Tag Archives: wimp

Availability is king – Music streaming service as described in Little Brother (published 2007)

Finally had time to start using my Kindle this Christmas and I decided to break it in by checking out something by Cory Doctorow. Based on a recommendation I received long time ago I have had his first novel “Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom” on top of my Amazon wish list for a very long time.

But unfortunately the book was not available for purchase as the publication date here all of a sudden was January 31, 2013. Is not it typical? When it comes to online content I, as pretty much any consumer, want what I want when I want it – not on January 31 – or any other release date for that matter. “Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom” has been out in Canada since 2003. It should be available for me on my Kindle in 2012.

But luckily, as Cory Doctorow release everything under the Creative Commons license, I was able to download a version for free on the author´s own website. While I was there I also decided to check out his first young adult novel “Little Brother“, which actually was the book I ended up reading this Christmas.

LIttle Brother by Cory Doctorow

Long story short: I really enjoyed reading Little Brother. It made me sort of wish this book would have been available for me when I was a teenager, but it was also a very good read even though I´m no longer a young adult. As a very passionate business analyst for a music streaming service (yup, that´s what I do for a living), I especially found this part of the book to be very amusing (in a good and impressive way considering the fact that this book was written as well as published in 2007):

indienet — all lower case, always — was the thing that made Pigspleen Net into one of the most successful independent ISPs in the world. Back when the major record labels started suing their fans for downloading their music, a lot of the independent labels and their artists were aghast. How can you make money by suing your customers?

Pigspleen’s founder had the answer: she opened up a deal for any act that wanted to work with their fans instead of fighting them. Give Pigspleen a license to distribute your music to its customers and it would give you a share of the subscription fees based on how popular your music was. For an indie artist, the big problem isn’t piracy, it’s obscurity: no one even cares enough about your tunes to steal ‘em.

It worked. Hundreds of independent acts and labels signed up with Pigspleen, and the more music there was, the more fans switched to getting their Internet service from Pigspleen, and the more money there was for the artists. Inside of a year, the ISP had a hundred thousand new customers and now it had a million — more than half the broadband connections in the city.

That was (legally speaking) futuristic back in 2007, but pretty much a reality already in 2008 – although it sort of wasn´t mainstream in Scandinavia before 2010, and music streaming/all you can eat music services is still on an early stage in North America as well as Scandinavia.

The music industry, however, has come a bit further compared to the book industry when it comes to making sure everything is legally available for the end consumer through the same service (“the more music there was, the more fans switched to getting their Internet service from Pigspleen” – a scenario illustrating the importance of musicians being available on music streaming services as well as authors/publishers selling their books on the Kindle store and similar services). Luckily the book industry have writers such as Cory Doctorow – just as the music industry is lucky to have musicians as well as label reps understanding the new music economy.

The end of this “Little Brother-streaming-service” story is that I have already pre-ordered the follow up book “Homeland”, making sure it will be auto-delivered to my Kindle on February 5, 2013. And even though everything is available for free on his website I am definitely planning on purchasing many more books by Cory Doctorow (I´m hereby a fan). This is how the economy of “free” works.

And what can we learn from this? Well, availability definitely is king! And the way I see it, one may say that my first Kindle experience illustrates that in a very good way :-)

Share

In Adresseavisen

I had the pleasure of speaking at Midtnorsk Musikkmesse Nov 4 2012. After my presentation Adresseavisen had a chat with Simen Idsøe Eidsvåg from HES and me as a representative from WiMP. We talked about streaming and the many marketing and PR opportunities artists have nowadays.

Check out a pdf of the article here or click the image for a big jpg.

Share

Article in Sandnesposten

Me (to the right) in Shevils at SÅ Festival 2012. FOTO: Kamilla Kvamme

I´ve been very busy since we moved to Norway and I have therefore not been able to keep this website up to date by posting on a weekly or even a monthly basis. Not sure what to do about that moving forward, but I am pretty sure I will figure something out (but it will probably take some time before I figure it out).

