Archive for January, 2010

Case Studies On New Music Business Models

Tuesday, January 26th, 2010

This is the kurb blog where I post things that are interesting to me.

If you want to read my Music business blog you can check out the link and email kurbpromo@gmail.com

It’s no secret that there’s a lot of concern these days about what the music industry will look like going forward — especially from those who work on the label side of the business and have been around for a bit. A variety of things have caused rapid change in the market. Competition from other forms of entertainment, such as the internet, movies and video games, have put more pressure on the industry, as consumers have been presented with significantly more options for their entertainment attention and dollars. And, of course, there’s the ever-present specter of unauthorized file sharing — or, as the industry prefers to call it (accurately or not), “piracy.”

While the industry spent many years fighting the rise of the internet as a distribution and promotion method for music, it was eventually forced to recognize it. The labels eventually licensed music to Apple and iTunes (as well as some other stores). It took them way too long to recognize that people wanted DRM-free music, but they’ve finally come around to recognize that as well.

But the big new questions are all about licensing. New services are starting to show up on the scene, such as the industry’s new darling, Spotify. Then there are attempts, such as those by Choruss and Warner Music, to set up something that is somewhat akin to a blanket license. For the most part, the industry hasn’t shown much willingness to do these sorts of deals in manners that allow the underlying companies to survive, let alone profit. Numerous innovative startups have suffocated under burdensome licensing terms — and as each one fails, it just gives consumers fewer and fewer reasons to actually use these services, wondering how long each will last until it goes out of business.

However, there is another solution: stop worrying and learn to embrace the business models that are already helping musicians make plenty of money and use file sharing to their advantage, even in the absence of licensing or copyright enforcement.

In simplest terms, the model can be defined as:

Connect with Fans (CwF) + Reason to Buy (RtB) = The Business Model

Sound simple? It is, if you understand the basics — and it can be incredibly lucrative. The problem, of course, is that very few seem to fully understand how this model works. However, let’s go through some examples.

Trent Reznor, the man behind the band Nine Inch Nails, has done so many experiments that show how this model works that it’s difficult to describe them all. He’s become a true leader in showing how this model works in a way that has earned him millions while making fans happy, rather than turning them into the enemy.

Reznor has always reached out to his fans, and has an amazingly comprehensive website, with forums, chat rooms and many other ways of interacting. He encourages fans to better connect with each other as well. While companies like Warner Music forced all the music videos of their artists off YouTube for many months, Reznor actually aggregates all the videos his fans take at concerts (he encourages them to bring cameras) on one page on his own website. He does the same for photos. He released a (free) iPhone app that allowed fans to locate each other, and communicate with each other, while sharing photos and videos as well. It’s all about connecting with those fans, and helping them better connect with each other, so they feel like a part of a club.

From there, he gives fans real reasons to buy. Lately, he’s taken to releasing everything he records for free online, knowing that the music will show up on file sharing sites anyway, so he sees no reason to fight it. Yet, he adds many other options that people might want to buy. With his release of the album Ghosts I-IV, he released all the tracks under a Creative Commons license that allowed anyone to share them online for free. Yet, he also set up some cool “reasons to buy.” You could get the two disc CD, if you wanted, for just $10. Above that, though, was a Deluxe Edition Package, for $75. It was, effectively, a box set, but around a single album. Beyond the two CDs, it also included a DVD and a Blu-ray and a photobook of images.

Where the experiment got even more interesting was that he offered up the $300 Ultra-Deluxe Limited Edition Package — of which there was a limit of just 2,500 available. This was an even more impressive “box” that also included the songs on high quality vinyl, and some beautiful giclée print images. But, most interesting of all was that that limited set of 2,500 were all signed by Reznor himself.

It took just 30 hours for all 2,500 to sell out, bringing in $750,000 in just over a day.

For music he was giving away for free.

But, by connecting with fans, and giving them a reason to buy, they did. In the first week alone, combining all the other offerings for Ghosts I-IV, Reznor brought in $1.6 million. Again, this is for music he was giving away for free.

