Trapital

UnitedMasters and Translation CEO Steve Stoute returns to the show, fresh off a new deal with R&B star Brent Faiyaz for a reported $50 million. Brent had his pick at multiple major labels, but chose to stay independent with UnitedMasters.We talk about how independent companies can compete with majors on upfront money, competitive advantages in the music industry, and more.Steve and I also chat about the industry at-large: AI, entrepreneurship, subscription prices and more. Here’s what we hit on:2:19 The ups and downs of entrepreneurship 06:11 Building two companies at once10:56 Positioning UnitedMasters in the music distribution space 13:16 Does anyone in music have a moat?15:56 Why Brent Faiyaz chose to sign with UnitedMasters27:33 Should the DSPs raise prices?30:07 Artists and creators becoming mini-media channels 36:58 How NIL (name, image, likeness) is like the independent music business37:19 Is Steve going to strike more NIL deals?45:52 Why every artists needs a Chief Technology Officer54:30 Separating real from hype: blockchain, to web3, to AIListen: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | SoundCloud | Stitcher | Overcast | Amazon | Google Podcasts | Pocket Casts | RSSHost: Dan Runcie, @RuncieDan, trapital.coGuest: Steve Stoute, @SteveStouteThis episode is sponsored by DICE. Learn more about why artists, venues, and promoters love to partner with DICE for their ticketing needs. Visit dice.fmTrapital is home for the business of hip-hop. Gain the latest insights from hip-hop’s biggest players by reading Trapital’s free weekly memo. TRANSCRIPT[00:00:00] Steve Stoute: They used to have a moat, but no longer do they have a moat. And I don't think anybody independent music has a moat. I think Distro kid has a lane and TuneCore has a lane, and United masses have a lane. And, you know, others have, certain strengths about them. but, I think the only moat you have is the moat that is a true result of the success that you have. If people choose you and you build a strong business, and you're growing, that's the quote unquote moat. [00:00:27] Dan Runcie Intro: Hey, welcome to the Trapital Podcast. I'm your host and the founder of Trapital, Dan Runcie. This podcast is your place to gain insights from executives in music, media, entertainment, and more who are taking hip hop culture to the next level.[00:00:55] Dan Runcie Guest Intro: Today's episode covered a wide range of topics, but the key thing that's central to it is artist independence, and we're able to sit down with none other than Steve Stoute, who is the founder and CEO of United Masters founder and c e o of translation, and has been working in music and entertainment.For decades now. This is actually his third time on the podcast, and we covered it all. We started the conversation talking about motivations and how you were able to stay consistent as an entrepreneur, given the ups and downs of that lifestyle. Then we talked about translation, United Masters, Artist Independence, a bunch of trends happening right now and how.A company stays through all of the waves of technology waves, whether it's blockchain from a couple years ago to web three to where things are with AI now. Really fun conversation. Steve always brings it in these talks too, so it's a really great listen, hope you enjoy it. Here's our conversation.[00:01:53] Dan Runcie: All right. We're back with the Trapital podcast. Yeah. We got the one and only Steve Stoute here. I think this is your third time on the pod. [00:02:00] Steve Stoute: Really? I thought. I guess I thought it was twice. Thought This was my second time. [00:02:04] Dan Runcie: We did one time. We was at Empire Studio there. Yeah. We did it virtual during the pandemic, and then we got this one.[00:02:11] Steve Stoute: Oh, well, I'm fan of it. very early. You were? Yeah, I was on it very, very early. I think you're a good job. [00:02:18] Dan Runcie: Appreciate that. [00:02:18] Steve Stoute: Thanks for having me back. [00:02:19] Dan Runcie: Thank you. Yeah. These conversations are always good. And I wanna start this one and a place we haven't started others. I feel like we normally dive into the business, but take it a step back.You've been building businesses as an entrepreneur for decades now. How do you stay even keeled? How do you stay consistent with it, just knowing the ups and downs that naturally happen with building businesses? [00:02:42] Steve Stoute: Well, the fact that I appear to be even keeled is a compliment because, I certainly am emotionally attached to the businesses I build.I know there's, you know, the saying, don't be emotional about business, but when I'm building something from an original idea that I have, it's, you birthed the idea. I'm emotionally attached to the success of it, and the organization around it and the perception of it. So, you've been through those tumultuous cycles, so you tend to not chase the highs or chase the lows.and that sounds good. but it is definitely harder to do that when you're emotionally attached than, you know, understanding the theory that you should do that. And I think experience helps a bit, takes the edge off. But yeah, I would say to you, you just, like, for me, I've been able to sustain the energy andsustain through the ups and downs, through, sort of expecting them and not, chasing the highs like that's where the big mistake is when something great happens or a series of great things happen, you know, respecting it, but not chasing it because I believe that that's still not, gonna prevent the tumultuous time from coming. Because [00:03:56] Dan Runcie: I think the tough part with that, and this is something I know I struggle with too, it's tying your own satisfaction, your own esteem at particular points with those highs when things are going well. Yeah. And it's great to say those things, but I know even myself, it's tough to be able to stay even keeled when things are going well. The phone starts ringing more, you start getting more opportunities, more looks for things. Yeah, yeah, [00:04:20] Steve Stoute: Yeah. And it becomes more hectic. And then you have to hire more people. And then that creates another set of problems and responsibilities. And look, building a business isn't easy. I said it, the shop, know that the biggest mistake that I see is the glorification of entrepreneurs like, almond entrepreneurs. So therefore, like, you know, the sacrifice that it requires, to be able to know that failure is imminent or success is imminent that you may have an idea and you can go years without realizing the opportunity and it may go to somebody else. people ask me, how do I do it? And, you know, I'm here in San Francisco, I was, You know, in LA the day before that I was in Miami, the day before that, the day before that I was in LA again, it's like, it just keeps going. And like, you know, not seeing your family an d sacrificing some of the comforts of home or the comforts that you have of a routine, it's also part of the sacrifice. So it's not easy, and you have to really be committed to it. It almost has to be your A plan, your B plan. Your C plan is that plan, like you won't find joy or fulfillment. in doing anything else. At least that's how I feel. [00:05:39] Dan Runcie: Yeah. I think a lot of it's accepting those trade-offs and knowing that you can't do it all. I think I've heard you talk about this on the shop as well, whether it's so-and-so as the birthday party, so-and-so as the this, and yeah, it's great if you can line up and do those things, but you've chosen this life to be able to be in LA, be in Miami, be in New York, and back to back days and Yeah, doing that requires this type of commitment to it and you can't do everything. [00:06:04] Steve Stoute: Yeah. and hiring great people, is part of it. but putting your own personal comfort is certainly not a priority. [00:06:12] Dan Runcie: Yeah, definitely. Interesting you brought up the hiring piece because I think you've definitely built up a reputation as someone that's always operating on 10. So you naturally wanna surround yourself with people that are at that level. What are some of the things that you look for to see, okay, does this person have the edge? Cuz you know you're gonna be running all the time. Can they run with you? [00:06:36] Steve Stoute: it's very hard to, you know, resumes or LinkedIn pages, whatever you use can tell you a lot, but they don't measure resourcefulness or effort, right? So those things do not appear in any aspect of looking at, a person's profile. So I've learned through failure, you know, I may have not, I may have, I have high, I have hired and fired. you know, 3000 plus people, you know, so you learn what are the qualities or what are the questions to ask, to try to help, mitigate that the kind of person you need for your company. It doesn't mean that person's bad. You could have made a bad hire, not because the person's not good, they just don't fit your team. I mean, you see it in the NBA all the time. Players on somebody that was on the Lakers or somewhere else goes to another team and then all of a sudden they do well cuz it's the system, it's the culture, it's the coach. And that's the same thing with employment. Like, you just may be good just not for this company. So understanding what you specifically need versus, oh, this person worked at, so tech high, or they worked at Google, they worked at Airbnb, we want that right? Pulling them into a startup or pulling them into that culture or pulling them into that product not made completely, is completely different, specifically in our case, than what they were doing over there. And not every single job transfers one to one, whether it's the music business, the tech industry, the marketing business. We hire people at translation all the time. They came from Ogilvy. It's like, well, that has nothing to do with us, right? Or they come from Goodbee and you're like, well, that ain't gonna work here, right? Why? Just because the way we are, set up, what they may be used to, the programming that they run versus what we run, they, you know, may not be a great culture fit. And so, knowing that helps mitigate that risk. So knowing who you are, knowing what kind of people respond well to your culture is an important aspect. Not only just the mission statement stuff. Yeah, great, But like really innately knowing it and feeling what works.What are the common attributes of the people that are successful at your company that are more nuanced based and knowing how to identify that in others and what other companies share those values so that people that come from those companies tend to do well at your company.[00:09:05] Dan Runcie: You mentioned how this is a tension point in music in this industry. I think we've seen it from time and time, whether it's the record label side and folks on the creative versus streaming and tech coming in and some of the pushback there. I think you've been able to have a good vantage point with both of these because you have a ad agency and you also have a music distribution service.The talents, the skills needed for one, may not make sense for the other, but they also have a bit of a unique identity there. How is it with that perspective?[00:09:38] Steve Stoute: Difficult, hard. at the onset of starting United Masses, I put translation in united masses under. United Masters, Inc. And understanding that in order to do that, to build a marketplace that has creative or brands on one side and creative and culture and cultural impact and creators on the other side, and building that marketplace takes hiring unique people because we sit at the convergence of culture, technology, and, storytelling. Mm-hmm. So you need people who are prolific at least two of those three things, every single person. And that's the only way you have a shot of getting that convergence to work as one and hiring for that and building organization structures around that probably is the most important thing. That I do every day is understanding where could we be more efficient in that model? What kind of people do we need in order to accelerate that model? How do we scale that model as a result of the talent we have and the talent we need? That is very difficult, and it is probably, it's definitely a top five priority, from the CEO. [00:10:56] Dan Runcie: And I assume as well, part of this is required with the nature of how you've positioned United Masters, right?If you don't have these differentiating factors, if you don't have this tie in to culture or trying to present sync opportunities or things like that, then it could easily be seen as another music distribution service. And that's not what Well,[00:11:17] Steve Stoute: Dan, you've been following the company very closely before you could be, just another distribution company before that became popular, I had this idea with that differentiating factor seven years ago, right?So I knew from the onset that distribution was table stakes. and the building of United Masters with translation and power powering the brand sync opportunities, the influence and type of opportunities, was something that I had the early vision on. So yeah, it's important, but it's not important in response to, oh, all of these, you know, distributors in the market now, so you need to X, Y, Z. I was doing the X, Y, Z before they even had the idea to be in music distribution, to be honest with you. And a lot of these music distribution companies that you see are coming out, are looking at United masses and honestly copying it. Some of it they can't copy. That's fine. some of it they can't copy. It's 20 years of experience in, you know, running record companies and building an advertising business to be able to do this. So you think you can replicate the outcome without replicating the process, which I've never seen actually happen, the theory is right? But to replicate it, to hire the people, to have the credibility in the marketplace to speak to brands and hire the type of people needed to pull us off. Good luck, I do believe, and I am supportive just to add to all of that, great distribution companies that support independent music, that have something to contribute to the independent music movement are welcome and everybody, you know, rises as a result of it. So I'm not necessarily, I don't look at. at these other, distributors as competitors, I look at us as contributing to an industry that's, changing the music business dramatically and if you have something to bring to the table, it's beneficial to all. [00:13:17] Dan Runcie: That makes sense. And I think for United Masters as well, you've been able to have your moat essentially as you've described it. You have the years of experience, you have the ability to connect dots in ways that others don't, and that's led you to land some of the artists you have.You have a recent deal that's been announced with Brent Faz and a long-term partnership there. Can you talk a bit about that deal and how things came together? [00:13:43] Steve Stoute: Well, a moat is a bit of a stretch. I don't know if we have a moat. We have a great business model that certain artists, labels can find use of.[00:13:56] Dan Runcie: Do you think anyone has a moat in this space?[00:13:59] Steve Stoute: No. No. The record companies, the traditional record companies had a moat, when physical distribution was a barrier of entry, right? It's very hard to press up 500,000 CDs or vinyls or whatever it is. and distribute it to 7,000 points of distribution. That's not easy to do for a small, a single individual or a very small business. So that was their mode. They also had a monopoly on radio and, MTV, you know, MTV doesn't matter at all and, for music per se. And, radio matters much less than it used to. for discovery, right? So they used to have a moat but no longer do they have a moat And I don't think anybody independent music has a moat. I think Distro kid has a lane and TuneCore has a lane, and United masses have a lane. And, you know, others have, certain strengths about them. but, I think the only moat you have is the moat that is a true result of the success that you have. If people choose you and you build a strong business, and you're growing, that's the quote unquote moat. but other than that, I don't think anyone has, a clear defining advantage that no one else can replicate, right? A nd just because we have the brand stuff doesn't mean that that's the, you know, I wanna believe that's very important to the artists. But somebody else may have another thing that is if marketed well and that's what they think their advantages. I don't have the ultimate advantage cuz you know, brands and brand partnerships in sync may not necessarily be what you find most valuable. It could be a distribution company that creates and manufacturer's merch and you're like, oh shit, that's the one I want. Mm-hmm. Right. So I don't, wanna say that specifically. We have that. [00:15:56] Dan Runcie: That's fair. I do think that that mentality is part of the differentiating that I think is lost in music overall to some extent, because I think that you have few record labels that truly have unique brands. I think you have few music streaming services that have unique brands, and when you have something, it's clearer to be able to say, who is this for? Who is this not for, right? And clearly, I assume you were able to do some of that with Brent Faz and that partnership. He saw something with how you all do business and said, okay, this is for me.[00:16:32] Steve Stoute: Yeah, Well, Brent is a very, very unique talent. I obviously he wants to be with something that. A company, distributor, or partner that represents values that are there to him. So creativity is extremely important to him. The fact that we do have translation really matters in that instance cuz brand partnerships is something that he holds near and dear to him. He also was very respectful of, my, you know, reputation and what I've accomplished and chose that over others who, you know, was offering more money but didn't have the, same values that he had or shared values he didn't share their values. He was very particular about that everyone who knows him knows that, he's high taste. So he wanted to be with, you know, a brand, a distributor, a partner that was, had a sense of premiumness to it. That was important to him. So I think the combination of those three things and, you know, just our chemistry, his manager Ty, is also a fantastic, really intelligent, guy who I've developed a great relationship and a lot of respect for, also played a very significant role in this partnership. And we're gonna do great things together. I knew this day would come, I knew where so much respect for guys, like maybe maybe for Toby, right? Toby Nii, who, I keep screwing up his name and he keeps making fun of me screwing up. His name is actually part of his name now. When I say it. But, I have so much respect for him and fat because we've done so well together and, they've committed to us and we've committed to them. And it was a proof point that an independent artist can be successful, can be, you know, a global brand. And I directly tie the work that we've done with Toby and, and others. And others. He just comes to mind. I spent a lot of time with him for why Brett chose us. Brett chose us. and now you got Brett who sold out his tour in three days around the world and shit. That kind of star deciding to stay independent, not go with a major label. And they offered him everything, all the money in the world. And I knew that trend is gonna happen. That's gonna happen, man. You're gonna start seeing this happen all the time, like, you know, the one moat, again, back to the legacy labels that they have, is that because they own your masters, when your contract is up, what they do, their, their thing is start to give you back the shit they took from you, right? So now you leave, you finish your 8, 5, 7 album commitment, whatever it is, right? And it's no longer can they give you any more money to stay. So they go, we'll give you back album one. And you're like, I'll stay on Sony because now Album one reverts I'll stay on Universal cause album one reverts. So they stay stuck in the system because all they do is now give you back what you shouldn't have never given actually, or they never should have taken. So they hold you cuz you're tethered to that, right? And no matter what, an independent distributor can't give you your first album that you wrote, because you never had in the first place. You never, you know, so you never had it in the first place, however. So that's the moat that they have with legacy acts that will stay. So it'll be hard for legacy acts to leave when they can give you back that kind of stuff. But the new artists who are building their careers are considering independent distributors such as myself or others, at the same consideration set as they're considering a label. If you can give 'em money and you can provide them services, look man, you know, people talk about like, oh, these labels have a service. We picked up our systems. We distributed a song, from a great, great young artist, good man, superstar Pride outta Mississippi has a song called painting Pictures. The song was released in October. The The song moves like this, my building, just, I don't know, 3000 streams a day or something like that. and then all of a sudden, on February 6th, it goes from 3000 to 9,000 or something like that. Our systems catch it, right? We're looking for the second derivative.We're measuring acceleration. Boom. We find it, Two or three days later, other labels. It goes from 9,000 to 27,000, and then five days later it's compounded to fucking 400,000 streams, something in a day. It's crazy. But we already have identified it. all the labels are offering the money, three and a half million, 4 million, this, that, and the third.He chose to stay with United Masters. Everybody said, well, they can't get you this. They can't do that. Songs gonna be number one at radio. It's not like they have an advantage anymore, you know what I'm saying? It's like, it's not even like a problem. It's Mm-hmm. nothmm. if it was like a heavy lift, the artist made a great song. We gotta work it at radio. There's a formula to that money is part of that formula, right? And we can do it. it. Somebody can't do it better than us. Universal can't do it better than us. They don't like for artists to think that, right? They would like the perception of that to be true, but it's not the real marketing is coming out of, you know, the artists themselves and your relationships with Apple and Spotify and other distributors and YouTube, and we have the same relationships they have. So the new artists know that. They don't see, the only thing the record company can really give them that they believe they can get, that they can't get an independent is money. And I hope the Brett Fires deal just shows that we have money too. It's like, [00:22:18] Dan Runcie: How big is that money difference? Because I think that's the one thing that people do. [00:22:21] Steve Stoute: It's getting smaller and smaller as the record companies are losing. They're letting people go. their margins are getting smaller and smaller. They're firing a lot of people. don't know if no one talks about this. this, but they're not running around writing those big ass checks like they used to anymore. They Hell no. no. No, no, no, no, no, no. [00:22:41] Dan Runcie: Because I think people will look at a deal like the one that Drake did last year. Yeah. For instance. And they're, say the Ruter mal is somewhere 300, 400 [00:22:50] Steve Stoute: It was more than that. Much more than that. But that's different. They have Drake's, remember what I told you, they got Drake's masters, right? That's different than an artist starting from Drake releasing the first. song with Trey songs. All right, whatever. When he started his career, like if Drake released a song today that Drake considers an independent music company, at the same rate that he, looks at a major label cuz the major label can't say anything to him today that will make him believe outside of money that they have an advantage. [00:23:25] Dan Runcie: This topic too, reminds me of something similar because we're talking about the record labels and the streaming service as well, who's bringing in money, and there's all this debate right now around pricing for these services. The record labels want those prices higher. The streaming for songs? Oh no, for the monthly subscription that customers pay.