A lot has happened since the last update. My work at WiMP is obviously taking up most of my time as well as I have started to play bass in a band called Shevils. Sandnesposten picked that up  and did a write up of me playing in a band while working for a music streaming service. The interview is pretty good. Check it out here (all in Norwegian):

Jobbar med 16 millionar songar

Share

Life is busy. Life is good.

A little update:

Ever since I finished my master thesis I have been extremely busy at Universal Music Denmark. That´s why things have been rather quiet here on this website. I truly love my work and line of expertise, and I am looking very much forward to what the future will bring (there´s more news coming very soon). At Universal I have been busy preparing the Universal Music repertoire for the DK launch of Spotify as well as maintaining the relationship with other key accounts such as WiMP and TDC Play. Universal Music Denmark has also launched Digster – a service offering editorial playlists for Danish users of Spotify, WiMP and TDC Play.

I actually had Digster as a case study when writing my master thesis on “playlist marketing in the new music economy”. Last month I had the pleasure of talking about Digster as well as my master thesis to music management students at The Rhythmic Music Conservatory in Copenhagen. Here´s the presentation i made for this talk. The master thesis is actually confidential, so this is the furthers you will get in regards to getting your hands on my master thesis (the presentation gives an introduction to Digster as a service as well as  considerations in regards to theory and the methodology when working on the master thesis):

Share

Musikselskaber 2010

Picture from ifpi.dk

I have a quote in regards to music streaming services in a new report released by IFPI Denmark June 1, 2011. The report is in Danish and can be downloaded here.

Click here to visit the IFPI website and read what they are saying about their own report.

The report is pointing out the fact that Denmark  is (still) lagging behind when it comes to commonly used as well as widely available music streaming services.

Share

Record labels as value adding content providers

When in New York last week I had an interesting lunch conversation with an acquaintance that works with online marketing within a totally different business than the music industry. A topic that came up was the existence of record labels (as we know them). One of many questions was why they still exist and if they even have a basis for existence in the new music economy? One argument for why record labels should cease to exist was in relation to how the Internet (now) provides an efficient means of music distribution where a major label investment is not necessary to facilitate the distribution (David, M. 2010: 136).

Photo: CC: Shutrbug72 / Flickr

 

I definitely agree on the fact that the Internet provides an efficient means of music distribution. I also agree on the fact that a lot of bands and artists don’t need to sign with a record label to build a career. I do however still think that record labels has an important role to play in the new music economy. This new role does however not (only) involve hiring a concert booker and implement a 360 deal to their business plan as well as talking about themselves as “music companies” rather than “record labels”. In my opinion the most important role of traditional record labels today is the role of “value adding content providers”. Here’s why:

 

Wikström (2009) argues that the characteristics of the new music economy (high connectivity and little control, music provided as a service and increased amateur creativity) are driven by the digital media technologies (p. 85). These main characteristics are also highlighted in the “Opbrud” report created by the Danish consulting agency Kontrabande (2011). In this report Kontrabande (2011) points out that the development of the digital market for the media industries (film, tv, books, music, games, journalism) is characterized by little control due to fragmentation (unbundling) and individualization of traditional media content, as well as increased amateur creativity and social relevance (sharing within communities). The report also highlights the demand for trustworthy filtering of content. This due to all amateur creativity and information overload for many users (p. 4). Wikström (2009) refers to Negus (1992) when he elaborates on the fact that “the music industry is about ‘developing musical content and personalities’ and to be able to license the use of that content and those personalities to consumers (…)” (p. 17). An important point on user-generated content made by Clay Shirky (2008) is that “much of what gets posted on any given day is in the public but not for the public” (p. 90). The same goes for musical content. As already pointed out the Internet provides an efficient means of music distribution and a major label investment is not necessary to facilitate such distribution (David, M. 2010: 136).  However, more music are produced and available online than what actually reach the consumer. Wikström (2009) refers to Hirsch (1970) and theory on “preselection systems” when describing characteristics of the copyright industries’ marketing challenges. The point is that music listeners only experience a fraction of new music released. What people end up listening to (as in what ends up becoming popular) is what passes trough the gatekeepers filtering system (p. 22). The music consumers’ now need to easily be able to navigate all the music in the Cloud (Wikström, P. 2009: 175).