The idea that you “can’t compete with free” or that free means there’s no business model is a myth. As Reznor and others have recognized, when the music goes free, it opens up new opportunities for better, stronger, more efficient business models.

Reznor’s next album, The Slip, was released just a few months later, and again, was given away entirely free, but it was released the very same day as he announced his next Nine Inch Nails tour. All he asked, if you wanted to download the music, was that you provide an email address. He then gave fans the option of what quality to download the songs — all the way up to lossless FLAC files. All for free. But, if you downloaded the files, you also learned about the tour, and the tickets were quickly snapped up.

The free music didn’t hurt Reznor’s ability to earn money. It enhanced it.

By connecting with fans and giving them a reason to buy, he’s been able to thrive.

Some have complained that Reznor is not a representative example. After all, that huge fanbase came about in large part because of his success under the “old” model, where he was signed to a major record label who helped promote his album and turn him into an international rock star. While some may quibble with how much the label actually helped Reznor, it’s worth exploring how this model has also worked for many other artists — from the superstars to new up-and-coming acts.

Josh Freese is a session drummer based in Los Angeles, who appears on well over 100 albums and performs with many different bands. He’s played with (among others), Nine Inch Nails, Guns ‘N Roses, Sting, Devo, The Vandals, the Offspring. Yet, outside of certain musical circles, he doesn’t have a huge individual reputation with fans. So, when he released his first solo album, called Since 1972, in March of 2009, he decided to set up a system similar to Reznor’s Ghosts I-IV experiment, but made it more fitting to his own personality — which meant making the options extreme and hilarious.

There were cheap options to get the music and CDs, but at $50, you would also get a personal 5 minute “thank you” phone call, where he said you could ask anything you wanted (his suggestion: “Which one of Sting’s mansions has the comfiest beds.”) There was a limited $250 option to get lunch with Freese at a PF Changs or a $500 chance to get dinner with him at Sizzler. The lunches sold out in about a week.

Then Freese took the model to a different level altogether. At $2,500 (limit of 5 available), he would provide a drum lesson, where you’d get to keep one of Freese’s snare drums. You’d also visit the Hollywood Wax Museum with Josh and one of a rotating list of his rockstar friends (depending on who was available). Finally, you’d get to take and keep any three items from Josh’s closet.

At $10,000, you’d get dinner with Josh and a rockstar friend, before hanging out at Disneyland (where Josh’s father worked for many years, and where Josh got his start as a professional drummer) with Josh. And at the end of the day, you would get to keep Josh’s Volvo station wagon — after dropping him off at home. Obviously, there was only one of those available.

There were also $20,000 and $75,000 options available, including many more offers, like having Josh join your band or be your personal assistant for a few weeks. You’d also get to go on tour with Josh. He would also write and record a five-song EP about you. A teenager in Florida actually purchased the $20,000 option, and spent a week with Josh, including a night on the Queen Mary cruise ship, a pizza party at Mark Mothersbaugh (of Devo)’s house and a game of mini-golf with the singer from Tool.

Once again, by connecting with his fans, and giving them something of scarce value, Freese was able to create a business model that worked.

Connecting with Fans (CwF) plus a Reason to Buy (RtB) worked again.

However, some still complain that he’s a product of the “old” industry, even if he was little known outside of it.

The next example is Jill Sobule, who had a hit song in 1995 with “I Kissed A Girl” (not the Katy Perry song). Since then, however, she’s been dropped from two record labels and had two independent labels she was signed to go out of business. When it came time to record her latest album, she decided to get her fans to help fund it. She’d already done an excellent job connecting with her fans, regularly interacting with them on Facebook, where she would hold fun contests each day and actually chat with them and respond to questions.

She launched a website called “Jill’s Next Record” that — like Reznor and Freese — offered up many options for how her fans could support her to fund a new album. They could pay $200 and get free access to any shows for a year. They could get their name mentioned on a “thank you” song. At $5,000, she would do a home concert at your house. She even noted you could charge for that one, and maybe even make some money. She ended up doing five or six such concerts. At $10,000 (described as the “weapons grade plutonium” level) you could sing on the album. This was meant to be a joke, but a woman in the UK purchased it, and Jill had her flown out to LA where she did, in fact, appear singing backing vocals on the album.

