April 22, 2008 1,000 True Fans - Another Perspective
If you have not read Kevin Kelly’s Technium today - artist Robert Rich has a very interesting perspective on 1,000 True Fans. Here’s a quote:
I don’t want to be a tadpole in a shrinking puddle. When the audience is so small, one consequence of specialization is extinction. I’ll try to explain.
Evolutionary biology shows us one metaphor for this trap of stylistic boundaries, in terms of species diversity and inbreeding (ref. E.O. Wilson). When a species sub-population becomes isolated, its traits start to diverge from the larger group to eventually form a new species. Yet under these conditions of isolation, genetic diversity can decrease and the new environmentally specialized species becomes more easily threatened by environmental changes. The larger the population, the less risk it faces of inbreeding. If that population stays connected to the main group of its species, it has the least chance of over-specialization and the most chance for survival in multiple environments.
This metaphor becomes relevant to Artists and True Fans because our culture can get obsessed with ideas of style and demographic. When an artist relies on such intense personal commitment from such a small population, it’s like an animal that relies solely upon the fruit of one tree to survive. This is a recipe for extinction. Distinctions between demographics resemble mountain ranges set up to divide one population from another. I prefer a world where no barriers exist between audiences as they define themselves and the art they love. I want a world of mutts and cross-polinators. I would feel more comfortable if I thought I had a broader base of people interested in my work, not just preaching to the choir.
Reader Comments (12)
Wow, what an in-depth response from Robert Rich.
He states that a major reason he can make a "living" today as an independent (in a small niche), is because he was heavily promoted by an indie label in the past.
Trent Reznor (Nine Inch Nails) was offering limited premium packages (you get lots of stuff). He had a package limited to only 2500 copies (for his True Fans) and it was priced at $300 (I think). It sold out very fast and earned him some quick cash. However, he was heavily promoted and very popular in the early-mid nineties. He's an established act.
Emerging artists have to figure out a way to build their value in people's eyes first. It can be done. Maybe not as fast as a million dollar marketing budget, but it can be done.
Cheers,
http://NewRockstarPhilosophy.com
This is the old diversify your market theory, however I don't really agree with this view because it doesn't grasp the whole essence of the article. I agree that over-specialization can lead to extinction, but the 1000 true fan theory doesn't say you have to specialize to feed those true fans. It just says you have to stay away from the long tail where there's virtually no value. It's not about preaching to the choir and rejecting a broad base... in fact it argues that by taking care of the true fans an artist can create a WOM effect that will broaden its fan base beyond the "true fans".
To keep the biology-evolution metaphor going, while its true that "the larger the population, the less risk it faces of inbreeding", isn´t it also true that in order to prevail animals will look to mate with the strongest partner, the one which will guarantee the best genes for the next generation?
In my opinion that's the essence of 1000 True Fans. It's not about limiting the target population but more about taking special care of those that are willing to value your product and pay for that added value. It doesn't say you should reject the long tail, just concentrate on the True fans.
I think the 1000 true fans theory has its flaws but I don't think it sets barriers and rejects the broad base... Here are some other views on the subject:
http://juanzelada.wordpress.com/2008/04/13/1000-reasons-to-quit/
My short 2 cents is this;
I kind of think the "1000 True Fans" should be the extreme minority of your fanbase and they should also be the ones you send the free stuff to...for being such "True Fans".
Just one thought.
I think this is extremely relevant.
Kevin Kelly has written a follow-up post to his 1000 True fans theory. In it, he features a response given to him by Robert Rich who "was one of the first professional musicians to start dealing directly with his fans via his own website. He wrote a reply to Kelly in which he tempers the enthusiasm for 1000 True Fans with a cautionary realism borne from actually trying the idea".
Check it out: http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/archives/2008/04/the_reality_of.php
I agree with Juan - I don't think 1,000 true fans should be the result of 'overspecialization.'
I'd also speculate that perhaps the kind of fans that would desire something so narrowly specialized may not necessarily be the kind of fans that you would want / would be able to rely on. Seems like they would be the first to jump ship when that album that goes in a 'new artistic direction' comes out.
Juan's blog also points out something that seems to be grossly understated in this argument - 1,000 true fans or not, the art is what comes first; you could be the most innovative artist in the world with your distribution models and be on the cutting edge of "music marketing 2.0" but if fans can't get behind your music / art because its simply not enjoyable to begin with, then you have other things to blame besides not having 'true fans.'
