18 May 2012

Posts Comments

You are here: Home / 2008 / Archives for March 2008

045 – You’re A Tool

27 March 2008 By Leave a Comment

This Episode of With A Voice Like This is a bit different than past episodes in that I’m straight forward on a mission. A lot of static is floating around the Internet on various topics and so it was my turn to state my feelings on a few things. Among them were:

  • Gary Vaynerchuk’s two minute videoblog from March 25 (If you haven’t seen this, you really should)
  • Web 2.0 as the savior of Good
  • Using the internet as a tool
  • Free music and content on the Internet
  • Copyrights and Creative Commons (and my basic understanding)

As always Comments From the Podcast Gallery rounds out the show.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Listen above or download by right clicking and saving.

Filed Under: Marketing, Monetizing, Philosophy, Podcast Tagged With: , , , , , ,

The Perception of Value

24 March 2008 By 3 Comments

So what’s it worth to you?

How do you quantify a service to someone who has no frame of reference? I have a Masters Degree in Vocal Pedagogy, which is part performance and part teaching voice, and I’ve spent tens of thousand of dollars on training my voice. If I don’t have name recognition does any of that mean anything to someone who’s looking for some music for their event or venue? What if I’m part of a group, where my name doesn’t come up as much if at all?

I deal with it all the time as a musician. A rule of thumb on how to deal with it is how much you charge, but even that can vary widely. I have an “I won’t step outside the door for less than…” figure. Now that figure for me as a solo singer is 66% higher than that same figure for me as a part of an established group currently. What do I base that on? It’s not like I have production costs to base that figure on to show someone. I have talent, knowledge and experience, but if you’re working with someone who has no frame of reference, those things don’t mean anything to them. And the money itself? I’ve had people not bat an eye at that money and I’ve had people politely (and sometimes not so politely) brush me off. So what’s the answer?

I learned the answer I use through singing weddings for friends. I was reminded of it because I did a wedding not too long ago, for friends. It’s the perception of value. I used to sing weddings for friends for free because I thought of it as my gift to them. And you know what happened? Nothing. Not even a thank you. It didn’t take me long to feel under appreciated and frustrated by that. Didn’t they know how much that was worth?

And that was it. No, they didn’t know. At least not in a way they easily understood. They had no frame of reference. After all, if I was giving it away, it must be worthless, right?

Flash forward to this wedding I just sang for friends. They knew they wanted to use me in the wedding, but they were looking at additional musicians as well. They did their research and saw what the market was around the Chicago area. When we finally discussed money, they said they’ll pay me whatever I wanted. I quoted them a price of 20% of my solo figure I talked about earlier. The phone went silent for a few moments, then I heard “Are you sure?” I told them this is my friends’ discount and the rest was my wedding gift to them. I got the now standard reaction which was many, many thank you’s and other people coming up and almost falling all over me to talk to me about it. I had given my friends a good frame of reference, a perception of value that they understood and everyone was happy, even ecstatic to the point that they shared it and so on and so on and so on…

That’s the biggest benefit to me. People were excited enough to talk about me and to me. That means:

  1. I’m more likely to be handing out business cards
  2. I’m more likely to be remembered
  3. I’m more likely to get that next gig

Even though I’m doing a friend a favor, I’m still getting a lot out of it. All because I was able to communicate the value of what I was doing. That’s the answer I needed.

I was reminded of that because I’m working on the website for 4-AM, the a cappella quartet I sing with. How do I communicate the value to three different groups; Booking Agents, Clients and Fans to the point that they share it willingly? With all the social media tools, I don’t have that answer yet. But I know the value. What’s your take?

Filed Under: Marketing, Method, Monetizing Tagged With: , , , , , ,

044 – A New Way

20 March 2008 By Leave a Comment

With A Voice Like This, What do you do?

Well, you take a slice of life and put it on display. Isn’t that what New/Social Media is all about?

So in this episode I talk about the direction of the show and and a foreshadowing of some future topics, then a couple of personal performance experiences from the past couple of weeks, a brief discussion of PrimeTimeRewind.tv, A brief introduction to GrooveShark, a music file sharing service, A couple quick shout outs and, of course, Comments From the Podcast Gallery.

If you want to know more about 4-AM, the A cappella quartet I sing with in the Chicago area, you can write me at jim@4am.net, or call DeVar Creative, Inc. at 815.334.9338 and tell them Jim sent you.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Listen above or download by right clicking and saving.

Filed Under: Podcast

Regulation, Like the Internet, is a Tool

18 March 2008 By Leave a Comment

Equally important as what is regulated is how it’s made compliant

The first question is what is regulated? The knee jerk response is the technology, but that’s not what would be most effective here. The technology is already regulated at least partially, by what is and isn’t allowed beyond certain borders. The technology also changes so quickly, trying to regulate it solely isn’t feasible.