[00:23:45] Steve Stoute: Oh, oh, okay. [00:23:46] Dan Runcie: Yeah, yeah. So they want the hire, the streaming services, well, a few of them still want to keep them as low as possible, but we're seeing things trending in that direction. You owning a music distribution service, relying on that streaming revenue as well, where do you take, what's your take right now on pricing on the consumer side and Yeah, [00:24:08] Steve Stoute: A few things there. Number one, the record companies had the opportunity when they held all of the leverage. To control pricing, to control pricing for the customer, as well as the price per stream. All these things were set up at a time when the record companies, you know, got big advances from Apple, you know, got ownership in Spotify, so they were cool with whatever was going on. As they're starting to lose market share now they need to go find growth, and the only way to find growth is go to the streaming services and say, charge more money so we can make more money. But the problem is that if the artist got the lion share the money, rather than the label getting the lion share the money, the current pricing model will work really well. The artists, if they were independent and they were receiving 80% of the money that came from streaming, and it went to each individual artist, they'd be fine with it. They'd be making a lot more money than they're making right now. The independent artists are making a fortune of money. Go ask russ. Go ask Toby. Go ask Brent what he's done for so many years. Why he stays independent, because they've really received the lion share the money. The record companies have bloated overhead, whether it be office space, employees and salaries of their CEOs and shit like that, and whether they're public or or not. In the case of universal, it's public. They need to show growth, and they're losing margin on how much money they're making per album or release, And the only way to find growth, real growth is the diversify of their business, which they haven't been so good at. There's not that many entrepreneurs insider, a record companies. Jimmy Iovine was one. Dr., Jay-Z was another, but there's not that many. You don't see that many. I'm not making this up. So you're talking about CEOs who were fat and happy, now all of a sudden have to innovate and they don't have a person that can make beats by Drake. They don't have a person who's gonna create the next thing.So now they gotta go to apple and Spotify and squeeze more. The problem is their leverage with Apple and Spotify have sort of, gone in the other direction. They don't have as much leverage as they had seven years ago, eight years ago, 10 years ago. ago. So that's the landscape. I the artists should get paid more money. That's we built our model to do, make sure the artists get paid more money and have great partnerships with, the platforms. And that's how I see it right now. yeah. So to answer your question on pricing, whether or not Spotify or Apple should charge more, I mean yeah. If they're gonna continue to grow so that you don't wanna price it so that people start canceling subscriptions, right? You gotta price it right so that it keeps growing. Cuz the more they grow, the more the pot of money grows. But before I get to even worrying about what they're charging, I need to worry about the artists are getting the lion share of revenue, and that's what we, stand for United Masses, and that's what we've been able to accomplish today. Okay. [00:27:33] Dan Runcie: And at least for the artists that are part of United Masters, they don't have the rights holder relationships that the signed artists do on the record label. So that side doesn't necessarily affect them as much. I think you definitely addressed that piece of it. I think the other side of it is looking at streaming prices on all the video services and how Netflix and all these other services have definitely expanded beyond their 9 99 price point.And then for you all as a business, knowing that a company like Spotify, which does have lower churn than a lot of those other companies as well, if prices were to increase 10%, that's 10% more revenue, at least for the streaming revenue side of the business. For a company like United Masters given the cut you have [00:28:16] Steve Stoute: Again, yes. and at some point you can raise the price to the point where somebody says, you know what? I'd rather not do that. I'd rather have an not that service. I'd rather listen to it free on YouTube, or I'd rather deal with ads. It costs too much. I don't know what that price is, but there's absolutely a point of diminishing return and setting any price. You gotta just know what that price is. So rather than me sit here and go, yeah, they should raise prices, which I could easily say, cuz it's beneficial to me. I want them to raise prices and continue to grow. Cuz as that pot grows, there's more money to be distributed. If they price it wrong, it hurts us. That's my only point. [00:28:59] Dan Runcie: That's fair. I get that. This topic as well, reminds me of another thing that I wanted to chat with you about. [00:29:07] Steve Stoute: We're talking about, reminds you of something else. That's great. That's how you write, you write like that, you find all these, comparisons, to different business models. in fact, you know, that's why I'm a fan of what you guys do of what you do. but it's funny when you say it, actually, reminds me of[00:29:22] Dan Runcie: That's funny. That's funny. I was actually gonna say, this isn't a random reminding, this is actually something you had said in that episode of the shop. I think it was the last one you did. You were, I think Drusky was on there. A fewer folks were on there. Yeah. You were talking about dollars that were moving from traditional tv Yeah. And going towards creators. Yeah. And how much of an opportunity that is. And I know you, with the business you have with translation, a lot of your work has been focused on doing these traditional TV partnerships, whether it's with a State Farm or some of the other clients you have.I'm curious to hear how this type of transition impacts your work and what opportunities you see and how you may have be thinking about the future on that side. [00:30:07] Steve Stoute: So the media buying companies, people who buy media for brands are seeing and advising that television ratings outside of sports are going in the wronging direction and advising to put that money more into digital channels that are primarily driven by creators. The creators have deep connections with their fans. The creators can create a network effect. So you can hire, you know, 50 creators who who have deep impact in different regions, communities, and you can buy against it. and sort of create marketplace momentum around a movement, a brand, a product, whatever it may be. My question toski is, this thing is shifting in your direction or what are you doing to prepare for it? I said something so long ago on, on my man Swae. I said that that artists are going to become mini media channels. I said this six years ago, mini media channels. If you look at the artists and you look at them like what cable channels were, you watch ESPN, they have an audience, you watch Turner, they have an audience, you watch Discovery, they have an audience. The artists, the influencers are gonna be exactly like those with obviously much smaller audiences, but the relationship between the artists and the audience or the influence in the audience is where the media money is going. ESP N, Turner and Discovery are prepared for that. that. Their organizations are set up for it. They stay on brand so that when the money comes their way, the brand knows, whoever's spending money against it knows exactly what they're getting and the kind of audience that they have. What What are the creators doing to be prepared for that movement of revenue coming to them? How are they set up for that? Because in the beginning it starts to look like, oh shit, this is all found money. But I'm saying, this is not just found money. This is the new industry. [00:32:23] Dan Runcie: Is there anyone that you see that's doing a good job of this right now? Or any creators that are ready for this moment [00:32:29] Steve Stoute: there's so There's so many of them. A lot of YouTube creators are doing it. You know, mr. Beast disguise, I mean, you know, the names. They all, you know, have created, you know, products that create lines around the block. I mean, you know, you don't look at it this way anymore because, she's transcended what you first seen her as. But Kim Kardashian is that she's the ultimate influencer. She's the influencer's influencer, right? Right. And she's built billions of dollars of business as a result of using her culture, her influence. that started with Instagram and social media. So like yeah, we've seen a lot of people do it, right? The musicians are now starting to do it right, because they're starting to realize Rihanna and Fenty. And others are copying or copying or seeing that, look, the streaming business is great and touring is great, but my impact, my movement, because of my digital footprint can allow me the opportunity to sell other higher margin items, like beauty products like lingerie, like footwear. So understanding your influence, whether you're a musician or personality and who your audience is creating opportunities for a lot of money to be made. [00:33:50] Dan Runcie: And how does that shape the type of work that translation will continue to do in the future working with creators? [00:33:58] Steve Stoute: Well, our number one responsibility at translation is to be lockstep with culture and lockstep in real lockstep. So as we help provide solutions for brands, creative, strategic solutions, We understand that what I just said about where this business is going and the influences and their impact that they have, we're very fluent at that. So it doesn't impact us in a way that says, oh, now we have to change our business as a result of this. We just create in these new landscapes, right? Like, it doesn't impact us at all. In fact, it hinders. The more bigger traditional agencies who have not even wrapped their brain around diversity culture, they're still running an old playbook. This new thing, they hope goes away, but we've seen this over and over again, right? It's the dilemma that happens, the innovation dilemma that takes place and whether you do it yourself or you get disrupted by somebody else. if you hold on to what you've done, you'll be disrupted. When we built translation, we built it under the manifesto of translating culture for Fortune 500 companies. And translating always needs to happen. It's why I came up with the name, everything needs to be translated, right? So the fact that tr culture needs to be translated and because it's translated and it changes, you have to be clear and understanding of it. I talk about that all of a sudden, the speed of culture, the speed in which, you know, someone can become an overnight success. Like there's a tape, a footage. You should run it, in this spot and I'll send it to you. Where Lil Nas X, goes on, he eats a piece of pizza January, 2019. He's eating a piece of pizza on Instagram. And He's like, yo, this is Nas X I got 1000 plus followers on spotify. I got 3000 on Instagram, you know, a couple, you know, thousand views on YouTube, but I think Old town Road is gonna be a hit. and I'll see you guys a year from now, literally a year to the day he has on a white fucking mink eating pizza. And he is like, you know, it's little Nas x 30 million on spotify, da da, da. And that's no different than skims disrupting spanks in a year. Like that's no different than other. Everybody is ready for the, that's the speed of culture and it's fast. It'll never be this slow again. Like that's a fact. So being a brand of an agency, a creative company, a influencer or whatever you are, if you are not aware, prepared, built for that speed, you will get left.[00:36:59] Dan Runcie: The other area that's move in just as fast, probably even faster is NIL and everything happening there with [00:37:06] Steve Stoute: This you of NIL? You were gonna say that, that reminds me of NIL deals. Oh shit. How the fuck did he do that? That reminds me of a great piece of pizza. I just had Steve again, NIL deals. Go ahead. Yeah. Yeah. [00:37:19] Dan Runcie: And I think we've seen a lot of fast movement there. Yes, we have. You've definitely probably see plenty of opportunities cuz I think the space is very unregulated. There's random things happening. [00:37:32] Steve Stoute: Yeah. And yeah, you should go look at, just so that you properly, as you definitely, know my work and have been, very much appreciative of my contribution. I did a documentary at LeBron James called student athlete that came out five years ago. You should look at that. You should play clips of it. We followed four athletes over a year that were high school, that were college athletes. One of 'em got injured and fucking, like, had to sleep in his car because you know, you are a D one athlete, you get injured, you don't make it to the pros. You don't get any fucking health insurance anymore. They fucking cut you. That's the end of it. Right. So you're playing for this lottery ticket and you don't get shit. And the fact that these student athletes don't get a chance to actually get a great education because they have fucking practice every day or games on Friday or traveling to get to a game all over the place. But the school benefits from all of the advertising dollars. And all of the conference dollars was something that we put a highlight on and it was really, making it and seeing these stories. You felt like this is of modern day slavery. Mm-hmm. So NIL deals the Wild, wild west, the transfer portal as well. So you had NIL deals and the transfer portal happening at the same time. What is this doing? This reminds me of the independent music business, because now these student athletes really now are independent business people. They can change schools with less friction than they could have five years ago, 10 years ago. Forget it. you change schools, you had to sit outta here. You couldn't do this, you couldn't do that. By the time you could play, you know, you lost a step or you weren't the same, or you were too far removed from the game, whatever it may be. So the hindrance of that made you stay at the school and not go through that problem. That was the way they kept you. Well, it's certainly not fair that the football in which you have to stay three years, right? And basketball pay for 90% of all of the other scholarships That the fucking sports program had. And yet these guys don't get any money. It is not right, you know, think about players getting thrown out of bowl games because they got tattoos, free. It's crazy. So I'm all for NIL deals and I'm happy, it's the wild, wild west. And I like the fact that there's a guy or girl on campus make making $2 million a year balling in a fucking Porsche Bentley or investing his or her money, whatever they're doing, helping their family. I'm happy for the fact that they are getting a chance to monetize their impact beyond a scholarship, that is fantastic, but definitely a education that is not the same because they're practicing the amount of time they're practicing and traveling. The way they're traveling, this is the least that they can do is get paid for their services. And the NCAA got away with a lot for a very very long time. You should look at that. Look, when the student athlete, it's a bylaw, right? that actually became a thing and why it was set up that way and what it means and the implications of it. It was a way to hog, tie or build a moat so that these kids would never leave. As college sports grew and the money grew, all of a sudden it became, these assets, right? Became really lucrative. These conferences became very lucrative, you know, hundreds of millions of dollars in TV deals. I'm happy for it. In fact, we represent the Big 12 and, shout out to my man, Brett, who now runs the Big 12. He came from running the Brooklyn Nets. He, I worked with him when he moved the Nets from New Jersey to Brooklyn. Then he went over to run a aspect of Roc Nation and now he runs the Big 12. He's the future of collegiate sports cuz he understands the music industry and the brand building industry. He understands the business of running sports team, the nets, the arena, the Barclays, bringing in talent to fill that arena pricing, dynamic pricing, media deals. He did it all. And now he's taken that combination of skills to Big 12 and he's once NIL deals. In fact, that's his competitive advantage because none of those guys who run all those other conferences, they're all like, shit, we gotta give these NIL deals. The students are gonna do X, Y, Z in this transfer portal. What are we gonna do? Brett's? Like, this is what I've been doing my whole career. I can't wait to set up NIL programs, bring brands in, you know, treat these students athletes like the same way we treated artists in my previous career. it's dope and, it's way, way, overdue. This reminds you of, [00:42:46] Dan Runcie: Didn't remind me of something, but I was gonna ask you, is this an area that you would work more directly in through translation, through the agency, working with the [00:42:54] Steve Stoute: Yeah. I mean, yes. Look, it's not like, again, we represent the Big 12, so our contribution to that, is adjacent to a lot of that kind of stuff, you know, there is an opportunity to set up a. a division that works specifically on NIL deals. I think it's much more, urgent that the CAAs do and the UTAs and the WMEs have that because their brokers of that kind of stuff. Where they have talent and they brands and they put 'em together, we do that for our clients. We don't do that as a industry trade. We don't just like connect random brands with, you know, artists unless we are, or athletes, unless we are doing much more immersive experiences and creative for those brands. But, you know, I'm happy we represent Beats. We did the, Beats deal with Bronny, then we did the commercial with Bronny and his dad with LeBron and like I love that. I love it. Not only for that story, but the fact that again, this 17 year old kid signed a deal with Beats. And we can actually market that and advertise that as, without him losing eligibility or whatever the fuck these guys were coming up with is dope.[00:44:07] Dan Runcie: Right. Especially given that everyone was gonna make money off of his name. So I'm glad he can do it himself. [00:44:12] Steve Stoute: Of course, like, you speak to Jalen Rose about this like when they're at Michigan man, the Fab 5 and these guys, [00:44:18] Dan Runcie: Oh, that was bad. [00:44:19] Steve Stoute: That's terrible man. Selling jerseys with their name on it and these guys. like, everybody's looking at investigating the, what they did and what did Webber do and what he did to try to feed his family. You can't even afford to get your family to come see you play. Mm-hmm mm-hmm. Well of course corruption's gonna be in it. You mean, I can't eat? I have a scholarship though. And my parents can't even come see me play cuz we can't afford it. You don't think that's gonna lead to corruption? What are you crazy?[00:44:47] Dan Runcie: It's this weird juxtaposition where I think either, Webber or Rose talked about this in that documentary [00:44:52] Steve Stoute: It's the coach by the way.Yeah. Gets paid $10 million, in most, towns or cities in America, the highest paid employee of that city, or town is the coach of the football team. Yep. Or the basketball team. They're the highest earning person in the entire city. [00:45:09] Dan Runcie: Yeah. They save at the state level too for the Colleges [00:45:12] Steve Stoute: Then they get deals with Nike and the coach makes the player wear Nikes or Reebok or whatever it is, the coach makes that decision. Everyone's making money except the student themselves, but they're getting a scholarship. [00:45:27] Dan Runcie: Right, it's crazy [00:45:28] Steve Stoute: And definitely an education with an asterisk next to it.Isn't that fair? Are you fucking outta your mind? [00:45:35] Dan Runcie: It's crazy. It's crazy. I'm glad this is happening and I'm glad we're seeing this shift. [00:45:41] Steve Stoute: Yo, pull up student athlete. When you do this, I'm you the edit right now. I'm gonna send you the Lil NAS thing and the student athlete thing. Oh yeah. We'll throw it in there. Put it in. That's why we're doing video. video. [00:45:52] Dan Runcie: Yeah, no. That's why we, no, this will be good. And then we have the clips and everything. Yeah. Shifting gears, last time you were on, you talked about chief technology officers and why artists need to have tech side folks on their platform. Yeah, [00:46:06] Steve Stoute: Yeah, brother. [00:46:07] Dan Runcie: Yeah, How have you seen this develop the past couple years since? [00:46:10] Steve Stoute: I haven't, the artists that obviously have the foundational truth is as technology is becoming much more important in content and video services, every artist needs a chief technology officer. That's the foundational truth. The practical reality is that that's not gonna be the case, which is the opportunity for platforms like ours to be extremely useful in providing tools, intelligence, information that is allows the artist, the influencer to take action in a very user-friendly way to help grow their career. So essentially, we wanna be the Chief Technology Officer as a platform for all of these artists. I believe that to be true. In fact, in building our platform, the remit to my engineers is that, that we have to anticipate what the artist's needs are. And build that for them. We're it for a community of artists. We're not building it to best interface with Apple or Spotify or YouTube. That's one part of it. 80% of it is what do you, I say all the time, man, I'm about to put my name in the system. I'm about to upload my first song. That experience. If I nail this, I'm gonna change the life for me and my mama. I'm gonna become my dreams. I'm gonna be able to quit this bullshit job and really live out what my talents are when I hit this button and upload this song. That's how they feel. to build a technology that's empathetic to that, and then as they continue to grow, make sure that they have the tools and they need information in order to do their thing. That's what I tell each and every engineer that comes into my company. [00:48:17] Dan Runcie: That trajectory makes sense because if you're starting out, you're a dependent, you're not gonna have the resources to hire someone to pay them 1 50, 200 a year, whatever it is to be a CTO on staff. Yeah. How could you leverage the partnerships you have? Maybe if you get to a certain point, you could have someone internally. [00:48:35] Steve Stoute: Of course. Of course, you know drake and, you know Beyonce and Pharrell and they have a version of a chief technology officer, somebody who, their interaction with technology is seamless and smooth and they understand it and they have relationships and, you know, they could speak with the tech leaders and be able to find the value and where the integration and partnerships can best take form. Up until you get to that point, we should be the platform to provide that for you at scale[00:49:08] Dan Runcie: Artists as well. This is also valuable because there's so many new things that are always coming. Obviously I talk about them often in capital. You're evaluating themself for your own business, whether it's a couple years ago, whether or not we should be building something on the blockchain.A couple years after that, should we be involved with Web 3? Should we have NFTs and 2023? AI is the big thing. [00:49:33] Steve Stoute: Can I talk to you about that? [00:49:34] Dan Runcie: Yeah, [00:49:35] Steve Stoute: But go ahead, ask the question. I'll get into it.[00:49:37] Dan Runcie: Yeah, so I was gonna ask twofold how you look at it for yourself with the businesses and then also the value add and advice you give to artists that are considering this.