 

It’s no secret that the music industry has been and still is hit driven. Industry success on a major label level is most often measured by looking at the music charts (who’s number one). Traditionally what has reached the top of the charts and the audience is what music labels have invested a lot of money in (TV-advertising etc). However the increase in music production and songs available online has made it necessary for the music labels to pay for exposure in more outlets in order to keep the audience on a constant level. And as we know, the decrease in CD sales has lead to an additional reduction in income. This way it is without doubt that the traditional way of music marketing and receiving attention for certain artists and musical projects will have a negative impact on profitability. It is therefore crucial for the music companies to lower investments, spend the marketing money more wisely and rely on music fans “to create a good buzz”. (Wikström, P. 2009: 91-92)

 

But as the music companies now has to rely on fans to create a good buzz and with an increasing demand for trustworthy filtering of content, there’s no doubt in my mind that record labels should play their role as “content providers” more serious. As the music industry is about ‘developing musical content and personalities’ as well as making sure that the musical content and those personalities reach consumers, it is highly important that all the music produced are of high quality and that it stands out of the mass creation of “amateur” content. A traditional music label should already have the staff to make sure this happens. I am certain this sounds a bit obvious, but every teenager during the 1990s probably remembers some of the disappointment they sometimes experienced after purchasing an album based on a radio hit. The hit single was good, but the rest of the album wasn’t. In the new music economy consumers no longer have to deal with this type of problems. Today music fans are able to buy access to “all the music in the world” through streaming services such as Spotify, WiMP and Rdio etc. This means that music consumption and eventually revenue streams will be based on what people actually listen to and not on the amount of albums and singles bought in record stores. This speaks out for the importance for record labels to make sure that all the content they represent are of high quality (the filter role of a gatekeeper). Hits are of course still important, but all the music made public by the music company is highly significant. In the new music economy, music companies simply achieve market share based on how much of their entire catalogue music consumers listen to. People still tend to listen to the most popular artists, and that will never change, but it has never been more important to ensure high quality of the entire catalogue. As more music is being produced than ever before (I have been talking about “cultural inflation” for about five years now) and easily distributed online, the music companies mainly needs to make sure that what they release is “better than the rest of what is out there”. The record labels therefore needs to make sure all of their music available in the Cloud is not just in the public, but also for the public. Simply put: Anyone can distribute music online. Not everyone can be on a label. In a world of cultural inflation, this is part of how the filtering of musical content might work.

 

In an interview with the Los Angeles based music blog Rollo & Grady, Seth Godin talks about the music industry in relation to his book “Tribes” (2008): “(…) music labels used to be in the business of grabbing shelf space, on the radio and in the record store. Now, the music industry needs to realign and be in the business of finding and connecting and leading groups of people who want to follow a musician and connect with the other people who want to do the same” (Rollo & Grady, 2009). The way I see it music companies should be about building strong brands and benefit from the artist career as a whole. The best way to build strong brands is definitely by making sure all the music released is of high quality (nobody wants to follow a crappy musician as well as nobody wants to be a crappy musician). This speaks out for the importance of highly skilled A&R people at record labels that not just search for the next number one hit. Today the artist and repertoire employee also needs the ability to lead and guide artists throughout their whole career. Marketing personnel at record labels has for a long time been the strongest argument why someone should sign with record labels. They still are. The marketing power of a record label might be crucial in order to break upcoming acts. However, as the return on investment is harder to reach the more money you spend on exposure in more outlets, the more important it is to make long strategic planning instead of plugging the next big hit or sensational story while paying large sums for exposure in tons of outlets music consumer doesn’t really care about (when was the last time you really noticed and acted upon an online advertisement?). It’s the entire content as a collection that is the most important asset at records labels. The focus therefore needs to be more on all content rather than just hits. At the same time it is crucial to spend marketing money more wisely as well as making sure the fans gets something besides a product wrapped together as a basic album. Today everyone can get their music on iTunes, but not everyone can create something special for their fans – something out of the ordinary. If you want people to recommend your music to others, make sure it is recommendable. The basic rule of content providers is simply that the service is available at little or no cost, to promote their primary business. Content providers are also referred to as “value added services” which on a conceptual level should add value to the standard service offering. In this case the standard service offering is the artist career as a whole, while the music (as in recorded content) of the artist is used to promote the entire business (although it is of course still possible to make money by selling recorded content).