In the United States efforts have been made to both regulate and control Internet usage. You need only to look as far as existing governing bodies, such as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). They have the blueprints of the what needs to be regulated, but their regulations are based on delivery systems much more limited than the Internet so they aren’t as effective as they could be. As for control, just look at the RIAA and the ongoing battle against Net Neutrality. This “Carve out our piece of the pie” approach fails because it doesn’t take into account the rights and relationships of the Business Partners, Clients and Customers and protects no one but the interest group that’s pushing its own agenda.

So start with the what of regulations, based on the rights and relationships and the existing blueprints. Some things will need to be thought of internationally and some nationally, asking the experts in their fields for input. And it needs to be mandated (yes, that means government). This is possibly the easier of the tasks, but by no means will it be simple.

Where regulating the Internet will succeed or fail will be in compliance. Compliance needs to be scalable and seriously determined by those implementing the regulations. In turn the implementing parties will be held accountable on every level for being compliant. And what is the basis for the scalability? Ability and Resources. There are three main reasons/examples of this.

  1. If you’ve ever been involved on any front of bringing a legacy system into compliance with new regulations, you know it’s a completely different process than building a new system to compliance. Both ability and resources come into play on this. So two different companies have two different methods of compliance based on the systems they have and how they have to reach compliance. In some cases that answer is to start from scratch.
  2. Different types of service providers have different needs and concerns toward compliance. ISPs, whether they be DSL, Cable, WiFi or other delivery systems need to approach compliance differently from Application Service Provider, so Verizon, AT&T and Comcast, et al. have a different set of needs than Facebook, Netvibes, Microsoft and Apple.
  3. Those with with most resources have the most to protect through the regulation, multibillion dollar corporations as compared to startups. Any acquisitions of smaller companies will automatically scale compliance based on the gains by the acquiring company/corporation. Those protections will also be shaped by the relationships between business partners, clients and customers.

How does all this happen? By an implementation period as a part of the regulatory process. During this period all the parties responsible for implementing regulations must document what they determine to be compliance based on the best of their ability and resources. Then meet those standards of compliance by the end of the implementation period. The implementing company/partner/corporation will be held accountable to those standards. If they cannot provide the proper documentation or their standards through documentation are found to be inadequate or inappropriate, they are held responsible and are open to any and all penalties for non-compliance. For example, if a Terms of Service Agreement written as a part of compliance is found unreasonable or unenforceable, it’s non-compliant. It serves everyone to be as thorough as possible and it will also provide a basis to be proactive. Anything developed after the implementation period needs to either be compliant to existing documentation or have new documentation completed prior to its roll-out.

It’s not a new approach, nor is it quick, simple or easily understood. It is workable and scalable even as new technology replaces old. It all comes down to this: Publicly available doesn’t mean unprotected and we need to get started on this as soon as possible.

That’s a 30,000 foot view, what do you think?

Filed Under: Internet, Regulation Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Exploit the Tool and Not the Community

17 March 2008 By Leave a Comment

Never has the chasm between ability and responsibility been so wide as on the Internet.

The Internet is a tool. For me personally, it gives me the ability to create and sell my music and any other merchandise without the responsibility of having to carry an inventory through Print on Demand (POD). It gives me the ability to reach an audience with a podcast without the responsibility of owning a 1000 watt transmitter, an FCC license (Actually, I have a 3rd Class license, but I don’t need it for a podcast) or being employed by a licensed broadcast entity. The internet gives me the ability to publish a blog without the responsibility of owning a printing press or having to maintain a supply of printing necessities which is much more than anything I could do prior to the internet and its capabilities. That’s a powerful tool and I’m not even scratching the surface of its capabilities by using myself as an example.

But like any tool, it depends on how it’s used. The Internet gives the ability of an Internet business/application to release a public statement along the lines of “We are cooperating fully with authorities and encourage our members to report any activities…” without the responsibility to fix the underlying, bigger issue that caused the problem in the first place. It also gives the ability to use journalanteism to push an agenda or spread a conspiracy without the responsibility having to provide a factual basis (The Internet hasn’t cornered the market on this, it’s just far more prolific due to easy access). The Internet ironically, also gives the ability to create an unedited, recorded live podcast where the host talks about the abuses of monitoring telephone calls without court order and then turns around, sometimes even in the same show and call a person without notifying them of either being recorded or broadcast live without the responsibility of understanding the correlation between the two and acting on it. Don’t get me started on copyright infringement, that’s another three or four blog entries on its own. That’s a powerful tool and I haven’t even scratched the surface of its capabilities.

So it seems now that whenever there is an issue on the Internet, as a whole we’ve reverted to the elementary school defense of “They started it!” and all the finger pointing and snapping at each other, choosing sides and a slap fight commences until everyone is tired and forgets about it. The real problem is that these individual battles have a cumulative effect and we’re quickly approaching the saturation point. So the topic is starting to roll around to Regulation of the Internet, as it should.

Just remember Regulation, like the Internet itself, is a tool…

Filed Under: Internet, Regulation Tagged With: , , , , , ,
« Older Posts
Get Adobe Flash player