[00:49:46] Steve Stoute: Yeah, So let's, I take a step back for a second. Whether 20 years ago as technology, you know, sort of more consumer facing technology 30 years ago has been, is taking shape into, is taking shape. The popularity of code or the popularity of, you know, technology outside of just the internet itself. It wasn't immediate frenzy around it. It didn't, like, it was just happening. It wasn't like front and set of the media. And I think part of it is like there weren't that many day traders like Uber drivers are traders and school teachers trade everybody's trading stocks. So now that you've built applications that allow people to day trade and everybody could be a stock analyst themselves, the technology has gotten a lot of media attention and a lot of that media attention I do believe has escalated the fact that it becomes top of mind. But yet the application of that technology may be premature. Agreed. So every with the metaverse, oh my God, everybody are you doing in the Metaverse? We're in the Metaverse. We're in the Metaverse. You in the Metaverse. What is the Metaverse? Is Fortnite the Metaverse? That's not the Metaverse, the Oculus is the Metaverse. No, that's not the Metaverse is gaming in general. The Metaverse. Well, whatever. But before we could even get to that, NFTs come, well fuck the Metaverse. It's the NFTs. Well, the NFT, you got a NFT. You got a What's your character? What's your character? Who you got a character? What's your character? What's your vetas? don't have a character. Let me see your crypto wallet. What's in your crypto wallet? What's in your crypto wallet? What's in your crypto? Okay, now we just went to the Oh shit. Fucking AI. you use chatGPT. How we gonna, it's like, yo, bro, could we just chill out? Stop. and the media writes it and then everybody just runs around. Thinking that they need to be prolific and like force themselves to find the application. cuz they don't wanna be left out like, let these things find, use cases that stick and therefore the products and the applications that come out of it will then take hold. But like for you to just run to crypto wallets and metaverses and ai and the, it's like, it is so overblown. And what I was telling my team about is what happens is like take crypto, like the media is incentivized to write it all the way up, right? write it all way. You gotta get this, you gotta get this, you gotta get this. They write it all the way up and then as soon as the shit melts, they fucking write it all the way down. So they still win because they fucking made everybody feel like it was important. And then, They start shitting on it and everybody has to read that because they wanna know why they're shitting on it. And then while they're shitting on it, they fix the next thing. Metaverse da da da it's like, it's funny to me cuz I could it's obvious actually. It's funny because it's obvious, but yet people sort of work themselves up, like, you know, I deal with CMOs all the time. They're like, you know, what are we gonna do in the metaverse 18 months ago? They don't even fucking bring it up anymore. Right? Why were you bringing it up 18 months ago? Cause you read it in the New York Times because it was on some news channel and you don't even bring it up anymore. [00:53:08] Dan Runcie: The dialogue around this heightened into the fomo. Everyone has the fear of missing out on all this.[00:53:14] Steve Stoute: Not me. I think I don't have any FOMO on shit that's not real. And I'm not saying it's not real, I'm saying until it has practical applications that affect my life or my business really.[00:53:29] Dan Runcie: How do you determine what that is?[00:53:32] Steve Stoute: I don't know, Talent? testing, I don't know, like that kind of thing. [00:53:39] Dan Runcie: It's interesting, right? Because I feel like we could go back to two years ago, and I remember, I think that was around the time that NFTs were having their craze and artists could've been like, oh, well, what if we could release a N F T on United Masters or something like that?Yeah. Or what if we could do this? And it's one of those things, in hindsight, of course the right answer is, yeah, that I don't think we need to do that. [00:54:01] Steve Stoute: Let's stay the you ask anybody who worked with me, I never, ever bought that that bullshit. I'm like, look, until that young kid, that 17 year old kid, 16 year old kid in Atlanta, Fort Lauderdale, los Angeles, is me that they're willing or want to buy an album as an NFT. I am not gonna allow Discord chatter to say that's where my business is doing.[00:54:30] Dan Runcie: I think that's a good example here, because so much of the chatter around this stuff is hyped up by people that are in it. People that were buying NFTs or music related NFTs or things like that were people that were talking about this on the regular, on Discord and Twitter, but it's not the 14 year old [00:54:48] Steve Stoute: guy, you know?and he's my man. But, he owns, Royal. [00:54:51] Dan Runcie: Oh, BLA? [00:54:52] Steve Stoute: BLA, you know, right? You know he put out an album, right. right. You know? Mm-hmm. Oh [00:54:55] Dan Runcie: yeah, I remember that [00:54:56] Steve Stoute: Remember 11 Million in that, right? DJ [00:54:59] Dan Runcie: and then Naz had done something on Royal a couple months later. [00:55:02] Steve Stoute: Right. But you so very smart, very, very smart. Made $11 million on an album. Everybody was like, that's the example. NFTs the whole thing. When you ask people, like regular fans who are fans of DJs that listen to EDM music and you say, you know that album blah da da da, they don't even know what you're talking about. That album that did that was purchased primarily by people that was in that business, the Discord community. It wasn't the general music community that bought it or even was aware of it. It was the people in that community. That's fine, that's fine. That's good for him. It's good for that community. Perfect. But to try to say that that applies to every, the industry at large now, and now the 16 year old kid in Atlanta, Miami, Chicago, whatever, is gonna now want that. That's not the right idea. And you know, it didn't require testing and learning for that. You could just do the work on it, do the math on it. Now there's aspects of the NFT, the blockchain technology, I think is very important, for payments. Yeah. So, I see that application, everything has an application. It's like AI is gonna, is fantastic. NFTs and crypto, and all of its fan the metaverse Fantastic. I just think this accelerated frenzy and FOMO sometimes get you to lose focus on what about it is really important to your business. And what I learned in the frenzy of the NFT marketplace or Web 3 was. The value of blockchain to payments. Payments in the music industry are very difficult because you have many people contributing to a song and, the rights holders need to have something that bound them right on these digital forever. Right. Until they decide to change it. And the blockchain does really good with those agreements in being able to put, you know, 17 people writing one song, whether it be a sample or just original writers, whatever it may be, and allow them to have these digital contracts that make sure everybody gets paid fairly precisely automatically. That part of it I like, I mean, for my, business, I like all of it. Mm-hmm. But specifically, for our business, [00:57:23] Dan Runcie: Does anything about AI spark interest or application in the same way? [00:57:28] Steve Stoute: Well, with AI, I'm trying to figure out, I'd really like it for education. So, you know, if I'm giving you tools, look at Uber, right? And They tell a driver, you know, peak times 4:00 PM this area, the town, the driver know where to go. The driver could be of any education level, but the tools that are provided to that driver, apply to, you know, whether you speak perfect English, you know, your learning English, your education level varies. The simplicity of what they provide you to be a small business is absolutely brilliant. You should look at the backend of Uber. You should see what an Uber driver sees. it'll amaze you. For our artists, I look at them like that. So, where I think AI can be really good is an understanding like when you post during this time, this is when the best time you get results.This is the type of content that works best for you. the, you know, release of songs when you should release them. The timing of it. I think utilizing AI to provide education around building your business can be very helpful for us, because of the fact that it can pull all that information and then provide a very easy way of understanding the best way to move forward based off the intelligence that it gleams.[00:58:47] Dan Runcie: There's so many applications of it, I think both internally for companies like you mentioned, but also how you deal with your stakeholders, how they then deal with their fan bases. It'll also be interesting to see just the bigger picture, what that next big thing is, how people are gonna react to it. A lot of it is accelerated by, How people live in bubbles themselves in a lot of ways.If you're only spending your time on Twitter, on Discord, you're just seeing the frenzy. You think everyone is there with you. Yeah. I remember a year ago I was at a dinner and this was right at the height of web 3. It was a lot of industry professional folks in there, and I remember being the person saying, you're all saying that we're gonna be on web 6 a year from now.There's people, the average person really isn't tapped into this. I don't think we're moving that fast. And a lot of 'em looked at me like I was crazy then. Yeah. And I'm like, it's my job to follow this stuff. I'm not a Luddite here telling you this. This is just the reality. So, [00:59:42] Steve Stoute: Well people, a lot of times people fight, try to solve problems that don't exist. Yeah. Right. Like it's like, you are saying web 6 and all that, we haven't even gotten to, you know, look, we still don't even know what the fuck 5G does yet, right? It's like, let's be really analog about this topic, yeah, we're fixing that, with AT & T but just in general, the regular con general consumer, you ask 'em about 5g, they see it on their thing. They're like, my text didn't go through any faster and my videos are still, you know, it's, Yeah. It's still like cycling. So I thought I had 5g. So sometimes things create more media momentum than the practical consumer experiences and a lot of times, spend a lot of time trying to solve problems that actually don't exist.[01:00:35] Dan Runcie: Agreed on that. Agreed on that. Well, Steve, before we close things out, the first interview we did, we talked about where United Masters was, where the future was, and I believe you told me, [01:00:45] Steve Stoute: but I did pretty good when I look, I haven't seen the interview, since, but I don't know if I did pretty good in my prediction. Do you remember? [01:00:52] Dan Runcie: You said we are in the first inning of this cause I think I asked you, what does the future look like with exits and future? You said we're in the first inning, we're early in this perspective. What inning do you feel like we're at now and what do you see for the future of the business.[01:01:07] Steve Stoute: I believe that we're still in the the first third of the innings. I think we're in inning to bottom of the second, you know, top of the third kind of thing. and the reason why is because now money is back into music. When I first sat with you, There was no vC money in music businesses anymore. They'd fucking ran. They lost all that money with all those other, you know, versions of this idea for reasons that make perfect sense, that the money had up, the money was going to social media and, you know, FinTech and a bunch of the other things like why me? Why music. And in the last five years, whether it be catalog sales or, independent music now being discovered by financial systems, Goldman Sachs and the others investors more, mainstream investors have realized that there's growth there and there's globalization of music and all of the things that bring energy back to the industry and that the record labels don't have this. Choke hold on it like they used to have. And it's not as difficult and to understand, which was another thing that people didn't understand about the music was They made it so difficult. People thought it was like a business that was so hard to figure out and all that other kind of stuff. Cuz over the rights. But because it's now become clear where I used to have to explain it to every single person. They're like, so you're competing with Spotify, like, no, you'd have to explain. it. They understand it now, which is cool. So now money's in, which means more entrepreneurs are gonna come in and build services like ours and other alternative services tools. The fastest growing segment of the music business is independent music. The fastest growing aspect of the music business is global music. Global music, the record companies never dominated because English speaking music was the only thing that really mattered. I mean, you just about it, Bad Bunny headline Coachella, right? How many people don't even know what the fuck he's saying? I mean, if there's 80,000 people there with maybe 65,000, don't know what the fuck he's saying. Yet they're dancing, all this great music coming outta Africa. Mm-hmm. That people are just going crazy over. That never happened. At the rate this has happened. Now, all of that independence rising globalization and music rising and money coming in. Is now you're about to see the acceleration of what can happen as a result of the momentum. It was always headwinds. And now I would say in the last year, it's been tailwinds. It's an exciting time. It's a very exciting time. it's an extremely exciting time. it's no longer in the dark. It's no longer something that, you know, big business. it wasn't paying attention to. Everybody sees it now. and when everybody sees opportunity and money and. Value creation and the fact that you can disrupt this, you know, a hundred billion dollar business of the music business, it can be disrupted because the barriers of entry has completely been removed like every other industry where the barriers of entry has removed, money goes into it, entrepreneurs come into it and new value is created. and I think that's being recognized as we speak here today. So we're in the bottom of the second, top of the third. [01:04:47] Dan Runcie: Nice. Alright, bro, appreciate that. [01:04:49] Steve Stoute: Always, as always, This is good man. All right. Trapital. Let's rock and roll. [01:04:53] Dan Runcie: Yes sir. man. Cool. [01:04:55] Dan Runcie Outro: If you enjoyed this podcast, go ahead and share it with a friend. Copy the link, text it to a friend. Post it in your group chat. Post it in your Slack groups. Wherever you and your people talk, spread the word. That's how travel continues to grow and continues to reach the right people. While you're at it, if you use Apple Podcast, Go ahead, rate the podcast, give it a high rating, and leave a review. Tell people why you like the podcast. That helps more people discover the show. Thank you in advance. Talk to you next week.

It’s never been easier for brands to push their message out. But building true connections is  in today’s fragmented landscape.Dr. Marcus Collins has advice for cutting through the noise. His new book, “For The Culture”, is full of insights. Marcus has worked with Beyonce, Apple, Nike and more. He’s the Head of Strategy at Wieden+Kennedy, and a marketing professor at the Michigan Ross School of Business (Go Blue!).Marcus believes people use brands to express who they are. To win now and in the future, the most successful brands will have to double down on identity, not on value proposition. Here’s everything we covered:[3:20] How media fragmentation is affecting community-building [5:35] Brands have to activate people, not algorithms  [8:45] Ideology creates cultural consumption[10:44] Brand ideology transcends industries[19:18] How non-visible companies can use tangibility to brand build[20:04] Effective market research goes beyond just data[23:57] Great marketing taps into the moment[30:04] Why Marcus wrote this book[31:30] How to reach MarcusListen: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | SoundCloud | Stitcher | Overcast | Amazon | Google Podcasts | Pocket Casts | RSSHost: Dan Runcie, @RuncieDan, trapital.coGuests: Marcus Collins, @marctothecThis episode is sponsored by DICE. Learn more about why artists, venues, and promoters love to partner with DICE for their ticketing needs. Visit dice.fmThis episode is also brought to you in collaboration with Primary Wave. James Brown would have turned 90 this month. Let’s revisit his cultural legacy and check out his greatest hits. Enjoy this podcast? Rate and review the podcast here! ratethispodcast.com/trapitalTrapital is home for the business of music, media and culture. Learn more by reading Trapital’s free memo.TRANSCRIPT[00:00:00] Marcus Collins: The hope for me personally, is to scale my impact like I believe that reasonable, my ideology, my belief, my conviction is that we're put in this world to serve God, and serve each other. That's what I believe, and the way I serve is by helping people realize the best version themselves operate the highest fidelity. So the book is a way to scale my impact.[00:00:21] Dan Runcie Intro: Hey, welcome to the Trapital Podcast. I'm your host and the founder of Trapital, Dan Runcie. This podcast is your place to gain insights from executives in music, media, entertainment, and more who are taking hip hop culture to the next level.[00:00:45] Dan Runcie Guest Intro: Today's episode is all about culture, culture's ability to drive the decisions we make in business, in society and more. And our guest is the one and only Dr. Marcus Collins. He is an award-winning marketer. He's a professor at the Ross School of Businesses, university of Michigan, go blue. And he has done a number of impressive things in his career, working on campaigns like Apple Music, Budweiser, made in America's Festival, Bud Light Platinum, Beyonce and her digital work, especially in the Sasha Fierce era. He's also worked with Matthew Knowles, Steve Stout, and many others in the industry today, and he is the author of a new book that just came out called For the Culture. So in this episode we talked a lot about brands reaching that ideology level, which Marcus describes as that top tier that a brand could reach in terms of how it connects and identifies with people and in communities.So we talk about what that looks like. We also talk about Marcus' goals for this book, how that shapes his viewpoints and some of the challenges that brands can face. With regards to branding and reaching that ideology level, whether certain industries are more or less disposed to being able to get there and more.I give Marcus a ton of credit, him and I had met over a decade ago, back when I was in business school at Michigan as well, and seeing his career path and a lot of the decisions that he was able to make a transition into doing something he truly loves and is one of the best people in the world at what he does, gave me inspiration to not only see that there were plenty of other non-traditional career paths after going to business school, but I think a lot of that also informed the type of work that I now do at Trapital today and how I try to continue myself on the path that makes most sense for me.So really great conversation, always great to have him on a second time on the podcast. So here's my conversation with Marcus. Hope you enjoy it.[00:02:41] Dan Runcie: All right. We are joined today by the one and only Dr. Marcus Collins, author of For the Culture, an award-winning marketer and a Ross alum. Go Blue. Welcome back, man.[00:02:51] Marcus Collins: That's right. Thanks man. Thanks for having me, doc. Always a pleasure to be with[00:02:55] Dan Runcie: Likewise and your book. Great job on it. Great job on the release too. You got a bunch of heavy hitters giving support for this. And one of the things that I wanna start with, you've talked about this before, the ideology hierarchy that brands go through and that journey. So for the listeners, can you first explain what that is and then an example of a brand that you think has gotten there and done A good example of that.[00:03:20] Marcus Collins: Yeah, so we think about ideology, it's about the way the brand sees the world, like the point of view that the brand has it's conviction. Some call it as purpose. It's really the driving belief that dictates where the brand goes, what it says, what it does, and with whom. it shows up in the world.And we all think about strong brands as brands that people know. Oh, I know that brand. we're strong. Where a lot of brands that we know that we don't consume from, right? Like Sears, we know that brand Blockbuster, we know that brand, but clearly people weren't showing up. So awareness isn't enough. One step up, we go, well there's, I know that brand and it has good quality, right?Oh, that's awesome. I know the brand has has good quality. It's a stronger brand. But to go one step higher is to know the brand. Strong, good quality, but it's also considered a leader in the space, right? So you've got like a Hulu and a Netflix and a Tubly. Which one is more trusted? Well, definitely ain't Tubly, right?Because they're not considered anywhere close to being a leader in the space. A step up from that is trust and confidence. I trust the brand. Not only do I know it, it has, good products. it's a leader in the category, but I also trust it. I have confidence in it. We think about, the headphones that we know to be the most trusted headphones in the market.We'll say, oh, that's Bose, right? Bose is demonstratively, a leader in the category and the most trusted headphones. Think about audio quality, sonic quality. However, Bose is bested in the market by Beats by Dre. Why is that? Because Beats by Dre operates at a higher level still. It's association and relevance that the brand, it's relevant for someone like me and the association, the imagery I have that's associated to the brand makes it seem cooler, right?Which is why Beats by Dre owned like 48% of the market when they were before AirPods came out, right when it came to the headphone market. But then it's one step higher than that. And the most strongest brands operate at this zenith, this pinnacle of brand strength. And that's ideology. They transcend the value propositions of the product.My razor sharper, my battery last longer, my car goes faster, and they operate at a place of conviction. And this is so strong for brands because people consume those brands, not just cuz of what they are and what they do, but because who these people are. And the brand becomes an extension of my identity.of Who I am, a Patagonia fleece is just as warm as a Columbia fleece, however, where in Patagonia says something about who I am, my identity, that I believe in mitigating our impact on the environment, and that's massively powerful.[00:06:01] Dan Runcie: This is relevant for musicians and artists as well, because I think they have some of those ideological brands too. I've been looking at the trends, especially with vinyl sales. More than half of the people that are buying vinyl don't have players. They're buying them to put them on display to showcase them.It is an extension of them. I want you to think that I am the type of person that listens to Drake, that listens to Tyler the creator. That's that zenith that we're talking about. it[00:06:29] Marcus Collins: It was so cool, and I fully agree with you. A few years ago, Fruit of the Loom, they do partnerships with musical acts like, Metallica, Kiss, Aerosmith, Seal's t-shirts. People got metallic on their, shirts. That's a licensing deal between fruit, the loos, and those musical acts.And a few years back, fruit looms. Were looking at their book of business to see which. brand, likeness which artists l likeness was doing better than the others. So they can re-up those licenses and they found that the Ramones was outperforming Kiss, Metallica, Aerosmith. They're like, what's going on The Ramones little small little band.Then they had like two albums out in the seventies, like, what's happening here? So they asked those fans, they said, you know, you must be a really big fan of the Ramones that you bought this t-shirt. They were like, Nah, I don't even know they're music. But the Ramones mean punk rock, and they want to be seen as punk rock, the meaning associated with the brand, that vessel of meaning that is brand.People use it as an identity mark, not because of what it is, but because of who they are. I mean, the biggest brands that we know, the biggest artists that we know, they all transcend what they do and operate at a level of why they do it. In the words of Simon Sinek,[00:07:43] Dan Runcie: This reminds me of those Iron Maiden t-shirts. You remember that era? Maybe it was like five, seven years ago when everybody was wearing Iron Maiden t-shirts. I don't know if they were really listened to the music, but I think it's that thing as well where they just wanna be seen like the type of person that would identify with that[00:07:58] Marcus Collins: Of course not. Of course not. I mean, people are wearing, Red Bull t-shirts. That was a thing, is a way of signaling something about yourself. NASA t-shirts. Exactly. Like just signaling something about yourself. And really, that's all we're trying to do to try to peacock our way through the world signal who we are in hopes that we can find people who are like ourselves and we find connection because that's what we are, we're social animals by nature.[00:08:21] Dan Runcie: And a lot of this, at least what we talked about so far, are consumer brands. This applies at the enterprise level as well. I think a company like McKinsey aligns perfectly. There is a status that you're able to send both internally within the organization and externally by hiring that firm, spending the seven figures for them to come and work on your project because of what you want to be able to say.