Her goal was to raise $75,000, and she had no idea if she’d be able to reach that number at all. Yet, she broke through that number and ended up raising over $80,000 in just 53 days. With that, she was able to go into the studio and record a full scale production, including hiring famed producer Don Was to handle production.

CwF+RtB worked again.

Again, some complain that Jill is not representative, due to her hit song in 1995 — though, again, they’ll ignore her being dropped from two record labels and and having two others go out of business.

So, let’s look at Corey Smith. In the earlier part of this decade, Smith was a high school teacher, playing open mic nights on weekends. But then, he started focusing on building his music career. He started playing numerous live shows, and really worked hard to connect with fans. He gave away all of his music for free off of his website, and used that to drive more fans to his shows. On top of that, he offered special $5 pre-sale tickets to many shows, which has a useful side effect: his biggest fans would convince many others to go as well, building up his fan base, and getting more people to go to more shows. He tried pulling his free music off of his website as an experiment, and saw that his sales on iTunes actually dropped when he did that. In 2008, mostly thanks to live shows, Corey was able to gross nearly $4 million. While giving his music away for free. Connecting with fans and giving them a reason to buy worked wonders.

Jonathon Coulton was a computer programmer. In September of 2006, he decided to write, record and release a new song every week for a year — with all of the songs being released under a Creative Commons license, so anyone could share them. And share them they did. Coulton became a cult sensation, and was making a good living within months of this decision. His fans were supporting him along the way, even creating music videos for every song he released. He started using services like Eventful to more strategically target concert opportunities. If enough people requested a show in a certain location, he knew it would be profitable and started “parachuting” in to do shows that he knew would make him money. Again, by connecting with fans and giving them a real reason to buy, he was able to build up a great following and make a good living.

Moto Boy is a singer/songwriter in Sweden on the wonderfully named label “Songs I Wish I Had Written.” Moto Boy and his label purposely put all of his songs on file sharing networks — including The Pirate Bay (the label’s founder, at times, has shared an office with one of The Pirate Bay’s founders). But, Moto Boy has worked quite hard to connect with fans. He has a great website, where fans can interact, and he encourages sharing his music in creative ways. When a bunch of his fans started filming his concerts and putting them on video hosting sites like YouTube and Vimeo, his label found the best such vidoes, and put them all together into a “YouTube concert.” Compare that to record labels like Warner Music forcing their content off of YouTube. While all of Moto Boy’s music is free, he’s continued to connect with fans in fascinating ways. Last year, he began selling wind-up music boxes, that play one of his songs. Just recently, he launched a limited edition (only 25) of those music boxes in beautiful, hand-crafted wooden boxes, signed by Moto Boy, with a CD and the music notation inside the box. Connecting with the fans and giving them a reason to buy beyond just the music has turned Moto Boy into a star in Sweden.

Amanda Palmer is a singer who made a name for herself as a member of the “punk cabaret duo” The Dresden Dolls. While she put out a solo album on Roadrunner Records (a subsidiary of Warner Music), she found that they had little interest in promoting her, and took things into her own hands. She reached out directly to fans on services like Twitter, often setting up “flash gigs” where people would show up wherever she wanted to perform. In June of 2008, one such flash gig at a beach in Los Angeles ended up with an impromptu, beautiful, music video for a song that Palmer had just learned that morning, due to a suggestion from a fan on Twitter. And she’s doing a good job making money, as well. Bored in her apartment one evening, she started twittering with fans and came up with a jokey t-shirt suggestion, and set up an immediate store, selling $11,000 worth of t-shirts in days. Another night, she started a live video stream from her apartment, and started an impromptu online auction for various items in her apartment associated with a recent tour, often with a personalized twist. In three hours, she brought in $6,000. Connecting with fans and offering them something fun and unique to buy worked wonders. To date, she hasn’t received a single royalty check from Warner Music on her album.

