10-24-14

It’s all about eyeballs. Now that I have identified my target audience as much as I can at this point, I need to build a marketing plan within my sponsorship plan to attract that audience before I can begin to attract brands. At this point, it is inevitable that not only are we considering me and my music, but my Ever Entertainment approach — an online, on-demand entertainment portal, where artists make 100% of the revenue generated in their artist channel, and audiences enjoy free.

Up to this point, I haven’t done any marketing apart from creating an online presence. Any audience I currently have is “natural” — they are finding me and Ever Entertainment on their own.

A tool that has become standard in a marketing plan is a SWOT analysis.

Strengths and Weaknesses identify internal challenges while Opportunities and Threats identify external challenges to implementing your marketing plan. This self-reflection is strategically crucial to your success.

SWOT Analysis

Okay, I think I’ve pretty well covered the bases at this point. That’s not to say my challenges won’t change over time. Just like the sponsorship plan, a marketing plan or even an entire business plan should be considered a malleable document that needs to be revisited and updated continually.

I now have to assess the potential damage of my Weaknesses and Threats and how I intend to minimize or hopefully eliminate that potential damage.

With internal Weaknesses, the thinking is that I can make alternative, internal choices to mitigate damages, because I have control over internal decision-making, policies and procedures.

Weaknesses Analysis:

|Bootstrapping – while tough in start-up phase, the rewards of retaining creative and equity control in the long run make this eventually a strength.

|Time – same as above, while tough in start-up phase, as long as I can retain control of my schedule ongoing, the reward in the long-run is maintaining a simple, low-stress quality of life, which becomes a strength.

|Little Red Hen – same as above, while tough ongoing, I minimize external demands and retain quality control of my music and my life, which becomes a strength.

|Online – provides me, again, with the opportunity to maintain a healthy, simple, low-stress life that touring cannot, and having to manufacture & distribute albums cannot. I could consider minimizing the impact by weighing the costs and benefits of offering the traditional jazz demographic the opportunity to purchase CDs or even retro vinyl on demand.

|Social Media – I have to create a plan and learn. I’m unwilling to contract this duty because it would then be fake, but I could contract a consultant ongoing to help me streamline it so I can be real with my audience using social media in a manageable manner. I see the power it has and consider it vital, and even core, to marketing my music online.

|Web Development/Design – It is what it is — I need a Steve Wozniac-type, without the equity position, so I cannot achieve this unless I can do a sponsorship trade or until I’ve sold enough sponsorships to pay. I’m still weighing crowd-sourcing as a possible solution as well. It could be a smart marketing move as well as funding alternative — but I have to weigh the perception of “crowd equity,” vs. retaining the perception of complete by-artist-for-artist creative & equity control. I honestly still lean toward the unquestioned position of complete creative and equity control. I don’t apologize for this stance. I’m well aware it is what Steve Jobs was criticized most for — and I have certainly been criticized for it in the past, but I believe his refusal to compromise or “share” creative control is why Apple products and entire vibe is what it is, which I admire. It feels even more important when it comes to music, and the milieu an artist creates to place their music within.   I cannot invite other artists to join me on Ever Entertainment until it has been revamped and is the “home theater on a computer” that I envision.

With the external Threats, I have to go through each issue and assess which action quadrant it currently belongs in:

1) Monitor: Low risk threats that you do not control but want to keep informed about that could cause minimal impact.

2) Monitor & Analyze: Medium risk threats that you do not control, but that do have the capability of causing impact.

3) Prepare Contingency Strategy: Threats that you do have some control to reduce, avoid or alleviate.

4) Prepare In-Depth Analysis and Strategy Development: More complex threats that have the greatest likelihood of impact.

|Cutting Edge – Never Been Done: my concept has never been done on the internet, but it is founded on the oldest model there is – sponsored content. While mistakes and lessons are inevitable, the foundation is solid.

|Competitor Replace: I would breathe a sigh of relief, and move my music there! It may not be my “home theater” dream, but I would zip my lip and be grateful they saved me all the work and I could just concentrate on my music. I assume greed will continue to keep competitors at bay, but ultimately, the only reason I’m doing this is because it doesn’t already exist for me to put my music on! If I walked into Shark Tank, I would straight up tell them I’m selling Ever Entertainment, and just take ongoing licensing & royalty fees, and get one of them to run it so I could put my music on it. If I got to choose who, it would be Mark Cuban. But they likely wouldn’t buy because my model is not designed to make lots of money for anyone but the artists. The House Channel needs to stay lean and automated, or the tail starts wagging the dog (which is what all of my competitors are already doing, in my humble opinion). Major Labels, of course, would be interested in owning it, but then would the artists who choose not to sign with a label be left out in the cold? Would the worldwide music funnel again be narrowed down to label artists? While I believe there is nothing wrong with a profit motive, I like a profit model that can pass the Golden Rule better. :o) I like a profit model that means maximum music worldwide. It is intentionally “by-artists-for-artists” — as soon as you get off that track, it becomes something else and returns to a more complicated business model.

|Social Media-while not everyone abides by the Golden Rule the best course of action, besides comment approval control when available, is to make sure I always do, always being cognizant that internet=stage. Having a business model that visibly pivots on making a genuine, positive difference in the world helps.

|Internet Issues – I need to assess internet and bandwidth alternatives, and create a contingency plan such as securing a back up provider, servers, etc.

|Wall – Website Design: I fully recognize that my vision cannot come to fruition until I am able to contract a web developer/designer to revamp the Ever Entertainment website. It is the issue that is front and center. I suppose I could abandon the whole Ever Entertainment concept, and retreat to just my Sere website, just selling sponsorships there and for my live shows — but I would lose so much. It is not only greatly advantageous to other artists and brands to have Ever Entertainment, it is an amazing help to me! I strongly believe I could only achieve a fraction of the audience or brand sponsorship on Sere’s website that I could on Ever Entertainment. I also would miss out on the electric energy of having all that music and all that audience in one space!
Okay, I’ve run my SWOT Analysis as best I can at this juncture. I now need to do a Competitive Analysis asking myself the following questions:

1)Direct Competitors – all online music streaming services. The list seems to grow every day:
Spotify
Pandora
LastFM
Live365
YouTube
MySpace
etc.

