QUIET PLEASE! THE LIBRARY IS FOR PERFORMING ARTISTS

The global music industry has markedly changed over the past 5 years; not only has the manner in which we listen to and purchase music changed forever, we must also confront the changes in play in which we “view” live performing artists.

Australia’s music industry was built around the live music scene; in the ‘70’s and ‘80’s you could enjoy a live music performance 7 nights a week and 365 days a year. These music venues were also licensed to serve alcohol and to allow patrons to gamble, thus the owners of such businesses enjoyed healthy profits for many years. Over the past decade, the Australian government has passed legislation to control the level of gambling and smoking in public places, resulting in many music venues closing their doors.

Australia’s ability to foster new music talent by way of live music performances has been stymied by the progressive closure of these venues; as such local Council representatives have unveiled an unorthodox plan to reinvigorate our live music scene.

Public libraries…

So long the embodiment of a venue of “silence” to enable the public to read and research, many libraries in the major Australian cities are hosting evening live music performances in order to entertain a public who is hungry to hear new artists.

Whilst this contravenes the historical mindset of listening to a live music performance at ear-splitting volume and being showered with sweat and alcohol, the library performances are predominantly in acoustic mode and they enable the audience to “sit down and listen” to the music at close range.

In an era when people are purchasing “virtual” books and book retailers are also closing their doors, maybe [just maybe] the arts of music and reading can join hands and save themselves concurrently…

WHAT CAN LUCIAN GRANGE DO THAT GUY HANDS COULDN’T?

With Universal finally completing the protracted takeover of EMI, the music world watches on with bated breath to determine the business acumen of Universal’s chief Lucian Grange. As a heads up, Grange has bold plans for the mega music label.

In a move best described as entrepreneurial, Grange will launch a new imprint [Virgin EMI] for new and unsigned British acts, as well as launching a UK-version of the iconic North American label Capitol Records.

Some may scratch their heads at the rationale behind the huge investment, however we need to dig deeper to discover as to how Grange can budget for such a risk. It’s all about timing…

In late 2011, Grange commenced his full acquisition of EMI on the condition that Universal would pay Citibank [the appointed Receiver of EMI] their asking price regardless of the European Commission’s anti-trust investigation of the transaction. History tells us that Universal was forced to offload the Parlophone label to Warner Music, albeit the global equity markets began to rally to the benefit of media stocks. The end result is that Grange has acquired two-thirds of EMI for fifty percent of the 2011 asking price.

Grange is both a traditionalist and a visionary when it comes to the music business. Universal controls the sound recordings of artists ranging from the Beatles to Motown acts to Eminem; this is a guaranteed cash flow for generations to come. At the same time, the 2012 “Gangnam Style” frenzy has inspired Grange to realise how huge profits can be made in music by employing new and different media to promote popular artists.

Guy Hands [former EMI boss] was a private equity specialist, whereas Lucian Grange has spent his entire career working for record labels. Hands paid far too much for EMI in the middle of global financial unrest, whereas Grange appears to have timed the closure of this acquisition for a good price and at a time when recorded music sales have displayed a positive turnaround. The music industry has changed forever, however the industry still requires well-credentialed music people to run a corporate music label.

EMI & UNIVERSAL – THE MUSICAL FALLOUT CONTINUES.

Commonsense and history suggests that the merger and acquisition of 2 music corporate giants would result in some unprecedented activity. The story of EMI, Universal and Ultravox confirms this theory.

Music lovers of the early-to-mid 1980’s will remember Ultravox as British electronic pop music stars; their 1981 smash “Vienna” was recently voted “the Greatest Song Not To Reach Number One” in a BBC survey. Joe Dolce’s “Shaddup Your Face” [the ultimate One Hit Wonder] kept Ultravox at Number Two on the UK Charts for 4 weeks.