Matthew Ebel is a singer in Boston who started building a fanbase by playing live and actively participating in social networks and other sites. He started regularly performing in Second Life, for example. At one point, he decided to set up a “subscription” backstage pass offer, whereby fans could pay $5, $10 or $15/month to get various benefits — including access to new songs every couple of weeks, as well as having new recorded shows sent to them. Depending on the level of support, they could get access to special shows, gift bags or other opportunities for unique offers not available to others. Ebel has discovered that he’s making enough so that music is his full-time job. Subscription revenues represent nearly 40% of his income, which is about equal to live gigs and sales of CDs and digital songs combined. Connecting with fans and giving them a real reason to buy has made it so that he can have career as a musician.

Moldover is an electronic musician based in San Francisco. Being in such a high tech hub, he had an interesting idea for his next album. Along with the music itself, the CD case would be a working circuit board, with all the songs spelled out in soldered electric circuits. These connected various components to make the CD case itself an instrument. Pushing a button on the side of the case, would light up the center and make a noise, which could be modified through a pair of light sensors, creating a virtual theremin. The case even had a line out jack, so it could be plugged into a computer or an audio system. The CDs themselves were sold for $50, and Moldover discovered the demand was far stronger than he expected. Yes, even though we’re told that no one will pay for music (without strict copy protection), this less well known artist is doing brisk business selling $50 CDs.

Of course, these are just musicians, but these sorts of models impact the wider ecosystem. Companies like TopSpin, Nimbit and Kickstarter are making this work today (for artists big and small). TopSpin has helped enable musicians to better connect with fans and give them a reason to buy over and over again — and found that, when it’s done right, people absolutely buy. One of TopSpin’s artists recently had an average transaction price of over $100, and multiple artists have seen their average transaction price at over $50. The claim that fans just want stuff for free is not borne out by these examples. Across all of TopSpin’s artists, they’ve seen an average transaction price well over $20 — more than the cost of your average CD. By enabling bands to connect with fans while giving them something of unique value to buy, beyond just the music, these bands are thriving.

And, of course, there’s a role for labels to play as well. Terry McBride runs Nettwerk, a Canadian-based label that has tremendous success embracing these sorts of models with a bunch of different artists. McBride has declared that copyright won’t even matter within a decade, and he’s acting accordingly. But he’s making sure that his acts really do connect with fans. With a recent album release by the hip hop artist K-OS, before the album was released, they released all the stems from the songs to let the fans do their own mixes. These weren’t “remixes” because the original mixes weren’t even out! Rather than worrying about an album leaking, K-OS and Nettwerk purposely got the core of the music out themselves and let fans do what they wanted with it. They then set up a system to submit the fan mixes and to vote on them, such that the best mixes were then put on their own album, and both the “professional” and the “fan mixed” albums were released at the same time — leading many fans to buy them both. Both albums, separately, but at the same time, ended up in the top 50 on the charts.

As you look through all of these, some patterns emerge. They’re not about getting a fee on every transaction or every listen or every stream. They’re not about licensing. They’re not about DRM or lawsuits or copyright. They’re about better connecting with the fans and then offering them a real, scarce, unique reason to buy — such that in the end, everyone is happy. Fans get what they want at a price they want, and the musicians and labels make money as well. It’s about recognizing that the music itself can enhance the value of everything else, whether it’s shows, access or merchandise, and that letting fans share music can help increase the market and create more fans willing to buy compelling offerings. It’s about recognizing that even when the music is shared freely, there are business models that work wonders, without copyright or licensing issues even coming into play.

Adding in new licensing schemes only serves to distort this kind of market. Fans and artists are connecting directly and doing so in a way that works and makes money. Putting in place middlemen only takes a cut away from the musicians and serves to make the markets less efficient. They need to deal with overhead and bureaucracy. They need to deal with collections and allocation. They make it less likely for fans to support bands directly, because the money is going elsewhere. Even when licensing fees are officially paid further up the line, those costs are passed on to the end users, and the money might not actually go to supporting the music they really like.