 

A survey recently conducted by ReverbNation shows that 3 out of 4 unsigned artists still want a label deal (Digital Music News 2011). This is also the case with most artists I know, and for the most part this is because 1) artists wants to get acknowledged for their music and 2) they really want to find a home for their music. If an artist really looks up to another artist, he/she/they would in some cases kill to be on the same label or “discovered” by the same A&R as their idols. It is therefore important not to let artists down. After all, they provide the content providers with the actual content and that way function as the most important stakeholder for music companies – Next to the music fans of course. Without fans, music is dead and without good music there will be no fans. That’s why it is crucial to give fans something extra.

 

As any other stakeholder, such as a music journalist, or digital distributor, I would however love to know that whenever music labels release music, it is of high quality, and I would love it if I just knew it instead of having them convince me. I am however not saying that everyone should be on a label to be great (recent history has definitely proved that that’s not how it works). What I am saying is simply that if record labels are supposed to have a reason for existence, it is first and foremost to become a filter of mass production (instead of becoming the mass production). In other words record labels needs to be providers of great musical content (and then some) where they add value to the standard service offering. One thing is the marketing expertise; another thing is the ability to continuously release great musical content on a market where the consumer (and not the marketer) has most of the power and where amateur content strive for the same attention as “music with a marketing budget”.

 

 

Bibliography

 

  • David, M. (2010) Peer to Peer and the Music Industry – The Criminalization of Sharing (First edition). London: Sage
  • Digital Music News (2011). Survey: 3 Out of 4 Unsigned Artists Still Want a Label Deal. Digital Music News (28.03.2010) Online: http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/032511unsigned [Accessed 03.04.2011]
  • Godin, S. (2008). Tribes: We Need You to Lead Us, London: Piatkus
  • Kontrabande (2011). Opbrud – Strømninger og bevægelser i markederne for film, tv, bøger, musik, spil og journalistic 2011. Kontrabande (March 2011).
  • Rollo & Grady (2009). Rollo & Grady Interview // Seth Godin (February 5, 2009). Located: http://www.rollogrady.com/rollo-grady-interview-seth-godin/ [Accessed 20.12.2010]
  • Shirky, C. (2008). Here Comes Everybody – How Change Happens When People Come Together, London: Penguin Books
  • Wikström, P. (2009) The Music Industry: Digital Media And Society Series. Cambridge: Polity Press
Share

Music streaming services, taste communities and the marketing of access.

The success of streaming services such as Spotify in Sweden and Norway, as well as WiMP in Norway and the attention of Mog and Rdio etc in the USA, proves that music streaming services has a great potential to liberate music consumption, as well as drive traffic from illegal music sites. Economically this is an important shift in music consumption habits and many market analysts are arguing that music-streaming services may be the record industry’s economic salvation in a downhill market situation. Streaming services therefore seem to be the most obvious place for the music industry to now reach its audience. A major challenge is however that one cannot take a product that sells for dollars and replace it with one that “sells” for cents and then expect the industry to remain healthy. At least not if the overall marketing and operations strategy remains the same. This way it is possible to argue that future expenses needs to be lower in order to realize the return on investment.