Ultravox faded away from the mainstream in the second half of the 1980’s, however their lead singer Midge Ure has never moved far from the public eye, primarily due to his involvement in co-writing Band Aid’s 1984 charity song “Do They Know It’s Christmas” and instigating the Live Aid concerts in 1985 with Bob Geldof. Ure remains a Band Aid trustee, as the aforementioned song continues to generate royalties for Ethiopian famine relief.

In the true tradition of “everything old is new again”, Ultravox regrouped in 2011 and began working up songs for their label, Universal. The initial signs of modern corporate music craziness occurred during the recording process, when Universal demanded an Ultravox album of songs from “outside” writers. Ure would have nothing of this, thus the recording of the album continued without Universal’s financial support. EMI picked up the Ultravox-penned album, “Brilliant” in 2012 however the corporate chaos surrounding their new label saw the release sink quickly due to zero promotional support.

Ultravox retains a global presence via its fans however their ongoing future is in doubt without the financial support of a major record label. Ure has been touring solo in selected territories in a very economical manner [500 seat clubs; support act doubling as his backing band] in order to gauge a “feel” for a fully-fledged Ultravox tour. It’s best described as a “DIY” process for some of the great music acts from past decades, and represents a trend for the ages…

REDFOO – MUSIC AND TENNIS DO GO TOGETHER!

As they say, any form of publicity is good publicity in the entertainment world – but music and tennis being good publicity?

Stefan “Redfoo” Gordy is a singer/ dancer/ DJ/ rapper who has made a decent sized name for himself in the music industry by way of his involvement in the dance group LMFAO and their biggest hit “Party Rock Anthem”. The 37 year old Redfoo has impeccable music pedigree; he is the son of legendary music mogul and founder of Motown Records, Berry Gordy. However, there is much more to Redfoo than meets the eye…

A young Stefan Gordy was a very talented tennis player when attending college. In fact, he was so good at tennis that he would regularly do battle against Mike and Bob Bryan. The Bryan twins are currently the best tennis doubles team in the world.

Music is in Redfoo’s DNA, however his love for tennis hasn’t diminished in the passing years. During the 2011 US Open Tennis Championships in New York City, Redfoo was regularly seen in the courtside supporter box of the defending champion, Samantha Stosur.

Twelve months’ on, and Redfoo was now supporting the Number One female tennis player [and rumoured girlfriend] Victoria Azarenka in the 2012 US Open Tennis Championships.

So what does this all mean?

Romantic connections aside, Redfoo knows that any form of publicity is of benefit to his career. The world media pay plenty of attention to the four Grand Slam Tennis Championships every year; Redfoo has a legitimate reason for scheduling his music commitments around his other passion [i.e. tennis] in order to leverage maximum exposure for himself.

Redfoo has been performing in South East Asia for the last couple of weeks, whilst semi-basing himself in Melbourne, Australia to support Azarenka in her defence of the Australian Open Tennis Championships.

I can still recall when Sir Cliff Richard was supporting the talented British tennis player Sue Barker at Grand Slam Tennis Tournaments in the 1970’s and 1980’s. Time as shown that there was no romance between Richard and Barker, however their connection was an early prototype of the current connection between Redfoo and Azarenka. It’s good publicity for everybody, and it’s good clean fun!!

BRITNEY SPEARS HAS [MUSICAL] CLOUT

The US business magazine Forbes has published its list of the highest-earning women in music for last year, with Britney Spears [USD$58M] narrowly pipping Taylor Swift [USD$57M] for the top prize.


Hot on their heels were Rihanna [USD$53M], Lady Gaga [USD$52M], Katy Perry [USD$45M], Beyonce [USD$40M], Adele [USD$35M], Sade [USD$33M], Madonna [USD$30M] and Shakira [USD$20M].