Instead, let’s let the magic of the market continue to work. New technologies are making it easier than ever for musicians to create, distribute and promote music — and also to make money doing so. In the past, the music business was a “lottery,” where only a very small number made any money at all. With these models, more musicians than ever before are making money today, and they’re not doing it by worrying about copyright or licensing. They’re embracing what the tools allow. A recent study from Harvard showed how much more music is being produced today than at any time in history, and the overall music ecosystem — the amount of money paid in support of music — is at an all time high, even if less and less of it is going to the purchase of plastic discs.

This is a business model that’s working now and it will work better and better in the future as more people understand the mechanisms and improve on them. Worrying about new copyright laws or new licensing schemes or new DRM or new lawsuits or new ways to shut down file sharing is counterproductive, unnecessary and dangerous. Focusing on what’s working and encouraging more of that is the way to go. It’s a model that works for musicians, works for enablers and works for fans. It is the future and we should be thrilled with what it’s producing.

Derek Sivers / Seth Godin Talk Music Business Ideas

Tuesday, January 26th, 2010

I’m Matt, I do marketing and stuff online, you can email me kurbpromo@gmail.com

I put interesting stuff here I find interesting.

This from boing boing:

” . . . In simplest terms, the model can be defined as: Connect with Fans (CwF) + Reason to Buy (RtB) = The Business Model.”

And this from Music Think Tank:

You say, “the winners are the artists who give gifts”, but many artists I know are feeling like the losers. How would you explain your philosophy of the linchpin economy to a musician who’s making great music, giving it away online, but getting only apathy in return?

Feeling like a loser is part of being an artist, but I want to challenge the notion of “great music.” Sure, some music that’s great is great for the ages and it’s okay that’s it’s not being heard, but so much of what people call great art (whether it’s a book or a song or a way of doing customer service) isn’t actually great, it’s merely “very good.” Very good music is unheard every day, because very good music is not in short supply. There’s a huge surplus of it.

I’m not equating “great” with “commercial.” I have no doubt that there’s great art that doesn’t sell. But most musicians you and I know are TRYING to be commercial, if commercial means successful, heard, lots of stuff sold, lots of people at the concerts. And in the rush to be successful, sometimes great gets pushed out the window. I’ve sampled hundreds of songs on CDBaby and I can say that almost all of it is very good. And virtually none of it is great, if we define great to mean music I need to buy, to give away, to talk about to everyone I know. Almost none of it changed my life, and that’s what great music does.

Great means unsettling. Great means open to criticism. Great means booed off stage. And great music, like great a idea, spreads. Ideas that spread, win, and so the goal today is not to make great music for 1970 or 1990, but great music for today, for a market that’s super picky and selfish and has ADD. Great is in the ear of the listener, of course, and the definition is simple: if it spreads, then for this market, it’s great.

By definition, Great cannot create widespread apathy.

People often use price as an indicator of quality. Even connoisseurs rate wine higher if told the price is higher. So many artists are averse to sharing their work online for free, because it might be seen as valueless. Since I’ve heard you argue both sides of this, how do you reconcile it in the case of an artist choosing how to share their work?

This is a conundrum, and probably worth thinking about a bit. Paintings, for example, have been free to experience as long as there have been art galleries. The difference today with music is that there’s a mammoth change going on – and it’s about control. Music has always been free on the radio (in fact, record companies PAID to get it on the radio). Now, though, every song is on the “radio” all the time, because the radio is Pandora and Limewire and the rest.

So, if the radio is already there, and music is free-er than ever, it’s not clear that music is valueless. There’s more music being listened to (not just played, but being listened to) than ever before in history, and that listening is proof that people value it. At least they value it enough to spend their time.

Get over the idea that your success is equated with selling the right to listen, or selling control over when people listen. Relinquish the opportunity to make money by controlling who can listen and when. That’s gone. It’s over. It would be like a bakery selling the right to sniff the fresh bread or a wine maker selling the right to look at the cool label. It’s now a public good, something you see as you walk by.

