agree with Mike ! But it's a very nice article ! good job :)
Bruce,
Here's the challenge, which you probably are aware of: "like" another song is a semantic term that people define will define differently.
Is it the beat? Is it the melody..those are relatively easy.
Is it the way the emotion of the chords supports both the melody and the emotion of the lyrics?
That's the toughie.
I am both a professional musician and have a masters level degree in artificial intelligence programming. And I have studied and thought a lot about "computer intelligence"...mimicking human thought and reasoning.
Which is what this box will need to to to produce a good enough "like" that most people will agree with.
I love what you are trying to do and don't mean to discourage you...just keep you pointed at the real problem...which I you have probably thought about probably more than I have.
Nice blog. I'll keep checking in.
How Can I Challenge The Payola Law?
My record label has a recording artist with a new cd release. The local radio station will not sell me ad time because playing the song in its entirety will count as a spin not an ad. The FCC says I am within the law as long as the ad discloses the sponsor's name. Spin count only becomes important if it is high enough to get your song ranked on an industry chart. I feel I should be allowed to buy ad time for a song up to the point it becomes elligible for ranking. The major labels dominate the playlists of stations because of their unlimited resources. The NY judge in the Eliot Spitzer 'Payola' case ruled that the major label in the case could not buy ad time for its songs because it artificially inflated the song's ranking in the charts. That interpretation applies because the song was already ranked but the ruling only further locked out unranked, anonymous, unknown, minor entities whose limited resources at best will only get us exposure but will not guarantee us a spot on any playlist or position on some chart. How can this ruling be tested from the perspective of an unranked minor entity? Thanks.
Jim,
I don't know which radio stations you are talking to, but I have purchased 60 second spots where 50 seconds of the spot featured a song by my artist. Contact me and I will send you an MP3 of the spot. My advice: Ask another radio station. Use Google Radio to place spots. Or, consider that you will probably not sell enough music to cover the cost of the ads. You are far better off driving traffic to a site that features 50 songs; thereby increasing your conversion rate (visitors to purchasers).