[00:08:45] Marcus Collins: To say, McKenzie is our agency, that's who does our strategy work, McKenzie, and we know this from being in business school, that people want McKenzie on their resume. Because of what McKenzie means, what it signifies, you know, there's a sociologist named Pierre Perdue, who talks about this idea of cultural capital that our consumption, the more conspicuous it is, the more we align, value from it.There is embodied cultural capital. That is our skills, our knowledge, what we know, like, you know, if you go to the opera and, you know, the literature, you know, the Odyssey, you know the Homer, you know all that stuff. Then you have a amount of, value, of capital, of cultural capital.And the idea is that if you were an equestrian growing up, that signals that you've come from wealth and your friends who were equestrians growing up signals that they come from wealth and who fr what friends, do you have friends like those and those friends open up doors for you for jobs? VC funding and the alike, right?So that cultural capital that embodied cultural capital turns into financial capital. The same thing goes with objectified cultural capital, the things that we buy, the clothes that we wear, the cars that we drive. This a way of signaling who we are in the world in an effort to meet other people like ourselves, that open up door for financial capital.The same thing goes for institutional cultural capital where I go to school, where I work, what fraternity I joined, whether I was in Jack and Jill, like these things signal who we are in the world that open up more financial economic opportunities for ourselves. So you're right. So it's not just, B2C as we typically think about it.These are all the many ways that we signal who we are in the world, the companies we work for, the schools we went to, the institutions that we frequent. These are all consumption behavior to signal our identity. So that we might find people like ourselves that create more social and financial opportunities for ourselves.[00:10:44] Dan Runcie: Are there certain industries or sectors that hitting that ideological level is extremely difficult or it's almost impossible? I think back to my own career experience. I've had internships at cable companies and airlines, and I think that there's challenges, especially just given the nature of their businesses, how consumers interact with them.But even I think about companies in waste management and areas like that. Companies that could have strong brands and business businesses, but is there a ceiling of how high certain companies and certain industries can go because of the industry dynamics?[00:11:19] Marcus Collins: I think that if a company defines itself by what it does, then yes, there is a ceiling. But if a company defines itself by what it believes, I think the possibilities are endless. Cuz even as you name off those companies, we look at them through the lens of their industry, their category. And they are defined by their category.Oh, you have waste management services. So you are in waste management. You have an airline. So you are in the airline industry. you make microprocessors, so you're the micro processing industry. When you only define yourself by the product services or product goods you bring to the world, then that's the only opportunity you have.But when you elevate beyond that, you say, we believe this. We just so happened to provide waste management services. Imagine if we said this is arbitrarily speaking. Imagine we said that we believe that a clean environment makes for. a better life. Let's just say that. I'm just make that up, right.A clean environment makes for a better life, and that's why we have sanitation services, waste management services. Then we go, well, what else could be better if it were clean? Well, what if we cleaned up the oceans? We're no longer in the waste management business. We are in the cleaning oceans business.Or, well, what if we cleaned up the internet? Mm. What if we went through the internet and found all the smut, all the whatever, the things that aren't as savory. Maybe for kids and we're going to clean the internet up. We're gonna create products to do that. We just so happen to do waste management.We still happen to clean up oceans. We still happen to create software that cleans up the internet. But what we do that because we believe that a clean environment creates for better solutions. Again, I just riff that but the idea is that if you operate at that level, you are not defined by your category and what you do.You're defined by your conviction and why you do it, and that is just Superman powerful. And then you bring in people who see the road the way you do.[00:13:12] Dan Runcie: I think we just gave an entire industry. A market class and a playbook that they can use moving forward.[00:13:19] Marcus Collins: That's right. We should of held onto that one.[00:13:21] Dan Runcie: But you're right, because it also makes me think of insurance, and I know you worked with translation and one of their big accounts has been State Farm, and if you look at the product itself, the features of that product don't necessarily align on the surface of what you would think could be something that is something you would advertise in that way, but we look at the benefits. That's how you can think more broadly. We can get to Chris Paul versus Cliff Paul, and so many of the other memorable campaigns we've seen from State Farm.[00:13:50] Marcus Collins: What's actually quite interesting about that and you're spot on, is that I don't think there's very many industries as commoditized as the insurance industry. They all use the same actuaries. All of them use the exact same actuaries, just some of them are more conservative than others, and they're willing to charge you a premium for their product.And I suppose the way they, you know, get it, the job done at the end of the day is better than others. But according to the research, from when I was working in insurance, people only report their collisions, their calamities 25 to 35% of the time. So 65% of the time, at best, people aren't even reporting the accidents.So the brand, the company never comes in to actually make good on their promise, right? We're just really hanging on there based on what this brand is all about. And State Farm exists because they believe that people should live life more confidently every day to help people live life more confidently every day.This will happen to have 18,000 agents across the country to help people make better decisions. This will happen to have to cover your stuff and help provide financial services, but why they do it? To help people live life more confidently every day. And now you say, okay, so how might we do that?Well, What does that mean for basketball? The NBA, one of their sponsorships? Where is actual statistic for helping people in the n NBA called the assist? Let's go after that. Now you have a creative platform to be a part of this institution that we call the NBA, but also another way of demonstrating why you exist, not what you do.[00:15:26] Dan Runcie: Makes sense. Makes sense. Yeah. I mean, I think that's applicable for a number of industries here, and we're getting into insights and just how you perceive people. And one of the things that we're talking about is who are the best market researchers. You have this piece in the book, and you've talked about this before, about why comedians are actually some of the best market researchers out there.Could you talk a little bit more about that?[00:15:49] Marcus Collins: Yeah. Comedians are phenomenal because they just observe people. They observe us humans as the social actors that we are, as we navigate the phenomenal world that we live in, and they look at people and go, that's odd. You see what she did? Oh, and he did it too. And they did it. And they did it. Okay. This is a thing, and as they observe people act, they apply theory to describe what they saw, right?They use theory to describe the socially phenomenal world that we live in, and then they say, okay, this is why it's happening. This is the underlying physics of why these people act the way they do, and then they tell it with a slant. They find an interesting way to communicate it such a way that when they get on stage and go, every time we go to the mall, you notice that you do this, we all go, oh my goodness, that's so me.I totally do that. Of course you do, because they have used what we know is to be the best description of human behavior. Theory and applied it to something empirical that happens. The phenomenon that we take on, the chances of us understanding people are far higher when those two things are together and the chances of us saying something that's meaningful to them is far greater when we tell it with a slant.And that's what good marketers do, mark, especially advertisers do. But market research, no one does it better than comedians. Full stop.[00:17:12] Dan Runcie: And this gets at something else. I know you've talked about comedians are able to get at that intimacy level. They're actually interacting with people. They're seeing things, and they're not mistaking that for information. And I think that's one of the challenges. I know you've talked about how we have so much data.There's so many companies that can easily just turn on Facebook ads, turn on Google ads, so you could see the profiles, but that doesn't necessarily give you that deep engagement to be able to understand beyond, and I feel like that's becoming a bit more and more of a challenge.[00:17:44] Marcus Collins: Exactly, that's the paradox. More information, very little intimacy and comedians are, have always been intimate and marketers used to be intimate, but as we get more. Information, more data. We go, oh, I don't need to go spend time with people. I don't need to go talk to people because I have their search history.I have their click history, I have their downloads. I have what they watch and what they listen to that describes who they are. It describes what they do. To get to who they are, we have to get closer. We need greater proximity to understand the underlying physics that govern, why they listen to trap music and why they watch, Succession, and why they consume what they consume, why they're going back into the nineties for fashion inspiration.Why is that happening? We can observe it and say, oh, cool, that's a thing. That's a trend spotting, but you don't know what's going on until you get close to people. And this is what we have to do as marketers. And I would even argue that maybe this is what we need to be doing as a society. Just get a little closer to people and it's easy to look at someone and go, oh, they're crazy.Because they operate by a different meaning system than we do, than different cultural characteristics than we do. But if we understand that the way we see the world is subjective, not objective, we go, oh, well my truth isn't, their truth doesn't mean that they're wrong. It just means it's just a little different.And the closer I get to understanding how these people make, meaning, how they navigate the world. The more connected I probably feel to them, but as a marketer, the more likely I am to interact with them, to engage them, to get them to adopt behavior, which is the core function of our gig.[00:19:18] Dan Runcie: This reminds me of Tyler Perry and what he's done with Tyler Perry Studios too. Of course, we all know the backstory. He was doing his plays. His plays were able to gain great traction. He ended up moving that into movies and his TV shows and everything he's done since. But even through all that success, he still was doing the plays.That was his opportunity to be in front of the actual audiences, see how they reacted. He would make jokes different in the north versus the south versus the Midwest, and that's his way of, although he may not be a traditional comedian, he's still wearing all the hats and he's still providing humor through his content.So I think that's one of the things that doesn't get talked about as much, about why he's been able to build this billion dollar empire.[00:20:05] Marcus Collins: That's right and the best set up comedians, they still go to the Laugh factory. They still go to the hole in the wall to try new bits to sign, try new material. Oh, they laughed at that one, not this one. Okay. That one got in. Okay, cool. They build their set by workshopping it iteratively, right?But marketers, that we hold onto it. We concoct it in the walls of our offices and then we release it to the world, prayerfully, hopefully in Shallah that it's gonna connect with someone. And it's like, well, yeah, there's some randomness that we can't control. Sure, we can't predict everything, but we can certainly increase the likelihood of connecting by just getting closer.And the challenge is that there are perverse incentives that make getting closer a challenge. In that it takes time. It takes effort to build relationships, to talk to people, to see the world through their lenses. Where I've had, I got one quarter to turn my business around, man, whatever's the most efficient.And that's what we rely on. And we wonder why we don't have strong relationships with our consumers because we look at consumers as machines, eat messages and crap cash, as opposed to real life human beings who navigate the world through their cultural lenses.[00:21:18] Dan Runcie: Do you think this got worse since the pandemic?[00:21:21] Marcus Collins: I would say in some ways, yes, in some ways, no. I think that there was a level of elasticity that when the pandemic hit, people were emailing everyone in their database saying, We care about. You we're thinking about you and then someone made that film where it took all the ads from all the marketers and they were saying all the same things.And you go, this is nonsense. And marketers went, oh, they're right. So let's like be a little bit more human. And people got human like, like the murder of George Floyd. People were like, oh, there's a world that exists beyond my own. there are lenses that are translating the world that aren't my own.Let me go see the world through other people's eyes. And for a moment, therefore, a brief moment we were getting in like some humanity in the world. But then once we got back to some normality, some normalcy, we snapped back into place. All right, cool. Let's use the data. Tells us, let's use it, this news to that.I thought that the pandemic was an interesting time because people just became a bit more empathetic, right? We saw companies treat their employees a little bit differently. They're like, hey, gives people some grace. People need time. People need space. like people's needs. And then once we went back to quote unquote normal, assuming we're back to some kinda normality, get back to work, get back in the office, gonna razor sharper.My battery lasts longer, my car goes faster. You aren't human, kind of a sad situation. and you would think that kind of inogen shock to the system will wake us up a little bit more. But unfortunately I think that there's some return to status quo a bit.[00:22:53] Dan Runcie: Part of the challenge seemed like there was so much growth that so many software and tech companies had during the pandemic, given the nature of the services they offered, and because the pandemic and lockdowns limited, then from the in-person interactions, it could be very easy to think, okay, well we don't need to spend the money on those focus groups.We don't need to spend the money on having our leadership team be out in the field to interact with people. Look at what we're able to do in the current ecosystem and we saw that there was just so much growth, especially from March, 2020 up until November, 2021. Things were booming, but then. World started to open back up and I feel like we're starting to see it more.We're seeing more flexibility with what certain companies are doing in terms of their policies, whether they are letting people work from home. But I'm also seeing people wanting more in-person events, more engagement. There is an appetite for this, which I think should hopefully translate to an appetite to getting in-person time and more inpe intimacy with the people you're actually trying to serve.[00:23:57] Marcus Collins: Well, what I think is awesome. Is that the technologies help facilitate ways to get closer, even if you can't in person, right? So, you know, we typically use ethnographic research for, when we're trying to study culture, right? Go into people's cultural contexts, observe them, interact with them, don't be, you know, sort of a tourist, be a part of the community.But then there's netnographic research, which is the same thing in ethnography, just in online spaces. In fact, all of my academic work. All my academic research is typically done on Reddit like I'm observing these communities in their cultural contexts, practice their cultural subscription, and the beautiful part about Reddit, truly.Now, I'm about to just nerd out for a moment here cause we could do that. Dan, is that Reddit has moderators that actually clinging the data for you. The moderators, they remove content that's not within the cultural conventions of the community, and then they'll get rid of people who post things that are outside of the norms of the community.They are cleaning the data for us to observe this community operate and abide by its cultural characteristics for a researcher goodnight. It doesn't get any better than that. And we get to observe these people make meaning through their discourse in an unobtrusive way. And not only that, we get over the hurdle that people have about qualitative research, that the sample size is so small that we can see this in massive, massive, massive, occasions in my dissertation work, I had over 12 million lines of text. I'm watching people engage. And like I'm going through it and looking at how they make meaning, the language they use, the memes that they use, all these different texts that they use in an effort to communicate, to help make meaning, negotiate, construct meaning.That's superman powerful. And if nothing else, this creates great opportunity for us, right? You could do interviews via Zoom. We did some ethnographic work, with folks in China when mainland China wasn't letting anyone in or out, so we couldn't even go be in the field. So we used Zoom. That was helpful, right?The technology is meant to extend our human behaviors, right? It means to extend where we have human limitations. And if we don't take advantage of that, what are we doing really?[00:26:15] Dan Runcie: I love that you mentioned Reddit there because it is a great lens into all of these subreddit. Each of them is a community that provides a reflection on what that broader community may be thinking, what they if, how they evaluate things and how they interact with each other. How do you, from an audience segmentation perspective, how do you look at the conversations that may happen within those communities and.Get an idea of how that may extend to a broader community, knowing that Reddit itself does attract, maybe a more analytical or a deeper type of thought that may be slightly different in terms of the broader subreddit community represents.[00:26:53] Marcus Collins: Sure. So, yeah, it makes a lot of sense. So when we're going out in the field to Stu to study, see, I wanna study cost players. I'm gonna go to Comic-Con where the hardcore cost players are, because these are the people that are abiding by the cultural characteristics of what it means to be a cost player, right?I'm gonna implant myself where they are and engage with them because oftentimes these are people that are like a part that are leading the construction of an a negotiation of meaning among the community. So Reddit, to your point, these are people who are hardcore into it. And maybe there's some bias in the fact that they're more inclined to be there than others, but they're representative of the community.And what we do in all research truly, is that we look at a sample of the market and then we try to generalize the learnings, right? So we, we look at, social phenomenon and try to find generalizability of it. So my research, particularly my dissertation, I looked at how brands of branded products spread within a cultural context.And I chose hip hop because hip hop's tentacles are. I mean, I'm talking to the guy who wrote the book on this, and you know this very well, how widespread hip hop's impact is in like, almost every industry. You could think of jewelry, high fashion, high tech, auto, sneakers, beauty, pharmaceuticals, everything, hip hiphop touches almost every single thing.So I studied, how brands and branded products spread in hiphop culture. Specifically, this community looked at the mechanisms by which they make meaning and they evaluate and legitimate products as they spread, throughout, throughout the community. And then generalized that broadly on how communities make meaning.Now, there'll be nuances that'll be different for rock climbers versus pickle ballers versus runners. But at its core, these are the processes by which things spread. So we try to get at some generalizability, especially when we have a wide swath of data to analyze.[00:28:56] Dan Runcie: Makes sense, and I know we've talked about that dissertation before. it's powerful. I mean, and that's so much of what attracted me to this work as well. We see how hip hop is so pervasive in every corner that it touches. And that's only going to continue even if they may not call it hip hop in the future.We still know where the origins come from, I say that because of just some trends I'm seeing in terms of how certain songs have been categorized and they've been talking about hip hop's decline. But we know what's there when we hear general music themes. This is the origination place. This is where it is, and this culture is now about to celebrate its 50th year in a few months, so it's just great.[00:29:34] Marcus Collins: I mean, which is why Trapital is so important, man. Like it's, you need, cultural producers to preach the gospel and to quantify its impact on commerce in the economy, which is you're doing the good work.[00:29:46] Dan Runcie: Thank you. Appreciate that. So before we close things out, let's talk a bit more about for the culture itself. You've been doing so much work in this space, you already had a great platform. What was the value add for you with this book, putting it out there, what does it do for you moving forward and how is that process?[00:30:04] Marcus Collins: The hope for me personally, is to scale my impact like I believe that reasonable, my ideology, my belief, my conviction is that we're put in this world to serve God, and serve each other. That's what I believe, and the way I serve is by helping people realize the best version themselves operate the highest fidelity.So the book is a way to scale my impact. As opposed to if you can't be in a Michigan classroom and you can't be a client at Widen Kennedy, or you can't be on my team at Widen Kennedy, here's a way to get some of, some of the thought leadership, right? But the other part, it's to helpfully raise, the industry that if we are using different language, A better Rosetta Stone talk about culture that will be better practitioners of culture and bear some responsibility to what we do. So we're not conquesting people's culture to sell more widgets, but we're actually contributing to it, realizing, that when we're using other people's cultural markers, we run the risk of what we know is appropriation.If we do that without understanding the meaning that it's associated to those things. And once we understand that, we go, oh, okay. We're not just gonna pimp their thing out, we're gonna contribute to the community that actually has made this thing a thing. And the hope is that, the residuals from that, the reverberation from that, will make a little dent in the world and would've I would've done my part.if that happens.[00:31:30] Dan Runcie: Makes sense. Love it. Well, for people that are listening along and wanna get a copy of further culture themselves, where can they get it and where can they follow you?[00:31:38] Marcus Collins: the book for the cultures available where all books are sold, particularly Amazon. you could find me at @marctothec, m a r c t o t h e c at all the social places, and marctothec.com/.[00:31:50] Dan Runcie: Love it. Dr. Marcus Collins. Thank you.[00:31:53] Dan Runcie Episode Outro: Thanks for watching Trapital on YouTube. If you want more where that came from, please subscribe to our YouTube channel so you can get all the latest updates. Or if you wanna hear the latest episodes, go ahead. Subscribe to the Trapital podcast. That's Trapital wherever you get podcasts. And if you wanna stay up to date with the latest insights, go ahead and subscribe to the Trapital newsletter.That's Tapital.co And sign up there. Thanks so much.[00:32:19] Dan Runcie Outro: If you enjoyed this podcast, go ahead and share it with a friend. Copy the link, text it to a friend. Post it in your group chat. Post it in your Slack groups. Wherever you and your people talk, spread the word. That's how travel continues to grow and continues to reach the right people. While you're at it, if you use Apple Podcast, Go ahead.Rate the podcast, give it a high rating, and leave a review. Tell people why you like the podcast. That helps more people discover the show. Thank you in advance. Talk to you next week.