What you can sell, what you better be able to sell, is intimacy. It’s interactions in public. Souvenirs. Limited things of value. Experiences. Memories. People will pay for those things, IF: your art is actually great and if you make it possible for them to buy them.

If it’s great, let it go. You’ll do fine. If it’s not great, figure out what great is and do that.

A tall order, but a huge opportunity.

Thanks, Seth!

Effective Small Business Marketing Services 2010

Thursday, January 21st, 2010

contact matt: kurbpromo@gmail.com to learn more about our online marketing and promotions services

Small Business Marketing: Online strategies for 2010

Interested in new ideas and small business marketing plans for the new year?
If you have an idea, roll out a landing page, turn on the adwords, and
keep trying until you get the presentation right, and people start
buying. But customer interaction is time consuming, video is a
promising avenue but still requires lots of commitment.

how can I do the least and yet offer the most value with these small business marketing services? How can I eliminate the endless customer

service required especially in the realms of consultation and digital services? Focusing on one product which is a doorway for selling everything else

I already sell, and having all the marketing revolve around this product focuses your funnel process for customers. Less customer service require less maintenance and commitment, but whatever customer

service you do provide can be a series of upsells.
There are many ways to expand the current base of your business

online, but you need to do more than set up a website with a landing

page and a google adwords campaign and leave it at that. We already
know from our experience with the online video production sites that
we need more effort.
But which ideas are the easiest to implement and what ideas have the
furthest scope for development in 2010?

Creating a digital information product requires a lot of work to

create the product and some good sales marketing to actually sell the

product to visitors. If the product is of a low standard customers
will be unimpressed.
But a new service that involves brokering favourable affiliate deals

in exchange for services can be slapped together very soon and over
time, advertising tested. Sales could be a struggle, so as well as the
website and the ad campaign, I need to be aware of the sales copy and

sales letters I’ll use to respond to enquiries explaining the

processes involved.
If I can establish a firm reputation for delivering services that are
already in demand, that could easily expand, how could you offer extra
service and convenience online?
When working as a solo entrepreneur delivering services, there needs
to be a leap from doing the performances to a higher level of earning.

Although the market is quite obviously lucrative, it’s hard to

pinpoint what to develop in the short term. Establishing a reputation

that will keep me working and for higher fees, so in that way working

more and creating word of mouth is a form of small business marketing.

Illustrate your work to potential clients as an example of how to
build a brand toward profitability. It’s a very long journey to

profitability from where I’m standing but staying passionate about it

will keep me pushing.
A digital product can be successful if the small business marketing
process is done right. Digital services can be highly profitable but
may require a lot of effort in making sales. The idea is to firstly

think of what the long term prospects will be for further development,
and secondly how easy it will be to main your commitment.

Connect With Cheap Online Video Production and Marketing

Thursday, January 21st, 2010

Cheap video production and online video marketing can boost your brand.

Cheap video production really is a great way to appeal to customers and fans online, really connect with them, and build the trust that leads to an ongoing sales relationship.

You probably know of popular online video sharing sites such as youtube where videos can receive millions of viewers if they prove to find online popularity by being shared, but viewers on youtube are often looking for information on many different subjects or topics so by uploading relevant videos you can connect with an audience online.

Also another major advantage of youtube is that videos uploaded there can be easily embedded into your website.

If you’re not technically proficient in video production you can find an online sevice that provides such cheap video production so you are able to participate in this new online form of social media and content sharing.

The internet can seem so faceless and anonymous and that’s what troubles a lot of consumers looking for services and products online, or even those building any kind of brand – that’s why uitilizing video content can be an effective way of creating the trust that most consumers need to make purchases confidently.

Are your competitors already using videos online, marketing their videos on youtube and taking advantage of all the benefits of having such videos available online? Then either you have the opportunity to compete on an equal footing or you can bring an element of personalization to your brand that perhaps your competitors have not considered.

You might be surprised how video can create trust and authority when used on an already popular website.

Our company Kurb promotions has long used a variety of marketing techniques online for businesses and entertainment brands, from SEO, to advertising, to blogging and social media, but although many of these techniques succeed in bringing traffic to your website, they don’t have the power to appeal to customers and fans in such a way that it gives them the confidence to choose you over other option or competitors.