Illustraion photo: Arnbjørn Marklund

So as a one time stream of an album generate less income compared to a sale of the same album on a CD (or download for that matter), the music industry is facing some important challenges when it comes to gaining considerable profit from music streaming. As the business of music is transforming from an industry driven to a fan driven culture, it is important to build a community of fans and to have these music fans engage in an economic relationship in order to consume music. As far as traditional music consumption goes, this means that the strategic operations are changing from being all about selling units until obtaining as many streams as possible for every artist and music track represented by the company. This is significant in order to increase royalty payments. As a bonus, music streaming also has the potential to boost the popularity of artists represented by the music company. The more popular an artist becomes, the more money one may also expect to earn from licensing the artist’s songs to a film or video game, and the more income you may also earn from the sales of merchandise and/or sponsorship agreements.

But as it is becoming more and more important for consumers to have access to the specific content rather than actually own it, it is a bit more challenging for the music industry to position themselves towards the consumer. The amount of money the consumer spends on music streaming is not necessarily out of loyalty to an artist or a music company. It is because the consumer has access to millions of tracks. One may actually argue that the liberation of music consumption in a world of access is about individual music discovery and social sharing within taste communities. The consumers are still music fans, and might therefore have several favorite artists they prefer listening to, but as the consumers already have access to everything, it is no longer about having ownership of the “right” content. For the music industry it is therefore crucial to make sure the consumer discover, listen to, enjoy – and therefore “come back to” the right content. This is how music fans enter into an economic relationship in order to consume (more) music. Access to everything is quite simply more important than ownership of something, and future marketing of music might just be about filtering relevant content for music fans.

Music companies therefore need to be on the forefront of these new market developments in order to future prosper. The following months I will research further on this subject as I finish up my master thesis at the IT-University / CBS here in Copenhagen. I will keep you guys updated as much as I can. My main goal is to to explore how the music industry might reach the music consumers and gain profitable market share through the marketing of music streams, as well as how one may build and maintain a community of music fans in a world of access.

Share

Musikere SKAL tjene penger på musikken

Så har det skjedd (beklager norskheten, men når jeg er så engasjert som nå funker det verken på dansk eller engelsk)…[edit: artikkel er nå endret - min perspektivering ble skrevet mens opprinnelig artikkel stadig var online.] Jeg har blitt misforstått i media, eller rettere sagt: jeg har blitt fremstilt fullstendig feil i media. Det til tross for at jeg både har gjennomsett og godkjent alle mine sitater. Med andre ord står jeg inne for alle mine sitater i anførselstegn. Det er historien rundt som fremstår som regelrett pølsevev.

Og hva snakker jeg om? [edit: Artikkel som først ble publisert er lagt ut som screenshot lenger ned]

Her er link til aktuell [edit: nå endret] artikkel i Politiken

[edit: 26. januar, 2011 kl. 07.53 har jeg sendt mail til journalist og bedt om at vinkling ut over direkte sitater rettes til]

[edit: 26. januar, 2011 kl 09.00 er overskriften på artikkelen endret fra "Digital spåmand: Musikere skal ikke tjene penge på musikken" til "Digital spåmand: Musikere skal ikke kun tjene penge på musikken"]

[edit: 26. januar, 2011 (ca) kl 13.20 Innhold i artikkel endret på bakgrunn av oppklarende snakk med journalist.]

Jeg synes ikke det er nødvendig å forklare så utrolig mye (jeg har mildt sagt vært litt fortvilet over hvordan min ekspertise blir fremstilt i denne artikkelen, men har samtidig møtt utrolig mye forståelse for at overskift og innhold ikke er i samsvar med mine sitater. Jeg velger derfor å tro at de fleste forstår at dette er litt mer humbug enn sannhet). La meg imidlertid forklare hovedessensen i hva som er feil:

Digital spåmand

La meg starte med å takke for tittelen. Min Twitter-konto har tikket inn med forslag om oppgradering av både CV og visittkort. Det skal imidlertid understrekes at jeg ikke har noe til overs for spådommer (jeg er en tilhenger av sannhet). Under intervjuet spør journalist meg om noe som har med fremtiden å gjøre. I denne forbindelse POENGTERER jeg at ett av mine største prinsipper faktisk er å IKKE uttale meg om fremtiden, men at man selvfølgelig kan snakke ut ifra de tendenser man ser i markedet i dag. Jeg håper derfor virkelig det er desken (altså, en eller annen forfjamset redaksjonssekretær) som har hatt livlig fantasi i denne sammenhengen, for selv om mange har uttalt at det er en utrolig kul tittel så er jeg altså ingen digital spåmand (det er det INGEN som er).

Photo: Flickr / islandguy808

Så over til neste elendighet:

Musikere skal ikke tjene penger på musikken.

Jeg har selv tjent penger på å spille musikk. For helvete: Min kone er musiker. Musikere SKAL tjene penger på musikk. Hvis ikke musikere tjener penger på musikk, tjener ikke musikkselskapene noe. Hvis ikke musikere tjener penger på musikken, har jeg faktisk ingen eksistensberettigelse i forhold til hva jeg til daglig arbeider med (jeg mener forøvrig også at journalister skal tjene penger på å skrive – bare i tilfelle noen var i tvil om det). La meg argumentere mot overskriften ved å sitere meg selv fra artikkelen:

“Kunstnerne tjener ikke nødvendigvis så meget på streaming som på cd-salg. Men man bliver nødt til at se på en kunstnerkarriere som et hele.”

Det handler altså om at utbetalinger fra en stream av et album ikke tilsvarer utbetaling for salg av en CD. Dette er det samme som at et album i mp3 format ikke gir det samme i utbetaling som en CD. Dette henger sammen med hvordan de grunnleggende økonomiske prinsipper fungerer i forhold til opplag og etterspørsel. Som musiker, band, kunstner etc handler det i disse tider om å se på en kunstnerkarriere som en helhet. Denne helhet inkluderer musikk-streaming, salg av downloads, salg av fysiske formater, ulike former for merchandise, konserter, sponsorater, publishing, synkronisering osv.

Jeg er med andre ord av den oppfatning av at man SKAL tjene penger på musikken. Musikken er nemlig hovedproduktet. Hvis jeg mente at man ikke skulle tjene penger på musikk, hvorfor i all verden har jeg i samme artikkel uttalt følgende:

“Det er vigtigt, at det primære medie, hvor folk lytter til musikken ikke er gratis”.

Lovlige tjenester som Spotify og WiMP er begge tjenester som koster penger. Forbrukeren betaler enten gjennom et abonnement (WiMP og Spotify), eller ved å lytte til reklamer (Spotify). For tiden er det imidlertid ingen hemmelighet at en abonnementstjeneste (altså der hvor man selv betaler x-antall kroner for tilgangen til musikken) er det som gir flest penger tilbake til rettighetshaver. Prinsippet er enkelt: Bygger man et hus (som man selger), fortjener man også å få betalt for det! Derfor er det klart at det er viktig at det primære medie hvor folk lytter til musikken ikke er gratis. ERGO: MUSIKERE SKAL TJENE PENGER PÅ MUSIKKEN.

Jeg er imidlertid glad følgende poeng kom fram:

»Spotify og andre lovlige streamingtjenester gør Piratebay (musikpiratsite, red.) overflødig, fordi du ikke behøver at downloade ulovligt, når du har al musikken er tilgængelig på lovlig vis«, siger han.

En ting er dermed at man får mindre betalt for et stream av et album sammenliknet med et kjøp av en CD. En annen ting er at det er utrolig viktig å se på lovlige streamingtjenester som viktige plattformer som overflødiggjør ulovlig nedlastning (pirateri). På denne måten vil streaming tjenester potensielt føre til en merinntjening for musikkbransjen etter hvert som streaming tjenestene potensielt kanibaliserer (på den gode måte) de ulovlige tjenester.