This week, I’m running back an interview with another one of the most popular episodes we ever did with KevOnStage from early 2022. KevOnStage (Kevin Fredericks) is a comedian, producer, director, and entrepreneur behind KevOnStage studios.  Today's episode talks about how he built an independent brand that really paid off his hard work. He established a solid fan base, had millions of followers on social media, and monetized these platforms by producing his hilarious viral content, a total blast in the mainstream.Listen as we talk about what's going on in his business and his independent success, turning rejection into a massive opportunity to be where he is now.Episode Highlights[01:56] What KevOnStage is currently working on[04:49] His take on more black content going in the mainstream[06:53] KevOnStage’s motto, his marketing strategy, and business goals[11:57] What it’s like to have autonomy in his brand[19:08] His thoughts on artists knowing their audience and dealing with critics[21:30] What's the process from the stuff put out on socials versus onstage[25:24] How does he approach his game using different social platforms[32:38] What’s something beyond just the monetary gain that makes him want to continue to feel inspired to create content[35:13] His opinion on creators who are a one-platform-dominant[38:21] Where does his most lucrative income come from [41:57] How he diversify his content to own the media and make his brand stand out[45:51] What would he like to be doing more of[51:28] KevOnStage’s new content to watch out forListen: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | SoundCloud | Stitcher | Overcast | Amazon | Google Podcasts | Pocket Casts | RSSHost: Dan Runcie, @RuncieDan, trapital.coGuest: KevOnStage StudiosThis episode is sponsored by DICE. Learn more about why artists, venues, and promoters love to partner with DICE for their ticketing needs. Visit dice.fmTrapital is home for the business of hip-hop. Gain the latest insights from hip-hop’s biggest players by reading Trapital’s free weekly memo. TRANSCRIPTKev: So, sometimes partnering is great, sometimes licensing is great, sometimes selling is great sometimes. A good business person takes the best deal for what they need to get done.(intro)Dan: Hey, welcome to the Trapital Podcast. I’m your host and the founder of Trapital, Dan Runcie. This podcast is your place to gain insights from the executives in music, media, entertainment, and more who are taking hip hop culture to the next level. Today’s guest is KevOnStage, the comedian, producer, director, and entrepreneur behind KevOnStage Studios. I’ve been following KevOnStage for years now. I think he’s one of the funniest people on the internet so it was so good to have this conversation. We talked about how he’s built his business and everything that he has done from how he creates content, how he thinks about what platforms he prioritizes, how that then provides insights for what he creates for his longer form content, what gets created from KevOnStage Studios, and, ultimately, the type of opportunities that he can offer for other creators and other entertainers that want to do, in many ways, largely the type of thing that he’s done. And we talked about where his streaming service sits in this ecosystem of the Netflixes and the Hulus and, in a lot of ways, even though those streaming services may have their black voices tabs, that’s not quite the type of content that is what Kev is making so he’s really finding his niche, doubling down there, and how he uses the insights from that to infer what gets made, that is how many creators have been very successful so so much of that is very relatable. This is also probably one of the interviews I’ve laughed in the most. He’s hilarious, like I said. This is a great conversation. I really hope you enjoy it. Here’s my chat with KevOnStage.(interview)Dan: All right, we got my guy KevOnStage here. Kev, you are one of the busiest people that I’d seen from 2021. Now we’re next year, man. How you feeling? Fresh year, how is it?Kev: I’m excited, man. We’ve got a lot of new things we’re working on. I’m really excited, man. It’s always fun to be at the beginning of a project, not knowing where it’s going or how far it may go and that’s kind of where I am now. All the things I’m like, “Oh, soon as I get back, soon as I get back, I’m gonna start working on that.” That time is here now so I’m really excited.Dan: That what’s up. Because I feel like for you, you got a few things that are already in motion that have been working well. Your content’s good. You got that machine going. But the Studio, I feel like that’s the really exciting thing that’s been growing.Kev: Listen, man, I’m working on my own flywheel, okay? Westbrook, they got their flywheel, fast IP, that was the best graphic I’ve ever seen that you made. Dan: Oh, thank you. Kev: I was like, “This is what I wanna do. I wanna do everything from Instagram videos to selling shows.” So, you know, and they all have their own value so that’s what’s exciting. I have the same amount of joy from making a funny reel like I posted of Angel falling in the challenge show, it was just — I spent 20 minutes on that, really just getting the fall right. And then I came here, you know, I went on location scout right before I came here to this new show we’re working on and then this podcast, like they’re all exciting for different reasons so I’m trying to enjoy it all. Dan: Yeah. I think the cool thing with that, you get to wear multiple hats and I know, with this, there’s a number of things that interest you about this, right? Like you enjoy comedy, you have that piece, but I also know that you like to put people on. You wanna use your platform to do that. So I feel like you being able to wear each of those hats and do those things gives you that opportunity to provide all of that.Kev: Absolutely, man. I think there’s the old saying of the church, “We’re blessed to be a blessing,” and that’s kind of what I wanna do. People have given me opportunities, partnerships with, you know, people have helped lift me, and I just wanna pass along the same thing. For me, my platform isn’t about me shining alone, you know what I mean? I tell my friends all the time, I want us all in the gated community. One things I used to do at all deaths that I found a lot of joy in was give people their first great reel or first time directing or whatever and I found that I had as much joy doing that as making somebody laugh. And KevOnStage Studios is really just a more expensive version of that. So, we wanna give people their first time PA-ing or help you get into the wardrobe union or makeup union. It’s hard for black people to get into those places but we need black people in those spaces so that’s kind of what we’re working towards doing. And then even simple things like our editor, one of our editors likes improv so it’s like, “Hey, you wanna be in an episode?” Things like that are great too because I want people to be able to scratch their own creative itch and that’s kind of what my passion is. Dan: What I like about KevOnStage Studios is that, sure, I think there’s a lot of attention right now with, “Oh, there’s so much black content out there on your Netflix,” your this and this, but what you’re doing is like you’re saying, that’s true to an extent but it really isn’t true for a lot of the people that I think could have the opportunities to be put on in this era.Kev: Yeah. I was just watching Abbott Elementary this morning where I was shaving and I was just like, man, this show is amazing, and to see somebody like Quinta Brunson who — my first time seeing her was on Instagram. Her “Girl who’s never been on a nice date, a large, he must got — he got money. He could —” like from that to a network sitcom. And even shows like South Side, which I don’t know their story as much, but the show is amazing, that’s great. But then there’s a lot of creators who have those similar ideas and absolutely no path to HBO, Comedy Central, ABC, Netflix. Even me, like I’ve pitched to a lot of people and I had a lot of, “Uh-huh, we’ll circle back.” And, you know, that was 2018, ’19, you know, pandemic killed off anything I had going in Hollywood so I want to be that same network for people who can’t get all the way to Hollywood, you know, like here’s your chance to get to, you know, Hollywood adjacent — North Hollywood, if you will. You’re right over the hill, you just — you know, it’s cheaper in North Hollywood. You know, there’s more taco trucks, you know? And your number 15 minutes of real Hollywood, you know, that’s what KevOnStage Studios, it’s the North Hollywood of Hollywood. We’re right there. We’re right there. But it’s a one-bedroom washer and dryer stacked, you know?Dan: Exactly. Kev: That’s a leg up from having to go to a laundry mat. Dan: Yes, that’s true. It’s true.Kev: Stackable’s good, man. I’ll take a stackable.Dan: Right, right. It’s one of those things, right? It’s like location and all that, you can’t pick everything with these things. You can pick two, and, Kev, you’re gonna give them two.Kev: Laundry is a huge plus. Location and a stackable, I’m like, “Bet, let’s do it.” Dan: Well, I think the good thing with it is that — because I know in past interviews, you’ve talked about, hey, with this model, this is something you wanna provide the opportunity. But from a business perspective, I know that it’s not something that you necessarily need like a ton of subscribers to reach some point or you’re not trying to reach like Netflix scale necessarily, it’s something that can sit beside that. But with that, I’m sure you also have goals from the business side as well as the impact side with the service. So, what does that look like from a streaming service perspective?Kev: Yeah, that’s a great, great question. It’s like — I heard this example somewhere. They’re like, you know, somebody’s saying you’re not gonna beat Walmart at selling everything at a low price, right? They’re gonna beat you if you’re starting out. What you can beat them at is selling a lot of one thing, right? Because they sell so many things for a low price, they can’t sell a lot of any one thing so they’re gonna have, you know, maybe one or two black shaving kits, maybe Bevel and maybe one other thing. If you have a black beauty supply store, people are gonna be like, “Well, Walmart doesn’t have what I’m looking, here I can go get some weave, you know, a do rag, I can get Bevel, I can get seven other, I get essential oils, I can get Dixons,” you know?So that’s our motto, like we’re not — Netflix has an $8 billion content budget. They made Squid Game to Red Notice with the Rock — we can’t compete with that, right? But they don’t have black people learning how to play spades. They don’t have that video. They don’t have, you know, the Real Comedians Challenge Show, they don’t have things like that, right? So we wanna over serve a population that is being served by Hollywood but it’s not the primary focus, you know what I mean? Right now, we’re in an area of, we’re sorry, black people Hollywood, like, man, we really discriminate against you guys for a long time and you guys caught us out on it. So we’re reaping the benefits of all that, you know, time where we weren’t, you know, getting our just due. But even then, there’s still so many other shows that can’t be made to this audience and that’s kind of what we wanna fill. We wanna make stuff for black people who don’t see themselves on Netflix, you know? This church show that we’re working on, you know, is for black people who grew up in the church from a point of view of somebody who also grew up in the church and worked in the church, like if you grew up in the church like me, you know, there’s never really been a true church show from people who grew up in there. There’s people who attended but not people who like worked in ministry, and Netflix might not see the value in making a show like that and that’s where we come in, and we wanna serve that audience. All that content where they can’t get it on Netflix. And also I’m not even saying you don’t have to have Netflix, like I ain’t gonna lie to you, Dan, I watch my Netflix, I watch Hulu, HBO Max, like as a consumer, there’s stuff that I wanna watch too, like Game of Thrones one through four. Dan: Yeah, one through four. One through four.Kev: One through four. Insecure, like all those shows. Of course we’re not even here to say “Don’t watch Netflix” and “Boycott Netflix” like I won’t even ask you to do that because I’m not gonna do that. But, you know, sometimes you want a nice steak dinner at a five-star restaurant, sometimes you just want a taco truck, you know, and you can’t get that experience. When you really want a street taco or the corn man selling elotes, you know, a big steak dinner is not gonna do it. So that’s all we wanna be, man. We just a little taco truck on the street, man, just pull up real quick, get you three little tacos, you know what I’m saying? Some Jarritos and a little elote and go on about your way. You’re not gonna bring your wife here to propose to her. But if you’re in between work, you know, this Kevin taco, that’s KevOnStage Studio, just a little street taco place on the side.Dan: Right. And then with Netflix too, that’s the place that has all the good ratings of the people that know what’s up.Kev: And that’s the thing. You know, somebody gotta tell you about this place. “Hey, man, you gotta go over there. Trust me.” And when you — and that’s kind of how we’re growing, right? We don’t have the marketing budget like Netflix, right? When Netflix came out, yet get three months free, a year free. They had billboards and buses in Times Square. We don’t have that.Our thing is like, “Yo, there’s this funny show on this network called KevOnStage Studios, you gotta check it out.” Or you see a funny clip on TikTok and you wanna see the rest of the video, that’s our marketing right now. Word of mouth, your boy telling you, your girl telling you, or you seeing a clip and you wanna see more.Dan: Right. I think I heard you made the analogy once of the Sally’s Beauty Supply as opposed to, you know, what you may see at the traditional place like a Walmart, right? And I think even with that, it’s like, you know, from a haircare perspective, you know what, yeah, Walmart may have that can of Sportin’ Waves but I may want something a little more serious if you wanna make sure the wave’s spinning, right? You gotta get something a little —Kev: Absolutely. They might just have Sportin’ Waves but they’re not gonna have Murray’s, they’re not gonna have Sulfur8, Just For Me, they might just have one thing. And that’s kind of, yeah, that’s exactly what we wanna do here, man, and we’re having a good time doing it.Dan: That’s great, man. That’s great. I think that, in a lot of ways, like we were saying before, that’s how you identify the elements of your flywheel and where everything sits and how you’re able to foster not just your platform but the other opportunities and what I think it does at the end of the day, it narrows in, okay, what is the KevOnStage brand? What does it stand for? And what type of opportunities you can create from that? Because I feel like with you specifically, you’ve now kind of hit this mode where I know you mentioned that, you know, you were knocking on the door of many folks in Hollywood or anywhere else and they weren’t necessarily letting you in, but now I feel like you’re kind of at this stage where you are doing well for yourself given everything you’ve built up independently.You’re now able to leverage things. As you mentioned yourself, you got that Maserati, like you’re — like you’re showing from that perspective, right? But you got those things. I’m curious, though, because I know that — and as you know, definitely you have broken down a lot of the levels of what creators are and the creator economy and all those things, at this stage, you really do have the autonomy if you wanted to, okay, at this stage, would I wanna ever do some type of partnership or deal with one of these bigger distributors that are always trying to offer comedians or creators like yourselves the serious bag, but I’m curious from your stage right now, like is that something that would still entertain you? Like is that something that you would ever do?Kev: I thought about it and it depends and I’ll tell you why. One of the best parts about being at KevOnStage Studios and not having to answer to a network is not having to answer to a network. If I wanna make a show, if I wanna cast whoever, no name or whatever, I don’t have to have anybody else say yes, you know, or no, right?One thing is, you know, I learned when I shot my first pilot that a network paid for, when they pay for it, what they say goes, right? So in this instance, they were like, “Take this joke out and this joke out and this joke out,” during the notes process and then when we shot it, they’re like, “This isn’t funny. This is not landing. We don’t think black people are gonna get this” so we took all that stuff out, even though we were fighting for it, at the end of the day, they won because we were small and we didn’t have as much power in the room, and at the end of the day, they passed on it because they said it wasn’t funny enough. We were like, “Well, you took everything funny out. How could it be funny?” So, you know, when you’re first starting out, the network has all the power because I’m not Denzel or Shonda Rhimes. If I got an opportunity, they’re gonna tell me what it is, and fight as I may, it’s gonna be what they say. But here, we can make what we want to make and I think that autonomy is very freeing and it allows me to make what I know is good and funny. Like one of the things that I pride myself on is knowing my audience and what they will like and all that stuff. And, you know, even when I do like brand deals, you know, especially early on, I would have less power and I would have to basically say whatever the brand said and it would come out corny, and I’d be like my audience would hate it and they could smell the fakeness from a mile away. As I’ve grown. I’ve been like, “Hey, I’m gonna tell you right now that’s not gonna work. Trust me, let me do it this way and it always goes over better.” So, in that instance, I love the autonomy. However, if we were able to partner with someone, it allows us to make things at a greater scale and provide more opportunities for other people and do things a lot easier. You know, everything we do now, we gotta figure it out, you know, when your mom came home, the kitchen bare, the cupboard’s bare, she’s like, okay, we got two chicken thighs, some corn, you know, some breadcrumbs, make something work. That’s where we’re at, you know what I’m saying? At the end of the day, you’re like, “Hey, low key, that was kind of fire for what we had,” but you’d also love to just go to the grocery store and get everything you want. So, right now, I’m loving the freedom, but as we grow, I wouldn’t say no to an opportunity to do more and maybe employ more people for certain projects. I don’t think there’s ever a world where everything I do, I answer to somebody. I always want to be able to create something that I want to create without having to answer to anybody. But, you know, if Warner Brothers said, “Kev, we’re gonna offer 140 million to develop some stuff,” well, yes. Yes, I would — I’ll take a little 140 mil, yeah.Dan: Right, right. And that’s the thing, right? It’s like you have the clear strategy and from an overall perspective, it sounds like, hey, I know that overall deals are the wave, that’s not necessarily what I’m looking for. However, if that number is right, I’m not gonna not have the conversation. We’re going to talk about itKev: Absolutely — like look what Tyler Perry did, right? And I’ve watched his career and tried to mimic it to the best of my ability, which I haven’t done that well yet. But, you know, still working. But, you know, he leveraged the early Lionsgate deals into his own pocket, like, you know, he partnered with them and they were able to finance those movies and he did X, Y, Z, boom, boom. And then the capital that he got from that, he was able to finance his own shows. So sometimes, partnering is great sometimes, licensing is great sometimes, selling is great sometimes. A good business person takes the best deal for what they need to get done, right? So I wouldn’t say that, you know, part of our business model is if I can make a show, you know, at our margins and I can license it to you in the first window, I can make a great margin there and now I’ve done two things, I’ve made the show and I made the show I want and I might, you know, right now, there’s a lot of, you know, places that have more distribution than we do so if you wanna take it off our hands, we made our money back and you wanna, you know, stream it, then you’ve just introduced a lot more people to KevOnStage Studios and they can come back to the app and watch the other stuff we’ve made. So that’s definitely part of our plan and that would help us make more shows. So even if we sold that one and they own the rights to it, I wouldn’t cry because we can make eight more shows with what we sold that one for. So it’s about making the right business, you know, choice at the right time and not being like, “I wanna own it all,” like, I mean, obviously, I wanna own it all but that also comes with its own risks, which means you have to finance it all. And if it sucks, you’ve lost everything, you know? Everything you spent. So that’s a risk that you don’t want to have to take every time, you know? Sometimes, you wanna take it when it’s near and dear to your heart, but not — every time? You wanna reach into your own pocket every time? You know? Not every time. So, yeah, we’re always keeping our options open to the right partnership whenever that may come.Dan: Yeah, I think that’s the healthy and best way to look at it, because as both of us, people that spent a lot of time on Twitter, we know how big — everyone wants to own everything, right? But until you’re actually in it, you don’t realize how much nuance there is with all of that and I really look at these things as a spectrum, as you do, and I think the best people have a mix of both of these things. And like you said, I know that, you know, you mentioned Tyler Perry as a model, the same way that you know how to create this content and do it at a way it’s affordable, that’s essentially what he did with like Meet the Browns, right? Boom, let me go sell this to TBS and now we got cable distribution for however many years, you know, he’s been doing that.Kev: Absolutely, and hardly anybody in Hollywood could shoot at the rate he shoots at. So his margins are much lower than a traditional network or even cable. So I mean, you know, Tyler, you see articles, they shot 20 episodes in six days —Dan: Wild.Kev: — nobody would even attempt that, you know? And BET was like, yeah, we’ll take more. We’ll take whatever you got. So, for him, he knows his audience, he knows his business model, he knows it works. Critics don’t stop what he’s doing. And the numbers reflect that he’s doing the right thing. People criticize, come what may, but when them numbers come out, people are watching. So that’s one thing I’ve been thinking a lot about is like, especially if you’re on Twitter a lot, everything sucks, everybody hates everything, there’s nothing good, everybody’s wrong. But at the end of the day, somebody is watching that. So, you know, we’d be on Twitter trashing everything but somebody likes that show and they’re watching it weekly. So, Tyler’s learned to focus on those people who are enjoying it and tuning out people who don’t enjoy because they’re not — they don’t help his plan and that’s kind of what we’re doing here. Like we’re not trying to make everything for everybody. We’re trying to make a lot of stuff for the people who want to watch it. And then you grow, the same thing Tyler did, you have your base, you cater to that base, and you grow that base.Dan: Yep. Kev: And if you do that, I mean, that’s tried and true. Like we were talking about earlier, you don’t need a lot of followers, you don’t need a whole bunch of people. You need people who are really excited and who want to come to your live show and buy a t-shirt, to support your Patreon, and get your app, you know? There’s so many creators with millions of followers but not a lot of active fans so when they try to go on tour or sell a t-shirt, people are like, “No, man, we don’t — we’re not — you know, post the thing on Instagram I like.” Dan: Right.Kev: But I wanna do this. No, no, no. So I learned a long time ago, it’s better to have 500 really active fans than 5 million people who kinda like your stuff.Dan: Definitely. And I feel like, with you, you’ve been able to see that in real life, like you are going on tour, you’re seeing these people in person, you’re getting all those reactions too. And you mentioned earlier about just insights and you being able to see what works and what doesn’t and I wonder, how much of that is based on just the feeling of, “Okay, this piece or this post really took off and then I’m gonna try to incorporate that into something,” or how much of it is also, you know, data driven as well where you’re looking at things, you know, precisely and you’re like, “Okay, like if I’m spending this much time here,” what’s that process like, you know, from the stuff you put out on socials versus what you may do on stage?Kev: That’s a great question. For socials, the one thing I’ve learned about the internet is I don’t know anything about the internet. What goes viral? What works? Man? My best TikTok is me holding my son’s dog and talking about how black people —Dan: Oh, does your dog know if you’re black? Kev: Does your dog know you’re black? If you’re Mexican, does your dog know