When you’re on a budget however, it’s not always feasible or viable for your organisation to have high production values, but you may as well hire the services of a cheap video production company who are able to produce cheap video presentation and cheap music video production so you are able to participate and be accessed in the field of online video advertising.

Also, when using online video it’s important to remain active, putting out new videos that seek to improve your standard of presentation. You can use animation, effects or flashy editing provided by cheap video production services but often the most important thing is to stay on top of your budget.

That way you can use the benefits of a cheap video production service online to enable you to provide regular videos not just on your youtube channel, but also on your organisations website also.

So in conclusion having access to cheap video production services gives you the ability to participate in online markeiting with a far more engaging tool. With an entertaining or informative video you can turn into profit with customers who are highly engaged.

Website url: http://cheapvideoproduction.com , http://www.kurb.co.nz/videomarketing.htm

Cheap Colour Copying Services and Colour Printing Auckland

Thursday, January 21st, 2010

Colour Copying Services Compared With Your Colour Printer

If you’re looking for the easiest and most efficient way of dealing with your printing needs you need to examine the point at which your business or organsation can get more value about going to your local colour printing and colour copying service provider.

The requirement of colour copying grows with each year. Sending out a black and white advertisement  will only forfeit your effort in today’s wave of advetising and using crude signs in black and white rather than colour dramatically reduces their power in marketing

The cost power value of colour printing need a a realistic assessment of how often it will be used by your organisation and the likely quantities you will require as bulk runs are usually much more favourably priced. Colour printers may be  less than the cost of a single print job, but what will it be utilised for, and what standard of quality and consistency are you expecting?

Do you realize the ink can be the highest cost and replacing it when you have to do many prints on a cheap printer may leave you with an expensive job and poor results. If you’re dealing with a professional colour copying service or printer you can guarantee your prints will always be of the highest quality and on time.

With the current competition amongst printing services, there are more options for colour publication in business, and have services delivered cheaply and affordably. Traditional copying services for color still has its place in the office, but a full service printer can offer services that you can’t get any other way, such as bulk bindery work, cutting and stapling.

However, the threshold at which owning a  colour copying printer and doing the work in house has become consistently lower. There are morecosts, and your cost per copy is going to go up compared to most traditional copying printers. On the other hand, you are able print items on demand, and more than make up the disagreement on inventory, taxes, stocking and other levels.

This will vary considerably by region and services offered by your local colour copying services. Break even point happens around 4,000 copies. If you’re making 4,000 copies of your item, it’s better to go to a commercial printer for this work.

With a typical small business, the cost of  colour copying will roll into the costs of the services or artefact you’re providing to your customers. In most cases, people want to see what they’re getting from you.. Doing a, marketing brochures or website income to clients are greatly enhanced by handing colouration prints to the client or prospect.

For larger businesses, it  comes down to costs per page; these dropped considerably they would be about seven to ten nowadays as pricey as a colour copying; they’re now down to three to four nowadays as expensive, which opens up a great deal of options for inventory, taxes, stocking and other levels.internal reports plus external income items.

In the end, the cost power of  colour copying stems on what you’d use colour copying for. They can  be a useful adjunct for most any business if priced accordingly, however it comes down whether by enhancing services provided to clients, enabling products or services that would otherwise be unfeasible, or reaction your inventory costs and improving overhead. You are able to get the cheapest colour copying and colour printing services to fill your needs.

colour copying services from a copy provider makes perfect sense, because it allows you to release products with interior colouration Higher end colour copying printers appendage interior color and even appendage publication colouration jackets for perfect bound books, an inexpensive piece of equipment.