Gjennom en riktig strategi rent markedsføringsmessig og i forhold til økt fokus på kundebehandling tror jeg fremtiden er meget lys for musikkbransjen (legg merke til at jeg sier “tror” når jeg snakker om fremtiden, jeg er altså ingen “spåmand”). Mine prinsipper handler om at det er viktig for artister/musikere å oppbygge seg en karriere gjennom å tilgodekjenne fans og derfor også gi fans hva fans vil ha. Deler av hva de fleste musikkfans vil ha er på nåværende tispunkt streamingtjenester. Dette understreker suksessen til tjenester som Spotify og WiMP i land som Sverige og Norge. Et økt musikkonsum vil dermed potensielt være til stor gagn for bransjen, og på tross av at en stream av et album i seg selv gir mindre utbetaling enn kjøp av en CD, vil summen av helheten stadig være bærekraftig nok for en kreativ bransje i konstant utvikling.

Nevnte jeg forresten at musikere SKAL tjene penger på musikken?

Screenshot av artikkelen som den ble publisert:

Share

Slides from my presentation on Music streaming services and online music consumption – How access to everything is more important than ownership of something

This is the slides from my presentation on my latest report on music streaming services. This time they are in English (yay!). The presentation also includes some thoughts on future challenges for the music industry in order to monetize/succeed with music streaming services. The data in my presentation is based on my own research which was amongst Norwegian students primarily between the age of 20-29.
Share

Music streaming services and online music consumption – How access to everything is more important than ownership of something

New report: How does music streaming services affect online music consumption habits and how can we expect such services to affect consumer behavior in Denmark?

The report takes a closer look on Norwegian music consumption and the usage of Spotfiy and Wimp. It is based on an online survey with 332 respondents conducted amongst students in Norway (96,3% are Norwegian citizens). The survey was carried out in the period from April 18th until June 1, 2010. The respondents are primarily between the age of 20-24 (58,7%) and 25-29 years of age (29.5%) and there’s a 50/50 division between male and female respondents. The population was contacted through their student networks at the University of Oslo, Bergen, Tromsø and Trondheim as well as Hedmark University College.

Illustraion photo: Arnbjørn Marklund

Furthermore the survey has been compared with previous research done by the undersigned and three other students at the IT-University in Copenhagen, Denmark.

Conclusion:

As people still listen to music on “old” formats such as radio and CD, the reports’ analysis shows that there’s no reason to predict radical changes in music consumption and listening habits in the immediate future. It is however without doubt that the CD is valued less in a world of access. The future of music consumption is clearly about providing access to content instead of selling units. With the launch of music streaming services, the overall music consumption will go up and generate more value for the music industry as a whole. In addition music streaming services leads to a decrease in illegal downloads. However, strong brand awareness and size of content is of decisive matter in order to have legal streaming services heavily minimize piracy. Although most people do not want to pay for music online, one may still expect some users of music streaming services to pay for its usage. The survey shows that 21,6% of Norwegian users of music streaming services pay to use it. As the network society values the actual size of content, streaming services need to have everything available in order to be attractive. Music consumers want access to everything including the record labels massive back catalogue – no matter if they already own any of this content on other formats. The size of the music collection is therefore the most important feature to attract users, and will therefore be decisive when it comes to pricing. Other features such as the ability to share playlists, seem to be of rather insignificant matter for the average user. However, as so-called “superusers” value the social sharing of music, such features will be of great importance in order to draw attention to the actual streaming service. Seen from an industry perspective, streaming services might actually seem like the only basis for existence on the consumer market for the established music business. On the other hand it is most likely that revenues from streaming services will not match the old economy of selling units. It is therefore important for the traditional music industry to take serious action in order to consolidate on existing markets, as well as entering into new music markets. One may not expect streaming services to save revenues. Such services do however have the potential to increase value of music in general as the overall music consumption goes up.

Download the whole report for free by clicking this link

Share