The music industry continues to evolve in quick fashion, to the extent that the aforementioned list of women are better described as “entertainers” rather than “musicians”. Whilst Britney Spears has been in and around the business end of the music industry for more than a decade, one could never comfortably describe her as a “musician”. Spears releases CDs [“Femme Fatale” being a big-seller in 2011] and tours the globe performing her songs [written by other people], however she is more so a “brand” to the general public. When factoring in her numerous endorsement contracts [an Elizabeth Arden fragrance deal is prominent] and television judging appearances, one can see that young Britney [well, she is only 31 years of age!] is a very marketable commodity who happens to occasionally sing a couple of songs.

A review of the 10 females listed reveals only 3 “musicians”: Taylor Swift, Adele and Sade. Whilst the balance of the list has varying degrees of “musical talent”, it is too much to ask to describe these stars as genuine musicians.

Let it be said, this is not a negative comment. This is how the music industry has evolved, and it may continue to trend in this manner for ever more. In previous decades, we have witnessed both female and male musicians branch out into acting and endorsement deals, however the vast majority of these musicians remain known for their core musicality. It will never be the case that bone fide female musicians will cease to exist; we simply need to accept that female “entertainers” will rule the roost for the future generations.

WHO NEEDS A RECORD LABEL?

Eskimo Joe [Australia’s answer to Coldplay] has adopted a novel approach to the financing of their sixth studio album.


The Perth-based band has set a target of raising AUD$40,000.00 by early February 2013 via the crowd-funding website Pozible, with the view to recording their new album in their own studio, The Wastelan. All potential financial donors to the project have the opportunity to share in various “benefits”, ranging from the chance to hear the new album prior to its release date [$500.00 donation] to a BBQ and private performance by the band [$6,000.00 donation]. Eskimo Joe has already raised $28,000.00 in 5 days.

Granted that Eskimo Joe is an established and successful rock band with a loyal global audience, their Pozible project is a great example of the embracement of new technology in the ever-evolving music industry. The band’s recent albums haven’t been able to match the commercial success of 2006’s “Black Fingernails, Red Wine”, thus it is no great surprise that Warner Music have set them free from their recording contract.

Only the strong survive in the face of adversity, and Eskimo Joe wisely invested the profits of their erstwhile financial success into the development of their own recording studio, providing a level of freedom to create their art without being too concerned about the high hourly costs of renting professional recording rooms. This point, in conjunction with the band’s established fan base and Internet site, almost negates the requirement for ongoing support from a major recording label moving forward.

If Eskimo Joe can continue to earn a comfortable living from music [and love what they do], then the “donation approach” to recording & producing studio albums is a very prudent decision and it will extend the life of the band. The financial muscle of a major label is a boost to an artist’s ego, however the present state of the music industry suggests that many labels won’t be forgoing un-recouped artist advances in the future. Every artist fears being heavily in debt to a label, as other labels don’t wish to assume the liability…

If an artist or a band has their “goodwill” and the “tools of trade” to continue a career in music, then who really needs a record label?

BEATLES: GUARANTEED CHRISTMAS PROFITS

Despite all of the negative publicity surrounding the future fortunes of EMI, their ownership of the master recordings of the entire Beatles catalogue is most definitely THE jewel in the crown of any record label. Whilst the supergroup officially disbanded more than 40 years ago and all possible recordings have been released to the public, enormous sales year-on-year warrant EMI’s marketing gurus to regularly dream up new strategies to exploit their most prized asset.


Christmas is the time of year for record labels to market their most lucrative product, and this year EMI have devised a masterstroke; blending the best in modern technology with the best in listening and viewing pleasure. The remastered Beatles catalogue will be released on high standard vinyl, lovingly packaged as a 14 album box set with familiar and little known photographs of the Fab Four.

In an era of declining sales of recorded product, EMI can’t lose this Christmas. The diehard Beatles fans will buy the box set, and the new fans will lap it up and test the sound quality on their recently acquired turntables.

After all is said and done, EMI is a business which needs to make profits in order to satisfy its shareholders. The general public will open their wallets at Christmas time, and for Beatles product. There will be a deservingly large Christmas bonus for EMI’s marketing team this year!!