Kurb Business Promotion and Marketing Goals 2010

Sunday, January 3rd, 2010

Matt from Kurb in Auckland, New Zealand offers all sorts of cheap promotion and marketing services! Including CD DVD Duplication, colour copying and printing,  Music Marketing. Services include Social Media Promotion, Video Production and Promotion, Online Advertising, Design, Web Development and Search Engine Optimisation. Still just $200 p/month kurbpromo@gmail.com

GOALS FOR 2010:

  • Maintain and consolidate CD and DVD copying services
  • Expand colour copying
  • Complete Kurb digital music marketing information and instruction product. Main outcome is to refine Music Marketing services to be less intensive while maintaining profitability.
  • Staffing: Continue to look into PA in a music and online marketing management role. Maintain and develop outsourced staff in 4 key areas: social media / video / article marketing / design. We want at least one solid person in each role. Design is the main issue.
  • Move on the opportunity to establish online video and small business marketing clients where possible. I want to get at least one job a mont
  • Continue to develop pirate entertainment brand and talent agency for building long term momentum. By this time next year I want to be making $1000 p/month from either of these activities or music related activity.

SO . . . week to week my mian tasks will be as follows:

– Sales/Customer Service

– Collating articles – at least 4 – for article marketing each week.

– Putting up posters

– co ordinating music marketing
Did I actually write my goals or did I just go on about a whole lot of ideas as usual?

Or basically just rank all my ideas.

CD DVD duplication of course, our most successful business, and then there’s colour copying, not a huge earner but a friendly constant.

Music marketing, demanding, annoying, in need of discipline and refinement.

And my silly ideas, the pirate thing, again I’m not a passionate pirate but like a true pirate the lure of glittering treasures is to much to deny.

Oh and the modelling agency, well wouldn’t that be fun. Wildly hopeful but fun none the less.

New Years 2010 Kurb Promotions Post

Sunday, January 3rd, 2010

Alright it’s time for the first post of the year on the Kurb blog, which means talking about a lot of the typical things you’d expect.

Bringing in new staff in 2009 was effective in some areas and not in others, however though it characterized the year and brought me to quite a mature point in facing the realities of employment within a small business, I didn’t realise how useful it was when it was most suprisingly effective.

Maintaining this effectiveness and attempting to find similarly effective staffing situations will be a big goal for 2010.

What are the main goals for Kurb Promotions in 2010?

Maintaining the effectiveness of our CD and DVD Duplication service and attempting to push up our capacity.

With music marketing it about a transition in our business model from consulting and complete agency to leading with a information product that becomes the doorway to other services. The old models of complete agency services and individual online marketing serviceswill still operate but not be promoted.

The information product however will come with a “service” type feel, that it’s not just about purchasing, but participating, and an honesty and upfrontness about it.

Everything I know and charge $200 p/month for will be in the book including sites I use and what to know. Also, it will be very succinct and be accompanied by videos.

From the point of having to deal with customer service less it will be a huge bonus but I am also intending the product to create plenty of opportunities to promote other services we offer.

I also have a licensing and skills and arbitrage exchange project I am developing, but I’m still seeing how that will work out – I am looking into developing music publishing opportunities also as I am assessing parts of the market that I can address. The scheme sort of goes like this. Musicians allow me to use songs on my Royalty Free album in exchange for marketing services, and I collect the proceeds from the sales of the album to parties looking to use recordings for commercial purposes.

This is not just using your music for synching to content and advertising but also commercial spaces such as restaurants, malls, cruise ships which need permission to play licensed music. These albums are sold with such licenses offered to the purchaser exclusively.

So what you see is the example of a modern music business model. I offer my marketing skills in exchange for music from musicians who probably don’t have the resources and appreciate the music marketing services in exchange, whereas I’ve already prepared a market for a high value proposition including those songs.

The colour copying services we offer I intend to begin promoting more aggressively and I believe that will expand naturally

Which really just leaves a couple of my projects left. These projects are really still experimental so it’s just a matter of doing what I can and seeing what sparks.

The pirate website of course I went into some detailed analysis of and I felt that long term my direction would be in marketing and maintaining a large interest in a joint venture where other parties would fulfill the services and creative aspects. I would stil participate in performances but the marketing and branding would be my main thrust.

The talent agency I also have hopes for but I have to be realistic about this also.  The point is I believe it will be a great learning experience and a lot of fun seeing where else our skills in music marketing can be applied.