Good discussion though - this is one of my favorite new blogs. Keep it up!
Justin
I think, like so many things, we nedd to consider individual cases. With music genres such as relaxation/meditation music for example, performing live is pretty rare, and fans want to buy actual CDs to put in their players in their homes for specific times.
I read a lot about "music marketing" and it's mainly centered around the performing musician...the BAND. For those of us who are in specific fields of music, marketing and customer needs can be very different. MUSIC is such a vast species, and some sub-species almost seem to exist in a world unto themselves, having little relevance to common views on marketing and promotion within the industry. It's kind of like the visual arts (being the species), and digital art being a sub species.
Having said that, i believe there are several important factors for all musical species:
Look outside of the traditional environments.
Respond to environmental changes swiftly.
Look ahead to areas of potential grazing.
Enjoy the fruits of your labour.
Go forth and multiply!
smiles to you,
Tania Rose
I think Robert may have missed the point a little. The concept of "1000 true fans" is not a new one, it just has a new name. What we are trying to achieve out of this concept is simply loyal customers. It is not that you service those 1000 true fans to the exclusivity of everyone else. You will still have many 1 off or semi-regular customers but the goal is to try to turn them into true fans who have a higher value to you in the long term. It's also not about changing your or compromising artistic side to suit some marketplace that has loyal customers. It's just about servicing your customers so well that they will gladly pay you in return.
Musicians need to stop thinking that the music business works differently to the rest of the world just because there is a creative component. Good, solid, loyal, long-term customers are the bedrock of any viable business, including music.
@ Tania: You are absolutely right. It depends on the individual. Usually the artist is seen as a band or vocalist, american or english, who starts live and then makes cds.
We started in 1985 in the studio as an instrumental duo and didn't give concerts until 2007. We are older than the typical myspace user but we are using all the possibilities of the www and love it.
Hmmm yeah I've seen it happen. A band has a core niche audience, lets say mostly teenage girls. The band evolves over a few years as they get older and expand their musical tastes, they change up their sound. That core audience doesn't follow which leads to a shrinking fan base. After a few successful indie-label releases, the bands self-financed album flops, leaving them out the profits they made from advances, tours and licensing. Add up the costs of 5 guys going out on the road (van, gear, gas, oil, trailer, food, lodging, merch, promotional materials, postage, sound guy/tour manager, 1 roadie), which can easily add up to $30-50K for a 2 month tour. $100,000 from 1000 true fans, minus the expenses for one tour, not even counting the costs of recording and manufacturing a CD, and the band members are barely making enough to pay their rent. The band breaks up because they're not kids anymore living with their parents and can make more money managing a used CD store or working as a bartender.
@Chet
Chet - your comment is an example of why I started blogging - to obtain the operational detail that comes from people that have seen it happen. Great comment! Thanks.
My own two cents would be a further expansion of what Gibbo wrote.
The music business is just that: a business. If we accept the idea of artist as company/busines, we have to realise that the majority of businesses eventually flop. There are several factors to consider: size of market (fan base), distribution capability, customer awareness etc. I like the "1000 True Fans" idea in the sense that it shows that you can build a base for the continued existence of your business on a relatively small number of customers. However, do not forget the Red Queen hypothesis (business students/graduates should know what I'm talking about): "To stay in one place you have to run as fast as you can." To stop is to move backwards.
In short, while your True Fans may keep you afloat, unless you continually expand your customer (fan) base you will - sooner or later - get left behind. Niche markets are always dangerous in this respect. Your choice is either to try to expand into adjacent niches as best you can or accept that at some point your business model will no longer be viable. I've seen this happen to many small businesses and musicians are no exception here.
If you want to make a living from music, then you have to regard it as a business. Unfortunately, most musicians are not businessmen, which is why much of the ancillary industry developed in the first place. However, if you ask any businessman whether they would prefer to earn £10 a month from 1000 sources or £1 a month from 10,000 sources, not a single one would choose the first option. Having said that, it is important to cultivate true fans who may evangelise on your behalf and expand your fanbase...
Here's a related post, responding to Kevin Kelly's original article:
http://www.podcomplex.com/blog/index.php/2008/03/07/true-fans/