you’re Mexican? If you’re white, does your dog know you’re white? That didn’t take a lot of thought. I literally was at home and he was about to get into something, I was like, and then I was like, I wonder if he knows that means stop in black, you know what I mean?And then I wondered if a Mexican family has their own version of that. I just threw that up and it had — it’s got like 2.6 million views on TikTok. That is not the funniest video, it’s not the most relatable, it didn’t even do that well on Instagram or Twitter or whatever. I just throw it up against the wall. I let the internet decide what’s funny or not and I know some things tend to do well more than others. Any culture messing with black food in a way that’s not traditional, you mess with macaroni and cheese, it’s gonna get a lot of views, right? But, you know, I was making a lot of those food videos and then people were just — like I was getting every food video so I was like, okay, as a creator, even if it does get a lot of views, I don’t wanna be the food guy and I don’t wanna keep making the same video. So, part of my strategy is I make something that is funny, make something that’s relatable, or make something that I just think is funny. Or if I got nothing of that, then I’ll share another creator who’s funny. There’s been some days where I’m like, “Man, I don’t feel funny today,” and I’ll see somebody else’s video, I’ll be like, well, let me just share their stuff because there’s nothing I can do that’s as funny as this. So, you know, and I share and tag them and then I’m like, even if I didn’t make something funny, I fulfilled my promise to introduce you to new creators. So that’s kind of my strategy. And I just also am very consistent. Even if I don’t think the video’s great, I still post it because what’s great to me and what’s great to somebody else is very different. I’ve had a lot of videos that I think they’re hilarious that did absolutely nothing. And a lot of them, like my dog video that I didn’t think nothing of and just threw up, that went viral. Like I made this waffle house video probably four or five years ago, I mean, I was on my way to work, I was like, you know, I saw this article, it said Waffle House is dirty. And I’m just like nobody who eats at Waffle House cares about that. Dan: Right.Kev: We know. That video went stupid viral. I mean crazy. And I didn’t even — it took less than 5 minutes total. Shoot, edit, post. And I did it — I wouldn’t advise this but I shot the whole thing on the freeway. I was driving to work, I always had my phone in my rearview mirror thing, hit record, said what I had to say, turned it off. When I got out of my car, I edited it, put the article next while I was walking to work. That thing went crazy. Didn’t think nothing of it. Just threw it up and so many people, that’s how they got introduced to me. So, you know, what do I know? I’ve been doing this 10 years now pretty consistently. So many things went viral that I would have never done. And, you know, that’s the nature of the internet.Dan: Right, it’s like you know that there’s generally a type of content you put out that’s going to work, you put it out there and you just know that something’s gonna hit. It may not always be what you think is gonna hit, but you put it out there, for sure.Kev: Absolutely, man. Let the people decide what’s fun. I mean, I did one video where I was yelling at my son, I use the term loosely, ’cause he had gotten good grades. It did like 7 million views on Twitter, 6, 7 million views, and I was just like, kids, puppies, they’re gonna work every time. So, you know, I try to exploit my dog while he’s still small. I don’t exploit my children as much. But the dog, he don’t even know how many videos. He does well. He’s earning his keep in the Fredericks household. Dan: One of the things I also, you know, like about how you approach your game is that you look at each social platform differently and you also know how to move to things, right? Like you know that Twitter is quick. You’re gonna — that’s gonna be the one that’s most current about things. But I know you’ve also put a lot more time into TikTok and just given, I think we saw the recent stats that TikTok, people spending more time on that now than Google, you know, you gotta be early on a lot of these platforms to rise. But there’s also things like Clubhouse, for instance, where, you know, I think things rose and then, you know, it dipped and I’m curious, how do you approach that? Like do you know that there’s certain ones where you’re like, “Okay, there’s something here, let me double down here,” like what’s your method for that type of thing?Kev: You have a lot of good questions, man. This is why you — you should do a podcast, maybe a newsletter as well about hip hop and entertainment. What I try to do, one of my, you know, things that I’ve noticed works well is using a platform how that platform was designed to be used. So Twitter, the best thing is tweeting, like writing, like writing out funny tweets, whether you’re trending, relatable, whatever. I post my videos — the only reason I post my videos on Twitter is because people would rip my videos and post — because videos didn’t do well on Twitter for me for a long time and the only reason I posted on there now is because people would rip my videos and post them and they’d do better on Twitter than I ever would have thought,so I was like, well, nobody’s gonna be getting them if I’m not gonna get them. But as far as TikTok, I always try what’s new incoming. I’ve tried, I mean, Vine. You want to talk about the worst creator ever on Vine? Kevin — I mean, I couldn’t get Vine to work for nothing. I made a Vine one time, Dan, and I’m lucky you can’t find it. And I was like making toast and I put a piece of bread in the oven and then the Vine cut and I had like half a second left and I was like, “Burnt,” and it was just a piece of burnt bread. And I was like, I don’t — I’m gonna stop doing this. This is literally the worst Vine ever. I tried Socialcam, Periscope, Clubhouse, spaces, Fleets, Stories, Snapchat. I’ve tried everything. Part of it for me is like, let’s talk about TikTok, for example. TikTok was a new — there were so many fun ways to edit on there, editing was more seamless, they had all those backgrounds. So, as a creator, it was just fresh. But anytime children are using something, the user base is gonna grow. And I think TikTok used to be Musical.ly and I remember my niece was on Musical.ly a long time ago so my strategy is always dip my toes in the water, see what works, find out how that platform works specifically. I realized what I learned about TikTok is you gotta be even quicker than other places on TikTok. I’m talking about people are scrolling like almost like this. You got like maybe 6, 7 seconds on Instagram, you got like 2.3 on TikTok and you can buy 3 seconds if you put the caption. It took me a long time to realize you had to write the caption on the video because people are not looking down to, I believe it’s the left to see what you’re saying so you gotta figure out, stop their system for one second and say when this be like or baby like or whatever. That’s step one and now you might have their attention. Using whatever trend is popping or whatever music is popping, now that’s step two. Now, you got them for 7, 8 seconds, now you may have a chance. But almost all of these platforms are, “Is it funny? Is it entertaining? Is it educational? Or is it relatable?” If you’re doing one of those of the four, you’ll be better off, but like I was a long winded person so I was on Periscope early and I stayed for a long time and I have so many of the people who are now on the Stage Crew is what we call our group of fans are — I used to go on Periscope every day while I drove to work. I was stuck in traffic for an hour and a half, I’d be on Periscope for an hour. And I just chopped it up. I’ve seen video ideas. And so many people loved it and they stuck with me for a long time. And another thing I do, I know I’m just rambling, I test out concepts on platforms, right? So I’ll tweet something and if that tweet does numbers, then I’ll be like, “Bet, I’ll make a video of that.” Like, for example, Uberfacts tweeted, “What’s —” This is a trend maybe last week. Uberfacts tweeted, “What’s a company’s secret you can spill now that you don’t work there anymore?” and I was like, oh, I worked at the bank. I quote tweeted, “The bank does actually overdraw you on purpose,” like a lot of people used to accuse us of that and we would have to lie but they actually do it on purpose. It had like 26,000 retweets so I’m like, okay, that’s great, that means people are interested. Now let me screenshot that, go to TikTok, and make the talking version of that. And then I put that video on TikTok, did well. Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, did well. And then a couple of days later, I put the video version of a tweet that went viral right back on Twitter with my own tweet and it also went well. And I’ll do that all the time. If I’m not sure video work, I’ll post it on my stories and I’ll check the engagement. If I get over 50 shares or 100 shares, I’m like, “Oh, I’ll take that off and put it on the main grid.” Sometimes I’ll make a full video. So I’m kinda like seeding out content and seeing what people respond to and then deciding if I wanna make a full video after that. I have to do that now because I’m doing other projects. I used to just scour the internet for videos all day but because we’re making stuff for the app and stuff, I don’t have as much time so I’m kinda like throwing stuff against the wall, seeing what works, and then making full versions of that. And that’s kinda how I continue making content consistently while I’m really spending more time creating long-form content, where I’m on set 10, 12 hours a day. I just don’t have the time to be on the internet like I usually was so I’ve gotta like be more strategic about doing it.Dan: That’s your fastlane IP model right there. You just broke it down.Kev: Yeah. Absolutely, man. I’m just always moving in there. And my hope, one day, I wanna be like — do you remember, DC Young Fly early? He used roasting to rise him to fame and then he leveraged that into other stuff. Now he can use social media just to remind you of what he’s doing. One day, I’ll be able to be like, “Oh, my social media is just to remind you of what’s coming and going.” Or like Kevin Hart, like he’ll still come on every once in a while and remind you he’s hilarious on social media but he doesn’t need it as a vehicle as much as he used to. That’s my goal, when I can go a week or a month without making something funny, and people still are checking in. But I’m probably a little ways away from that.Dan: What do you think that would look like to get there? Like is there a particular number or do you feel like it’s like a feeling of where you are in your career?Kev: I think — what it really will probably be is when I’m shooting so many things that take up my full day, when I’m shooting 10, 12 hours on set, it’s really hard to make a great internet video that day, because I’m not on the internet because I’m shooting. When I’m on break, I might be scanning but, you know, the lunch on set is 30 minutes, if that, feels like. By the time you sit down and eat and then you’re back on set for 6 hours. If I was doing that for three months, it’d be tough to make the same amount of content that I’m making. So if I was basically doing those kinds of projects back to back, then I know my social media will suffer in the sense of creating at the pace I usually did. My only hope is that the monetary benefit from my other projects will, you know, keep me afloat. I mean, obviously, I don’t make crazy money, well, relative, from the actual platform, it’s all about leveraging them to make money off the platform. But, you know, we still get paid from Tik— I mean, not TikTok, I mean, technically TikTok but I make no money off that. Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube so my hope is that I’ve got so many projects that I’m making, either from my own distribution service or for somebody else or a partner or something we’ve sold, that I’m like, “Man, I’m making too many things, I don’t have time to like see what the TikTok trend is.”But, honestly, Dan, I like making videos so much. If I was on my lunch break, scanning through TikTok, I will make a video, because it doesn’t take me that long. My best skill isn’t funny, isn’t being hard working, it’s efficiency. When I’m inspired, I can download, shoot, and post in no time. And TikTok, God bless them, so happy you can just click download for most videos. Don’t make me go through screen recording and down— that’s too much. You want people to share these anyway, make it easy. So, I can do a whole thing in less than 5 minutes so as long as I got 5 minutes, I’ll probably make something.Dan: Yeah. I feel like that’s what drives it at the end of the day, right? Like there has to be something beyond just the monetary gain to make you wanna continue to feel inspired to create and that’s great that you have that still with the videos. I mean, I definitely sense that from the joy and passion that you share out of it, but I think for a lot of people that do create content on the internet and then that is the awareness they build to sell elsewhere, they ideally would just love to sell the other thing but the internet feels like this thing that they have to do. So the fact that you don’t feel that, I mean, I’m sure it’s still exhausting, for sure. But the fact that you don’t feel that naturally, I think, is what helps that longevity.Kev: Absolutely. I think, you know, we all deal with like burnout or not feeling funny or feeling like I’m never gonna come up with any other idea. But I see the value in using these platforms but also leveraging them to your own stuff, like being an early YouTube creator when adpocalypse happened and Logan Paul did that suicide forest thing and everybody’s monetization was punished, that’s the first time I was like, “Oh, snap. I didn’t even have nothing to do with this. I never been to Japan. I would never. Why am I getting punished?”That’s the first time I was like, “I can’t rely on these platforms,” and then when Vine came and went, even though I sucked at Vine, there was a lot of people where they depended on Vine and, luckily, most of the creators who were big leveraged that to Snapchat or Instagram or YouTube but some of them never even got close to the heights that they had on Vine. And the same thing happened on Instagram or TikTok or whatever. You know, a lot of people are one platform dominant, killing it on TikTok but nowhere else big. I would rather be five platforms doing okay than one platform dominant because now I can go from TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, into my own platform, Patreon, which is fantastic. It’s very important to what we do here. If I only had Patreon, I’d be okay. So, you know, I’ve kind of like made my exit strategy because the Internet changes too quick, you know? One day it’s popping — Clubhouse, man, people were — it was the thing for like 5 months and then everybody — it felt like everybody was just like, “Nah,” like one day, and it’s still there, it still have great stuff going on there, but during the pandemic, man, it launched — or not launched but it popped at a perfect time when everybody was at home. Dan: Right. Kev: But then people just got sick of people talking and Facebook came up with their own one and Twitter came up with their own one and then Clubhouse didn’t have, you know, that exclusive thing anymore. I mean, that’s — you talk about a quick pivot. Dan: Yeah.Kev: You know, Clubhouse, how quickly Twitter jumped on that, that was fast. It took Instagram a long time to copy Snapchat. Dan: Yeah, and —Kev: It took Twitter, it felt like 2 months before they had —Dan: Yeah, Spaces was quick.Kev: I was like, Jesus, and the thing that Facebook did really well is kind of what Twitter did too. They said, “We’re not gonna beat Snapchat’s market share, and we don’t have to. All we need to do is slow their growth and get somebody who was never gonna go to Snapchat to do what they would have done on Instagram.”My wife is that person. She never went on Snapchat ever. But they took that idea and that, you know, Stories, put it in Instagram, and she was like, “Oh, I’ll do this.” And I was like, “Girl, I’ve been telling you about Snapchat.” She was like, “I’m not downloading no more apps.”And that’s the same thing. So you — that’s why I never wanna be one platform dominant because the winds, they blow and change too quickly and you could be caught in the cold, you know? Like YouTube, man, YouTube decided on a whim, it felt like, family content, if it looks like it’s geared towards kids, you’re not gonna be able to monetize that. People went from making hundreds of thousands of dollars a month to zero. When they decided they didn’t want pranks anymore, people went from making 50 grand, 150 grand a month to like literally zero, I’m not even exag— I know people who had to give up their house in the Hollywood Hills when YouTube was like, “We’re not doing that no more.”And that’s when I was like, “Oh, this is too dangerous to be only on one platform.” You gotta use them all but you also have to have an exit strategy. To me, you know? Everybody doesn’t have to do that but, to me, you gotta have an exit strategy.Dan: Yeah, that makes sense. That makes a lot of sense. And I think the way you structured it makes sense too. I mean, yeah, you mentioned you’re still getting some income from those platforms but the majority is outside of it. And I’m curious, what do your splits and breakdowns look like from a percentage perspective of, you know, like how much does come from those platforms versus how much comes from your other content or your stand-up or any of the other ticketed type of things?Kev: So, the most lucrative by a mile is live events. Touring, live events is the most lucrative. That’s why when the pandemic happened, I was like, “Oh my God,” because that — before the pandemic, that was foolproof. As long as people wanted to come see you, you will be able to eat forever, and then all of a sudden, no. So, for me, the most important thing is touring. The second most important thing probably is my Patreon, because that’s a group of people who really believe in what we’re doing here and support me and if I lost my other platforms, they would still be there. Outside of that, YouTube and Facebook, YouTube was really consistent monetarily. Facebook can be a blow up, for me at least, a blow up and then nothing. You have some months where it’s, you know, 2 grand and some months it could be 10 grand, you know what I mean? So it’s like, you really can’t build a business off of that, you know, wave of, you know, unpredictability. But for me, I probably say 60 percent is live, 40 percent is — or I’m sorry, 20 percent is Patreon, and the other is like podcasting. Podcasting can be really lucrative with the ad revenue. It’s also platform agnostic. Like I don’t need to be monetized on YouTube because I’m monetized through the ads that are baked into the podcast, you know? So, for me, those are what I focus on and everything else is gravy. Whatever Instagram pays me, gravy. Whatever Facebook pays me, gravy. Whatever YouTube pays me, gravy. And those are the things I have the least amount of control over anyway so, yeah.Dan: That makes sense, yeah, and I think like that split too, honestly sounds like what it’s like for a lot of artists as well. I mean, so much comes from live performances, more than half for most of them, but that other chunk, you know, whether it’s through their branded partnership or any of their influencer revenue that they may have but also what they get actually selling their music through streaming or the publishing revenue that comes in. So there’s definitely a ton of similarities there, which is why I like the model of what you all, and what you specifically have done to build it up. But I think the difference though is that I probably see a little bit more creativity on average from some of the more successful independent comedians than maybe some of the more, you know, successful artists.I feel like there’s been more of like a standard path but whether it’s you or some of the others that have, you know, risen up, especially in the past 5 to 7 years, there’s definitely, you know, I think a bit more variety and, you know, especially whether they’re building their own studios or they’re trying to do a few more creative brand partnerships and deals, I’ve always been fascinated with that piece about how comedians and stand-ups are able to monetize and use the internet.Kev: Absolutely, and I think like look at any 85 South, man, like they have — their live event is huge. And then they can just put that exact video on YouTube or their app and they sell merch and even if they did nothing else but live shows and merch, they’d probably be okay, but now, they’re building their own app out. It’s already out there, the Channel 8, and they’re expanding that.So, you know, another smart thing, like let me diversify what we’re doing and own the media aspect of it. But, for me, that’s merch and brand deals like, to me, it’s hard to be good at everything, you know what I mean? So I don’t try to be. I’m like merch, I’ll focus on the road, if I have a great idea, but it’s not my strong suit, because fashion and design aren’t my strong suits so I’ll just really make stuff for the Stage Crew who loves it. And I’ll focus on live events, video content, and podcasting and I’ll be strong there. I mean, you got people like Kountry Wayne who like master of Facebook and Instagram, like he knows the amount, you gotta be at least 3 minutes to get really paid. His sketches are 3:01. They’re gonna be over 3. On Instagram, they start really quick so he’s mastered that and he’s also on the road. So everybody has their skill set and it’s kinda like, to me, basketball players, like LeBron’s the greatest player to me, ever, and he’s good at a lot of different things. Steph is the best shooter ever so he doesn’t have to be a rebounder like LeBron because he’s gonna shoot threes from the logo so you won’t be able to guard him. And that’s kinda how I think of creators, like very few people are as well rounded as LeBron but you can have a long career being really good at one or two things and that’s fine too.Dan: Yeah. And as long as the platforms that are there are still aligned to like where your skill set is the better.Kev: Yeah.Dan: Because it’s one of those things where Steph also was really good at something that he was able to set a trend with and, you know, just gotten more and more favorite too as the game went on. But it’s like if you’re really good at, you know, like that Charles Oakley, you know, old school right? This next game, you might not have as long of a career is you may have had in ’93.Kev: That’s a fantastic point. Charles Oakley wouldn’t know what to do in this game, like he’s still gonna be big and strong but he’s gonna be guarding Luka or Kevin Durant and they shooting from three, they’re driving around, the game has changed so that’s a good point as well like the game changes so you have to be able to, you know, change with the game. The internet changes. The same thing with comedy, like what was funny and tweetable 10 years ago isn’t funny or tweetable this year, and I’m not one of those who complains about cancel culture. As a comedian, our job is to know where the line is. Know what society thinks is funny and stay there and not to be like, “Well, this was funny 12 years ago.” Yeah, The Nutty Professor was hilarious before but it wouldn’t be as funny if it was made now. People would call it fat phobic or whatever. But if you watched it then, it was great, you know what I’m saying? Pepé Le Pew, hilarious as a kid. Now you’re like, “Yo, what’s was he on, man? Where’s the consent? Leave her alone, man. Let her go,” you know?So I think comedy and everything is similar. Everything is changing. Fashion, language, music, all of that stuff. So, you know, as a creator, you have to be aware of that change or you get left behind.Dan: Yeah. And to bring it full circle, what you brought up with Vine is a great example of this. You yourself may not have been the most successful on that platform, like you said, but there are many people who had some of the most popular Vines that were like winning and spread everywhere. And, unfortunately, I just haven’t seen them as much because there’s something about that 6-second storytelling that they did so well with that just didn’t translate as well to where things are right now.Kev: Absolutely. 