Now, you would think I would be putting other female jazz artists here, but in my model, they are not my competitors, they are my compatriots! In my model, I need all the other female jazz vocalists I can get! With a neighborhood filled with female jazz vocalists, it is easier for a worldwide audience to come to that neighborhood to listen, and then easier to attract sponsors. Audiences would stay longer and it truly becomes an experience. Think of walking into one isolated gourmet chocolate store vs the feeling of being surrounded by a whole cluster of gourmet chocolate stores (I guess this analogy only works if you love chocolate like I do — but you get the idea!) A quick stop becomes instead a luxurious experience worth spending a whole day to enjoy!

2) Indirect Competitors – live venue entertainment. Since my Ever Entertainment model gradually includes whatever types of entertainment content that can be consumed on a computer, then my indirect competition becomes only that live entertainment my audience would choose to physically go to. Since virtually all entertainment can be filmed, I am then only competing for those audience members who want to “be there” in a live venue. I suppose other female jazz vocalists also become indirect competitors in that I want to make sure audiences choose my “chocolate shop” as a must visit. That is all about maintaining the quality and authenticity of my music.

3) Competitor Benefits – I have to ask myself what my potential and existing audience likes about my competitor’s services. With my direct competitors, bottomline, my audience likes listening to music free, if they can, or at a minimal cost, with the convenience of being able to listen anywhere they can access the internet. Each competitor has their own bells and whistles, but studying those, I aim to improve on them, creating an on-demand experience where the audience has creative control, if you will.

4) Competitor Costs – How much are customers paying for my competitor’s services? It varies. Some models are completely free with the audience either being subjected to audio ads or less-intrusive print ads to foot the bill. Others charge a subscription — Live 365 is an annual fee of about $90, for instance. Some are an annual fee, some are monthly — as little as $4.95/mo. Ever Entertainment will always be free as well as free of forced audio ads. Print sponsor banners and interest-based video/audio spots, in addition to embedded channel content and endorsements will be available.

5) Competitor Success – What makes my competitors successful and why? What are they doing right? Simple. My audience gets to conveniently listen to music free, or almost free in an easy to navigate format.

6) Least Successful Competitors – What are they doing wrong? The music streaming landscape is so competitive right now, the least successful drop off quite quickly. There was one, shoot, what was it called. See. I was just listening to it maybe a month ago, it went under trying to tell artists it was about promotion (which translates as no pay for the artist) and telling audiences no cost and no ads. Unless you’re independently wealthy and made it your mission in life to do this as charity, the writing was on the wall. Now I can’t even remember the name of it. That in itself is telling. This is business. Several are still running that have been accused of pay for play, charging starving artists to play their music. That not only leads to negative perceptions, but most audiences, myself included, don’t want to be subjected to streaming whatever, with no quality control. Those are probably the two most glaring examples. If I were being nitpicky (which I am in designing Ever Entertainment) the answer to this question would be way too long. Given the most important difference between Ever Entertainment and competitors, which is the artist receiving 100% of their channel revenue, it would seem like a waste to spend time on trifle.

7) Competitors Major Strengths & Weaknesses:
-Strengths – capital, web development/design expertise, offering     major labels equity
-Weaknesses – according to all the research I can find, artists are getting pennies or zero, while companies are making millions and even billions from brands

8) Competitor Changes: Are my competitors implementing any changes to their fees, products, marketing programs or operations? The research shows that competitors are currently spending a lot of time, energy and money trying to convince everyone this is the way of the future for music, trying to convince audiences (and artists?) that artists are in fact getting paid, or in the cases where artists are getting zero, trying to convince artists that the promotion value is their pay. They are in damage-control mode, as artist articles continue to surface saying they are not getting paid. It is still a very fluid environment — the wild, wild west. But, meanwhile, they are clearly making millions and even billions, major labels are now in equity positions so they are no longer yelling and without a viable hero in sight, audiences continue to listen.

9) Short and Long-Term Competitors: Because of the greed factor, once a Golden Rule profit alternative is available where artists make 100% of their channel’s brand revenue, unless another by-artist-for-artist effort does it better, audiences will have a very good reason to listen at Ever Entertainment, a reason that my competitors will not likely be willing to trump. I believe online music streaming will settle into what it should be — a direct relationship between artists and audiences, not just musically but also financially, because brands will appreciate and pay for the chance to enhance the audience’s entertainment experience, as well as be heroes.

10) Competitor Difference: How does my service differ from my competitor’s services, what is my USP (unique selling point)? Ever Entertainment’s USP is a by-artists-for-artists music streaming service where artists receive 100% of their channel’s sponsor revenue and audiences listen free to on-demand, uninterrupted music.

Whew! Brain fog. Next time!

DIY Music Sponsorship Journal – 10/24/14  Eliyora Entertainment LLC.  Ever Entertainment® © Paradunai LLC.  All international rights reserved.  All trademarks property of Paradunai LLC.  All personas, concepts and original songs created and performed by Sherese Chrétien.