100 percent. That’s what I was saying, like some people translated but for some people, that was it. They never reached the heights they had on Vine ever again, you know? And some of the same trends on Vine probably would work on TikTok but not exactly. So, you know, you gotta get in where you fit in and fit for as long as you can. And then, as the world changes, you gotta fit there too. And that’s, to me, the only way to survive.Dan: Definitely. So, for you, just because you are wearing, as we talked about, all these different hats, all these different roles, 5 years from now, 10 years from now, of course, we don’t know where things are going, but in the ideal scenario, what would you like to be doing more of or what would you like to be doing less of?Kev: More of helping other creators create their content. That’s actually one of the things we wanna do at KevOnStage Studios. It’s the hardest part though. Much harder than I realized, you know, to even maybe make somebody else’s show, to even go through the legal process of trying to make it is already expensive. So I found that that part was a lot harder than I realized. If somebody comes in and is like, “Yeah, whatever deal is fine,” it’s very easy. If somebody is like, “I’ve got these ideas and stuff,” talking to their lawyer, our lawyer, it’s tough. And to do development, you need somebody who can focus on that, you need the resources for legal, you need the production staff to be able to go and make that. So I would hope that we could grow enough to be making more of stuff for other creators and creating those opportunities. Right now, we’re kind of focusing on building the foundation with the team we have. But in order to do that, we’d have to scale out a little bit so that would be our goal.I would also love to be making independent movies. That’s always been a dream of mine. I just love the experience of movie, either in theaters or at home, I don’t care. I’m not like one of those creators, like, “It’s got to be in a movie or it ain’t real,” like I was poor so we couldn’t go to the actual movies that much so all my dreams and memories are watching them at home. So I don’t care if you’re watching it on your phone or TV or whatever, but I’d love to be doing those two things, if nothing else. Creating content with others and then creating movies and creating stuff that I would love to create and hopefully distributing it to a lot of people. The one thing about the KevOnStage Studios app right now, it’s still very small so, you know, to the viewer, that’s fantastic, but the other streamers and distribution sites, they have a lot more access. If I tell you to go watch a show on Netflix, the chances of you having Netflix are very high. Or HBO Max, something like that. If somebody tells you to go watch something on KevOnStage Studios, the chances of you already having that app are not as high as you having Netflix. So our goal, our hope would be that, “Oh, yeah, man, I’m gonna check that out. I didn’t even know we had that.” But you gotta have the show that breaks through. Like if you think about Apple TV, as much money as they have, people didn’t really click in by and large until Ted Lasso. Like I watched See, they had a lot of stuff. Nobody cared, by and large, until Ted Lasso. So even — and they have trillion dollars in cash. People were like, meh, you know what I’m saying? So it’s not just unique to what we’re doing, it’s a lot of places that struggle. Peacock and Quibi. Quibi had all the money in the world, access to every A-list star in the world, people were like meh, so it’s not easy, man. It is not easy. It’s not even unique to being small. It’s just not an easy business to be in. So I would just hope to still be here, in fact. Low key, to still be able to do this for a living in 5 years, I will be happy with just that.Dan: No, man, I think you will. And I mean, I’m not just saying that as someone that’s been a fan of your content following you for a while. I mean —Kev: Thank you, thank you. Dan: I really do look at you as one of the success stories when we think about this era of the Internet and what creators were able to do in this phase. I feel like we’ve seen folks in, you know, past eras and eras before that and the Internet has always been so nascent but I think your focus and consistency. Wait, which one?Kev: I really don’t know. Nascent, what’s that?Dan: Oh, in terms of like just being early on a trend and just being, you know, like quick with it. Like I think that, you know, for you, oh, man, lost my train of thought —Kev: I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to interrupt you.Dan: No, no.Kev: When people use a word that I don’t know, I always ask because then I’ll be like, you know, “That was nascent,” and then people would be like, “What did that mean?” Oh, you know, what it means is early on to the trends and whatnot, you know what I’m saying? So I didn’t mean to get you off track but I was — that’s a good word that I don’t know so I had to ask you real quick. I could have Googled it later but —Dan: Oh, no, no. I appreciate that. I know, people appreciate this too, just from like, you know, the conversation, for sure. No. So, normally, some of these things, editors, I’m like, “No, can you all take that out?” They’re like, “No, we’re leaving this in here,” because —Kev: Leave it in, editor. Dan: They’ll learn too. But, yeah, man, I mean, like I said, you, the focus that you had with so much of the content that you put out and also just how you continue to enjoy it, I feel like that is the model. And I’m really excited for you and where you continue to grow and the fact that you’re leveraging your platform the way you have to put people on, I mean, that’s the dream. I mean, I know that, you know, I’m definitely, you know, in the days of it, it could likely feel like a lot of work but, hey, man, you’re doing the work, man. And it’s much appreciated.Kev: Thank you, man. That truly means a lot, Dan. I appreciate you even saying that. And I’m glad that you think, you know, I’ll still be here in 5, 10 years because I hope too, you know? But if not, you know, I own a house in this small town. If you see me living in South Carolina, just figure out that it didn’t work.Dan: Hey, man.Kev: But I’ll still be happy. I’ll still be making videos or doing podcasts or something.Dan: And joy will be there. The joy will be there. For sure. Regardless. But, hey, man, Kev, this was great. I really appreciate you for making the time. Kev: Thank you, man. Dan: But before we let you go, anything you wanna plug the audience, let them know some of the content you got coming out with the streaming service?Kev: KevOnStage Studios. man, go to your app store, whether you’re on Apple, Android, Roku, Amazon, go to KevOnStage Studios, download that. Go ahead and subscribe for the year. Don’t worry about what’s on there. Just subscribe for the year. Trust me, it’ll be worth it. We’ve got a lot of amazing things on there. We got the Real Comedians Challenge Show, which is just knockdown drag out funny. We’ve got What’s Good?! which is a food show with comedians and comedians are more like regular people than chefs so you’re gonna feel like it’s you and your friends going out to eat in a different city. We got Love On Stage, which is a dating show my wife created and produced. That’s fantastic. You can stream that whole season in there. Just fun stuff like Get Your Black Card Off Layaway shows, Keon’s All Stars, Crafts and Cocktails, just fun stuff, man. Just go on there, check it out. Destination Evrywhr is an amazing travel show that, you know, has a musician who went all the way to Cambodia to make music with Cambodians. We have stuff like that. I mean, just go over there and check it out, man. Just don’t worry about the monthly fee. Don’t pay monthly. Pay by the year. You get two months free when you pay by the year. Just go ahead, go from here, wherever you’re listening, right to KevOnStage Studios and pay for the year. You won’t regret it. And even if you do, we already have your money.Dan: We’ll make it easy for people too. We’ll put the link in the show notes.Kev: Perfect. Thank you so much, Dan. I really appreciate it. I’m a big fan of yours. I’ve been watching your podcast and be like, “How does Dan get these guests?” And then you tweeted like I just be asking, I was like That ain’t no secret. That’s just —He’s like you just know somebody or just shoot your shot. I’m like, you had Rick Ross though, man. You had Issa Rae. And you’re like, “Yeah, just ask.” I’m like, “Okay, we’ll see how that works, Dan. I’m gonna just ask too, see what I can get on my podcast.”Dan: I will say, I mean, there’s something a bit more nuanced to that and I was like, you know what, I could have added more because I made it seem like, “Oh, y’all could do it. Why don’t you just DM Rick Ross?”Kev: Yeah. I was like, “Dan, it is not that easy.” It is not that easy and you know that. I just believe all we got to do is DM him and he’ll be like, “Yeah, I’m gonna be on there.” You know it took more than that, Dan.Dan: Oh, man. Well, no. So ’cause I think people probably appreciate this for the folks that do listen. So the Rick Ross one, real quick, so the Rick Ross one, I had had his attorney, Leron Rogers, on the pod. Him and I had had a good conversation and, you know, stayed connected afterward and I saw that Ross was putting out a book and I was like, “Alright, if someone’s put out a book, they’re gonna be on the tour,” and then I was like, “Okay, hey, you know, I know that Rozay is gonna be on the tour, would love to have him, he’s writing about business. This literally is the avenue to do that.” And he was like, “Alright, send me some details, let me see what I can make work,” and then we made it work after that. Kev: See?Dan: Yeah.Kev: It is more than just DM-ing. It’s timing, it’s relationship, it’s an audience people care about and a podcast that people actually watch and download. So, sorry, guys, it’s not as easy as Dan made it seem.Dan: No, you’re right. If someone has to be, “Oh, hey, how did you get KevOnStage on your pod?” I’d be like, “Oh, I just DM-ed him. Y’all could do it too.” You gotta get all these people flooded. They will be like, “Oh, KevOnStage, can you come to do my thing? Oh, KevOnStage —Kev: Guarantee you it’s not gonna be that easy. ’cause if I don’t follow you, I don’t even really see your DMs. I’m a fan of Dan so I saw his and I already wanted to be on this show so when he asked, I was like, “Finally, my time is now.”Dan: It’s funny, man, because I so remember, it’s like one day on Twitter and, I mean, like I said, I’ve been following you on, you know, all the other platforms. And then, one day, you just quote tweeted something I said and you were like, “Y’all should follow this guy.” And I was just like —Kev: Yes.Dan: Yo, KevOnStage — I was just like, okay, all right, we hear this.Kev: ’Cause you’re really smart, man, and you take stuff that is like out there and you make it so digestible. Like what Westbrook is doing, I’ve been following them but when you made that graphic about the flywheel, it’s like, “This is exactly what they do,” but it makes so much — I sent that to so many of my friends. I was like, this is what KevOnStage Studios has to become and the way they did The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air reunion, all of the stuff they did with that and then they ran that same thing back for King Richard, genius. And then with Will’s Best Shape of My Life, I watched that, get YouTube to pay for it, boom, use it to actually lose weight and promote your book.Dan: Brilliant.Kev: I said what the heck? I wanted to get the book because of that. Genius level marketing and even somebody as big as Will Smith, everything they do is not behind the paywall. They gotta use YouTube and Instagram just like regular people. So I know I’m on the right track. And I also met Will Smith, I don’t know if you know that. I don’t like to talk about it. Dan: Oh, no, you only post a photo, what? Every month or so.Kev: I haven’t posted in a while. I should bring it up again today.Dan: If he wins this Oscar for Best Actor, you gotta be part of that campaign.Kev: He might thank me from the podium. He might be like, “This wouldn’t have worked without KevOnStage’s dad joke to help promote the film. I’m so glad that he did that and that’s why you heard about King Richard,” and I’m gonna be like, “Thanks. You’re welcome, Will. And you’re welcome, world.”Dan: Oh, man. I’m kind of waiting for that moment, that will be dope.Kev: Oh, man, I’ll be so happy for him. I’ll be so happy. And he was great in that, like it was an Oscar-worthy performance so I really do hope he wins.Dan: Yeah, no, definitely. No, he does too. But, hey, man, this was great. I really appreciate you coming on.Kev: Thank you so much for having me, Dan. I appreciate it, man. (outro)If you enjoyed this podcast, go ahead and share it with a friend. Copy the link, text it to a friend, post it in your group chat, post it in your Slack groups. Wherever you and your people talk, spread the word. That’s how Trapital continues to grow and continues to reach the right people. And while you’re at it, if you use Apple Podcast, go ahead, rate the podcast, give it a high rating, and leave a review. Tell people why you like the podcast. That helps more people discover the show. Thank you in advance. Talk to you next week.

In the 1990s, Interscope Records played by its own rules. Most new labels started with big stars, but Interscope had a clean slate. Most labels were scared of rap music, but Interscope leaned in. Co-founded by Jimmy Iovine, a producer, and Ted Field, a film producer, people questioned whether they had the chops to make it.The label has had a hand in some of the most memorable music moments like Death Row Records, the rise of Eminem, and the creation of Beats by Dre headphones. To break down Interscope’s success, I brought back Zack O’Malley Greenberg. His book, “Three Kings,” covered Interscope’s story. Together, we unpack what’s made Interscope such a long-standing player in the music industry.[0:53] The most successful individual label of the past 30 years?[2:40] Key figures in Interscope’s come-up story[6:57] Nontraditional way to build a record label [11:07] Death Row Records partnership [16:44] Biggest signing? [19:14] Best business move?[28:07] Darkhorse business move? [33:21] Where will Interscope be in 10 years [36:07] Would Interscope’s 90s approach work today?[43:39] Interscope’s entrepreneurial challenges today [50:36] Biggest winner in Interscope history?Listen: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | SoundCloud | Stitcher | Overcast | Amazon | Google Podcasts | Pocket Casts | RSSHost: Dan Runcie, @RuncieDan, trapital.coGuests: Zack O’Malley Greenburg, @zogblogThis episode is sponsored by DICE. Learn more about why artists, venues, and promoters love to partner with DICE for their ticketing needs. Visit dice.fmEnjoy this podcast? Rate and review the podcast here! ratethispodcast.com/trapitalTrapital is home for the business of music, media and culture. Learn more by reading Trapital’s free memo.TRANSCRIPT[00:00:00] Dan Runcie Intro: Hey, welcome to the Trapital Podcast. I'm your host and the founder of Trapital, Dan Runcie. This podcast is your place to gain insights from the executives in music, media, entertainment, and more, who are taking hip hop culture to the next level.[00:00:27] Dan Runcie Guest Intro: Today's episode is all about Interscope Records. It has been one of the most influential record labels since it was started in 1990. This record label has been home to Dr. Dre, Eminem, 50 Cent, Lady Gaga, Olivia, Rodrigo, and countless other names in between. So we talked about what made Death Row records wanna partner with a company like Interscope and what made Interscope succeed time and time again. So we talk about the business model of being able to sell controversy and why that worked well, especially in the 90s. We also talk about leadership and how important it is to have people at the helm that understand what's needed and how that continued to help Interscope time and time again.We also talk about some of the challenges that Interscope has had and how they're able to navigate that too. And in this episode, very similar to the Cash Money one that we did a couple months ago, Zach and I, that's Zach O'Malley Greenberg, you may know him from his work back when he was at Forbes as the entertainment editor there.And from the books he's written like Three Kings and Empire State of Mind. We talked about a number of things and answered several questions that we talked about in the Cash Money episode as well. What was the biggest signing? What were the best business moves that were made? What was the Dark Horse move?What are the missed opportunities? How did this record label handle transitions? And who is the biggest winner overall from the success of Interscope Records, which is now Interscope Geffen A and M today, one of the umbrella labels under Universal Music Group. This is a really fun episode to do, and we're gonna do more of them.So let us also know if you have any suggestions on other ones you want us to do at the end of the episode, and we'll go from there. Here's our breakdown on Interscope Records. Hope you enjoy it.[00:02:13] Dan Runcie: This episode is a breakdown on one of the most storied record labels of the past few decades, Interscope Records and we're back to break it down with my guy, Zach O'Malley Greenberg. Zach, welcome back, man. [00:02:24] Zack Greenburg: Thanks for having me, as always. [00:02:27] Dan Runcie: Yeah, I knew that this was a topic that was near and dear to you, given the work you covered in the spaces.Well, this is one of the more interesting record labels, but following their work for years. And just to just kick things off, this record label starts 1990, right at the beginning of a new wave for music and since it's come out, would you say that this is the most successful record label, individual record label that we've seen in music since then?[00:02:52] Zack Greenburg: I mean, it's certainly hard to think of another one, that's been more reliably at the top, right? I mean, and I think the thing that really sets Interscope apart is it's not like, you know, the label was made off of just one act or two acts or three acts. They just have a, track record of continuing to find, you know, artists that push the envelope, that, you know, break records and that end up at the top of the music scene and, you know, kind of across genres and eras too.So, you know, and really even across, chief executives, which is I think, pretty unusual. So, I think there's some kind of secret sauce in there and, can't wait to dig into it with you.[00:03:27] Dan Runcie: Yeah, I think it. In terms of the longevity, in terms of the phases they've gone through, whether it's dominating in hip hop, dominating in pop, dominating in rock, they've been able to do it across genres across decades. The one record label that I do think could also be worth mentioning in this respect is Republic Records started a few years after 1995, but I think there's a few things there too as well.The consistency and the ability to do consistent deals, win challenging Bit Wars and get some of the top artists. So I do think it would probably have to be one of those two. But from a timeframe perspective, just all of what Interscope was able to do even before things got started at Republic, do give them a edge.If we're talking past 25 years, that's probably another discussion, but past 30, 32 years, I think Interscope is probably there. I think there's also maybe a case to be made for Columbia or a case to be made for Atlantic as well, but I do think that Interscope, especially just with the way that they went about things a little differently, which we'll get into, but I feel like they have a strong advantage there. [00:04:33] Zack Greenburg: Yeah, for sure. And I think, you know, particularly when it comes to the sort of entrepreneurial spirit, you know, and we've talked about Cash Money and Def Jam and you know, Rockefeller certainly, hip hop, specific record labels that have been uniquely, entrepreneurial, you know, especially given some of their leadership, but like, I think for a label that, you know, kind of delves into pop so much.And of course Interscope obviously, you know, huge home for hip hop too. But to have that entrepreneurial streak, outside of it, mostly hip hop label. I think that's pretty unusual too in some of the things they've done around beats, which we can get into. you know, j just, you know, being almost, you know, like a venture fund or an incubator as much as a record label in some ways. I think that's another way that Interscope has been, you know, really different from the rest. [00:05:16] Dan Runcie: Yeah, for sure. That beats thing, we'll get into that one in a minute. I feel there's so much to dive into there but let's start with the quick backstory. I'm sure a lot of folks already know this, but there are three main figures that were involved with. The beginning of this record label. You have PBIV, you have Ted Fields, and you have John McLay so. Let's first start with Jimmy. So as many of you know, this was someone that was a record producer. It started as that worked with legendary artisan music, whether it was John Lennon, Springsteen, and several others. And with that, he was able to carve out a lane, figure out what works for him. And I know that now the jump from producer to executive may not seem like it's that much, but back in 89 ' 90', there were a lot of question marks around whether or not this record producer guy could run a business, could he be an executive, and make the decisions and call the shots?And there were a lot of things that Jimmy did that may seem conventional, but there were a lot that were seen unconventional. But I do think that him having the partnership with others helped craft Interscope to where it is today. And Ted Fields is one of those first, one of those people where the name comes from.So yeah. Zach, tell us a little bit about Ted and some of his [00:06:28] Zack Greenburg: work before. Yeah, I mean, you know, and it was, this was at this point, over 30 years ago, but, you know, I was five years old. But kind of looking back on it now, I mean, it seems to me the way these things go, like Ted Field was kind of the money guy. Jimmy was the industry guy and you know, Ted Field was one of the heirs of the Marshall Field Fortune, he had been involved in film production and like race cars and all kinds of things that heirs to Fortunes are option involved in, which are maybe not as lucrative as Interscope Records turned out to be. but interesting nonetheless, he was a producer on, revenge of the Nerds and some other really interesting films.but yeah. In 1990, he came along, basically thought of Interscope Records as its division of this film company. and he brought on, he teamed up with Jimmy. I think they were actually introduced by the manager of u2. and, David Geffen was sort of involved in negotiations along the way. And, it was like kind of a who's who of the music world, you know, at kind of the cusp of the 1990s there. And so he came in, he brought on John McClain, to run Interscope at first. So John McClain is like one of these people who's incredibly, he might be the most influential person in music who nobody's ever heard of. And, unless you know, you know, John McClain was, critical in Janet Jackson's success.he's also now become the co-executor of the Michael Jackson estate. you know, really since MJ died, along with John Branca, who's sort of the, public face of it, but, you know, John McClain, if you want to like, try to find a picture of John McClain. I mean, this guy is so, under the radar, but he's so deeply in the mix.I don't really know how he manages to avoid the spotlight quite as much as he does. But, you know, obviously contributes a ton, of expertise, and as a true power player behind the scenes in the music business. So, you know, you kind of, you kind of put that dream team together and then you have sort of the ingredients for, you know, the beginning of, what we now know as Interscope records. [00:08:18] Dan Runcie: Yeah, and I'm glad that you brought up Geffen earlier because when this started, a lot of people looked at Geffen as the model for what this could be, but also how Interscope went about things differently. Geffen's whole thing when he had started Geffen Records was who were the established artists that he could go after?Again, whether it was Elton John or a few other folks that they were able to really secure, because at the time, the thought was you wanna have the proven people on your roster because it's so hard to be able to build that from the ground up. So not only is Jimmy and the team already going into this from people that don't traditionally have strong music experience in terms of running a music company, at least in late eighties, early nineties, but you also have them try to do it completely with new artists and going in from a new perspective.And this was part of one of the things that I think helped set them apart because they lead into genres and aspects of genres that other folks avoided. So of course, in the early days of Interscope, they focused more so on rock music. That's what Jimmy was known for. And you had artists, I think their first hit was Ricoh Suave.They had had some stuff with Marky Mark and the Funky Bunch. So you started to see a little bit of more interesting ways to go about stuff. But then they also had Nine Inch Nails and Marilyn Manson. So you got a vibe for the fact that this wasn't just rock music. They were in many ways going after that shock value like what was the thing that was somewhat controversial, but there was the controversial stuff that did sell and was resonating and they were able to take risks that others weren't, and it worked out to their advantage.[00:09:58] Zack Greenburg: Absolutely. And you know, another executive, who deserves mention is Tom Whaley, who came over from, I think it was, he was at Capital and a and r there. And you know, he was the one who had originally signed Tupac, in I think 1991. So that was like way before Tupac was a mainstream success. He was really getting in early, you know, the seed round of Tupac, if you will. and [00:10:18] Dan Runcie: Digital underground era of Tupac. [00:10:21] Zack Greenburg: Yeah, exactly. So, you know, whereas maybe Geffen was more of like a series B kind of fund, you know, looking for series B and C, kind of sure things, you know, I think Interscope was really willing to get in there early and Right. They didn't really care if, somebody was controversial.And I think, I think Jimmy, I think that was part of his genius, was being able to tell like, you know, we shouldn't shy away from controversy. And in fact, you know, as, as long as it's. Not crossing certain lines. controversy can actually be good for a record label because it generates publicity and, you know, certainly as Jimmy got deeper and deeper in, you know, into the hip hop world, you know, I think, he followed that, strategy pretty closely. [00:11:03] Dan Runcie: Yeah. And I think this speaks to something that worked effectively in business in the nineties as well. There was almost this monetization of pearl clutching, if that makes sense. What is gonna make people actually be like, oh, did so-and-so just say that? And that's why MTV was able to reach heights in the late eighties and early nineties that VH1 necessarily didn't at the time.And that's why Interscope was able to do things, other labels weren't. And then I think similarly, you even look at gaming back in the day. You look at a company like Sega and the types of games they were willing to release on a council like the SEGA Genesis, they were taking risks that Nintendo didn't wanna take.And I think we actually saw Sony continue to do that. So I feel like there was this ethos of that in the nineties from the get-go, and Interscope was willing to go there where others weren't.[00:11:50] Zack Greenburg: Yeah, hundred percent. And, you know, I think it's, also just interesting to know that I think a lot of people look at the Tupac saga and they think about, you know, there's this whole, and we can get into this later, the whole Suge Knight and bailing him out of jail and all that.But, he was already in the Interscope, family, you know, years before that. So[00:12:06] Dan Runcie: Right. [00:12:07] Zack Greenburg: It all kind of comes together. [00:12:08] Dan Runcie: Oh, definitely. And I think with that it's time to talk about what are the most important things that does set the stage for this record label. In general, it's the partnership with Death Row records and signing them to the deal that they did. So it's funny because I think that when a lot of people think of hip hop artists signing deals and getting ownership, we often hear about cash money.We often hear about Master P and No Limit, but Death Row was able to do something quite similar and have that type of relationship with Interscope as well. It was a distribution deal, and for as notorious as Suge Knight is for his bully tactics, and that's probably a light way to put it in terms of how he goes about his business.He was very adamant about what they owned and they were able to use a few hundred thousand dollars investment on their end. Largely gotten from some money that, Suge Knight didn't get that he was owed from a vanilla ice steal and that that becomes a start to death row records. And they sat on the chronic for over a year until they found the right company. And the right company ended up being Interscope to partner with.[00:13:14] YT Clip 2: All I remember is that Dre came in, then plays the chronic. I said, who recorded this for you? He said, me. I said, wow. This guy will define Interscope. [00:13:24] Zack Greenburg: Yeah. and you know, I think that, you know, there's the old story of like, when Jimmy first heard Dre and Snoop together on a track, he's like, these guys are like Mick and Keith just, you know, they're just, just different genre but saw it immediately, right? He saw the, like behind the scenes musical guy, you know?and then the sort of like the forward facing storyteller, the performer. And, he saw formula that worked in rock and that would work in hip hop. And, I think in many ways, You know, Jimmy's genre agnostic, right? It didn't really matter that this was hip hop or that was rock.The point was the formula works and it works in whatever genre you put it forward in. So, at one of my other favorite Jimmy Stories was, I don't remember which song this was, what was it? It was, maybe it was off the chronic or doggy style and that he couldn't get the, radio stations to play it, because it was too obscene or whatever.And so, he just bought like 32nd or 62nd slots, or maybe he bought like, full three minute slots on drive time in LA just terrestrial radio and just played the song and people didn't realize that it was an ad, and they just, they loved the song and they started calling the radio stations requesting it, and that's how they rocketed it to the top.Which, do you remember what song it was? it's, not such, of course, the listeners are gonna be like, oh [00:14:41] Dan Runcie: someone's gonna come back and ping us about it. [00:14:44] Zack Greenburg: But I just, I love that story and it's, just like classic Jimmy Iovine, you know, you know, and it works. and I think also, you know, to your earlier point, like monetizing the pearl clutching, the best way to, get somebody to want something is to tell 'em they can't have it, right?I mean, so whoever's mom is like clutching their pearls, but the kid is like, wait a minute, my mom is freaking out and I can't have this record, like, what is this record that I can't have? Even if they didn't know what it was, you know? and I think in a funny way, like that era, you know, the whole parental advisory sticker, I mean, that became like, you know, like almost a badge of honor, [00:15:18] Dan Runcie: Oh yeah, I was a marketing employee at that point. [00:15:21] Zack Greenburg: Yeah, exactly. and you see that, know, obviously throughout music, but even, to draw parallels, with basketball, which as we get into talk about, beats by Dre, you know, I think there are a ton of them. But like one of the reasons that, Eric Jordan did so well early on was because they were like finding Jordan for wearing them.And this was a big story, you know, he was kind of like breaking the rules by wearing, cuz it, you know, the sneakers they had to be like white in the nba, white sneakers. We could only have a certain percentage with color on them. And like the Jordans were 50% red or something. And, this was like a big problem and, you know, resulting in fines.But Nike decided to just pay the fines and take the publicity. And I think that sort of attitude is, the one that was, you know, adopted by Jimmy and, you know, by Interscope more broadly throughout. [00:16:04] Dan Runcie: Yeah, great story. And I think that speaks a lot to both the blessing and to be honest, in some ways the curse of, Jimmy, what Jimmy's great at, and some of Jimmy's challenges as well, because from a leadership perspective and from the risk taken perspective, he was always willing to go there and spend the money to make the things happen, right?Whether it was taking a less lucrative deal to work with Death Row because you're working with Death Row, what you're able to put out, right? Three other first four albums they put out are classics, you have the chronic, you have Doggy Style, you have the above the Rim soundtrack. They just came so strong.And even that moment when they're able to have that cover on vibe, that is just such an infamous cover of, you know, the three main artists and show together. No one else could really do that, and that's why that does stay as strong as it is. But with that, Jimmy also did get a lot of criticism for overspending and not necessarily having as many checks of balances in place.A lot of people felt that, you know Doug Morris, who, this was a little bit later, but Doug Morris, who was leading Universal at the time, pretty much gave him a green light to do a lot of the things he wanted to do. And I remember in the nineties he had side Tom Jones, which was in many ways a bit antithetical to like how he's been running the business so far to spend the money on an act like that.And then even some of the things later on with Apple Music, and I mean, that's a whole nother conversation, but it's the way that the money was spent, worked well when it worked well. But then things don't work out, everyone has, you know, the criticism ready and some, some businesses that can work well, but in other businesses it can be a little bit challenging.[00:17:47] Zack Greenburg: Right. Yeah. absolutely. And, you know, I think as with many businesses though, if you spend a lot of money and you spend it, you know, intelligently or at least you know, in the right direction, maybe you overspend a little bit. If you spend in the right direction, you know, the rewards accrue to you.And, you know, I don't know if I'm getting too ahead of myself here, but. Just while we're on the topic of controversy, you know, just the whole corporate history of Interscope, it had started off as a, or it eventually was a joint venture between, Time Warner and then Field and Iovine.And in 1995, after all this controversy, with some of the lyrics and, you know, Dolores Tucker, you know, and all this T ime Warner divested, sold it's half of the company to field an Ivy for 150 million bucks. And then year later they just turned around and sold that half for 200 million back to Seagram.And, you know, so they made a tidy little $75, 85 million in like a year, you know, after, having their hand force by this controversy. So, it's just kind of funny how that all works out. [00:18:47] Dan Runcie: Yeah, no, I'm glad you brought that up. But I think we could get into some of the categories now cuz some of this probably fits there with that too. At least, I'd say the biggest signing here, I think the biggest signing, there's a number of them in Interscopes, 30 plus year history, but I think it has to be this Death Row deal.[00:19:02] Zack Greenburg: I think the death row deal, because it kind of paves the way for everybody else. But, I would say though, if there were a single artist that, you know, sort of, if you had to pick one artist to define Interscope, I'd probably go with Eminem. I mean, just in terms of like the overall, the controversy, the evolution, the sales.I mean, you know, just, nobody can touch Eminem from a sales perspective. you know, certainly when it comes to hip hop, over the past, you know, couple decades and, you know, just, all of the, kind of, the good and the bad and everything that came together. I mean, you know, but that doesn't happen unless you have Death Row.It doesn't happen unless you have Dr. Dre. I mean, you know, if you say like, what artist was most critical to Interscope overall, like on a broader kind of like holistic spectrum, I'd probably go with Dre. but as far as assigning, I don't know. It'd be hard to top that in my book. [00:19:53] Dan Runcie: Yeah, I think Eminem is a good counter there because this is kind of like the cash money conversation we had then, right? Do you say that it's Lil Wayne or do you say it's Drake and it actually is Drake from a pure numbers perspective, but obviously Drake doesn't happen without Lil Wayne and the same thing as here with Dre and Eminem and then everything else there.And Eminem is specifically because I think even if you looked at the 2010s, he's still probably up there in terms of the most commercially successful artist. He's already number one of the two thousands. He was already pretty high up from the nineties just given the work that he did in the late two thousands and his. In 2022, his greatest Hits album was the most popular rap album in the UK. And this is a album that's 17 years old, a greatest hits album. And then you just look at the streaming numbers. I'm pretty sure he has two of the three most streamed songs of the two thousands being Lose Yourself and Till I Collapse, which wasn't even like a big single at the time, but ended up being a staple on workout playlist.So yeah, [00:20:57] Zack Greenburg: and he has remained relevant in a way. I mean, I think if you walk down the street and you ask the average, you know, 15 year old, they'll know who Eminem is and they might not know who Dr. Dre is. [00:21:08] Dan Runcie: Which is wild to say, right? [00:21:10] Zack Greenburg: I know, [00:21:11] Dan Runcie: Wild. Yeah, [00:21:12] Zack Greenburg: It's crazy, but I think but I think it 's also true, for better or worse, so, [00:21:17] Dan Runcie: What's the best business move in, Interscopes done?[00:21:20] Zack Greenburg: I think it might be cheating a little bit because it was part Interscope and it was also part Universal more broadly. but I would go with beats, right? Just, you know, by way of background for those who don't know the full story, you know, uh, Jimmy Iovine and Dr. Dre founded Beats in, gosh, what was it, 2008? Something like that. [00:21:36] Dan Runcie: Yep, 08' [00:21:37] Zack Greenburg: But like from the very beginning, you know, the story goes that they're like walking down the beach in Malibu and, Dre has some kind of sneaker deal on the table and he says, you know, Jimmy, should I take this sneaker deal?And Jimmy goes, you know, like, F sneakers, let's sell speakers. And so that's how Beats was born. Is that exactly how it went down, you know, we'll never know, but it's a great story. and You know, to kind of tie it back to what we were talking about earlier with Air Jordan, they really did follow the Air Jordan Playbook in a lot of ways.And, when I wrote my book Three Kings, which was about Dre, Diddy and Jay-Z, the Dre section really focused a lot about, you know, beats and sort of how Dre set up this business and everything with Jimmy. And, you know, I actually went to the former CEO of Best Buy and I said, how did you sort of like, get kids to pay 200 bucks for a pair of headphones when like, they had been paying 200 bucks for sneakers before?And he said, well, we very consciously told our salespeople, when somebody walks in, you've gotta tell them like, you know, you're competing with Jordan not Bose, you know, you're gonna tell that kid like you know, this headphones set is like, more interesting for your wardrobe than that pair of sneakers or, you know, like that's how you're gonna really kind of win and create a category, not just sort of become the, best player in an old category. And, I think that was like the brilliant thing that they did. But the way that they got it to happen was they got full buy-in from Interscope and from the parent company, universal.And actually Universal invested a pretty big chunk of money into Beats. so that, you know, I think gosh, I don't remember exactly what it was, but I think when Apple finally bought them out, in 2014, I think Jimmy and Dre had 25 to 30% each. I think Universal had something like 20%. LeBron had a little bit and, will I am, but, you know, the fact that Universal was bought in, the Interscope was bought in, and that Jimmy was able to get them to put, beats headphones in like every single, I don't remember if it was Interscope video or all universal videos. I think it might've just been Interscope. [00:23:33] Dan Runcie: Yeah, they had 'em in Ineterscope cuz like they had 'em in like Gaga videos and like she would wear them and stuff. [00:23:39] Zack Greenburg: Yeah. And it's like, it's brilliant. Like what a brilliant move. So, you know, off of the two, that, whatever they put into it, intermediate, a lot of that was free, right? They just put in, you know, their own free product placement. They have to do anything and they help build this, you know, build beats into this $3 billion company.and so, you know, I, I don't know how the pie sort of divided, but it ended up being, you know, worth hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars, to the sort of universal Interscope family. And then, you know, also, you know, hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars for Jimmy and Dre.So, there are a lot of great signings. I'm sure they made a ton of money off of Eminem and all these other artists, but like, it's really hard to top that one. And, they just really knew how to do it. They really knew how to, I mean, Jimmy, you know, yeah. Again, it's a perfect partnership.Dre is this perfectionist artist and Jimmy is the market critter. And I remember, man, it must have been like 2010 or 2011, I got invited to this like launch of some new Beats thing, for New York media only. And, you know, there were like 30 people there and it was Jimmy and Dre and they were kind of like standing around in this, big conference room.And, you know, Jimmy was just like talking and yacking it up and telling stories and he told the story about the walking down the beach and, you know, sneakers or speakers and Dre's just kind of nodding and, you know, chiming in occasionally, but like, that was their deal. you know, Jimmy, Jimmy was the talker and Andre was the, you know, the, the quiet genius artist.and that was a pretty potent formula. [00:25:10] Dan Runcie: Yeah, that was my answer too. Beats has to be the best deal. All the reasons you mentioned as well. They also saw a huge opportunity with speakers as well because at this point, the predominant way that so many people were listening to music were those cheap white iPhone headphones or the iPod headphones, I should say, at the time that people were listening to.And I remember Jimmy was adamant about how poor the sound quality was coming out of them, especially given how much focus there was in the nineties around surround sound and both speakers and all this stuff. And sound shifted to these very cheap plastic headphones that just came for free in the iPod, cases.So them putting a bit more money into the technology there. Granted, there were other companies that did come through and really expand further, and that's how we're able to have products like the AirPod Pro Maxes, which are now several hundred dollars more than beets ever were because beets was considered to be expensive at that point.And now people will buy those like it's nothing the same way that people will buy Yeezys. Like it's nothing. So that other point about category creation, not just building within an existing area was key there.[00:26:20] Zack Greenburg: Yeah. And I think it's also worth noting, you know, Jimmy clearly looked up to Steve Jobs a lot and, you know, took cues from Steve Jobs creating the iPod, right? I mean, that was a very, like, he created the iPod. It was a music thing that helped basically revive apple and, and get it on the track that it is today.And you know, there, I don't think there's an iPhone if there's no iPod, but, you know, how did they get the iPod to be so sexy? It was like, It was those YouTube U2 commercials with the like, hello, hello to place golf to go, you know, and everybody was dancing and, and the crappy white, you know, earbuds with the, you know, chords and everything.you know, that was like, that was a creation of a category. And you know, I think that Jimmy looked at that and he thought, gosh, you know, I could do something like that. And I think he always thought it would be a great fit for Apple but Steve Jobs, you know, while he was alive, I think he kind of thought he could do it all himself, and he didn't really want to be involved in, you know, in that side of the business.So I think it's why, it wasn't until after Steve was gone that, you know, Apple came in and, and bought beats. But yeah, I remember reporting on that deal when it happened and happened at the worst. I was like, I had just gotten on a flight to like go to Italy for vacation with my wife.and I woke up at 7:00 AM and we landed or whatever, and I had like 70 texts and it, you know, it was like be, while I was over the Atlantic Ocean Beats, had gotten sold to Apple. And that, video came out with Dre saying how he was, you know, the new king of the Forbes list.And, [00:27:54] YT Clip 1: The Forbes list just changed. They need, Hey, it came out like two weeks ago. They need to update the Forbes list, shit just changed in a big what? Oh my understand that. Oh my. The first billionaire in hip hop.Right here from the motherfucking West Coast. Believe it. Oh. [00:28:11] Zack Greenburg: and so I just said to my wife, I was like, honey, we're gonna have to hang out in this airport for a little while before we started our vacation. I was like, you know, trying to put together a story and figure out what happened. but I think that one of the things that people talked about, you know, and at the time everybody's like, that's a crazy amount of money, you know how, you know how like Apple never spends money like this, you know, what's the deal? But a lot of the scuttlebutt was that they kind of like viewed Jimmy and Dre as, you know, maybe not like a replacement Steve Jobs, but almost like a piece of the Steve Jobs Voltron that they were gonna try to recreate, you know, like Tim Cook would, you know, the, would be the brain and the like, Dre and Jimmy would be the heart and somebody else would be the, I don't know, like something like that.They would piece it back together and get these little aspects of Steve and that they thought that Jimmy and Dre could really help out on the marketing side of it. and, you know, I don't know, I know that they had kind of like, there was a period of a few years where they were getting paid to hang around and, do stuff.And, you know, they did some, I think they did some more commercials, promotion, that kind of thing. But I never got the sense that they really were like, all right, you know, apple for life. And I think they kind of just, the thing ran its course, and, you know, they, took the last bit of their cash and off they went to do the next thing but it was interesting at least. that a lot of people really thought that that was kind of like part of the reason why, the deal was for such a big number, you know, that it was almost like an acquihire type of situation. [00:29:36] Dan Runcie: Right, and the other big piece of it was the streaming service that they had created at the time. And Apple wanted to get into streaming. They didn't have a streaming service. They were starting to develop one. So Beats music eventually became Apple Music, and then that's how Jimmy became so integral with [00:29:52] Zack Greenburg: And, I think even by that point, beats already had some really interesting people, I think like t Trenton Resner and so forth who were like deeply involved with it. And I think, you know, part of that was appealing to Apple too. that they felt that, you know, not just that the product existed, but that it, you know, that, the people existed who could kind of like grow it within Apple and, you know, eventually turn it into, into, iTunes like, you know, Apple Music and so forth.[00:30:17] Dan Runcie: Right, which speaks to that partnership in Jimmy's connections, right? He had been working with trend since the nine Inch Nails days. So yeah, all comes full circle. what do you think is the dark horse move or the dark horse thing that Interscope has that doesn't get talked about as much? So mine for this, I actually think it's the longevity that they've had with leadership there because I think that other record labels, this gets talked about a fair amount, but, and it's true for auto scope, I feel like it just doesn't get talked about in that same way.So since 1990, there's been two people that have been the head of it. So you had. Jimmy from what, 89 or 90, the founding until 2014, and then John Janick takes over and he's been there for almost a decade. And then if not more, if you just consider, you know, I think the total time working in the organization.So that's like you think about other organizations too, whether. You look at a team like the Pittsburgh Steelers, there've been two head coaches there since the early nineties. You look at the Green Bay Packers, there's been two quarterbacks that they've had as starters since the early nineties, and those teams have been consistently competitive and you rarely see them getting the first round or the number one draft pick.I think like Mike Tomlin hasn't had a losing season, and in some ways I kind of think about Interscope in that way. Yeah, sure. Every record label's had ups and downs, but these teams that have consistency, especially in an industry like music where there's so much turnover, so many of these other labels that are their competitors can be revolving doors in this way, which can lead to a lot of challenges for people to really be able to execute a strategy. This is one thing that I think has helped their longevity quite a bit.[00:32:01] Zack Greenburg: Yeah, I would say for my dark course, I would say John Janick, specifically, and I think people don't really realize, you know, just like how successful he's been cuz everybody talks about Jimmy. But, you know, first of all, at this point John's been there, I mean, he's been running the show for almost 10 years, which is nearly as long as Jimmy was.And, you know, who knows how much of the time before, Jimmy left in 2014, John was actually really, you know, running things on a day-to-day basis. So, you know, the, just like so many times you see a, visionary founder like Jimmy, leave a company and then, you know, the thing just kind of like Peters out, but, you know, I mean, under John Janick, you know, look at, you know, like Billy Eilish for example. I mean, I think Kendrick Lamar was also under his watch, probably Machine Gun kelly must have been under his watch too. [00:32:51] Dan Runcie: Yep. And then even Olivia, Rodrigo more recently. [00:32:54] Zack Greenburg: I mean, what a huge, you know, like, so that's definitely like on the level of, you know, of the biggest acts that Jimmy was able to bring in.And you know, it's like, you know, even with some of them it was really more Dre than it was Jimmy. So I think that's, you know, yeah, I think John deserves a lot of credit too. you know, and we haven't talked about Lady Gaga, so she's not exactly a dark horse. but, you know, lady Gaga is somebody who came in under Jimmy, but like, jimmy should not get credit for Lady Gaga because Lady gaga was kinda like languishing, you know [00:33:23] Dan Runcie: He was on the bench chilling and then like it was like the Akon's, the one that's like, Hey, what about her? What about [00:33:30] Zack Greenburg: And I remember I interviewed him, for Forbes. This was back in, you know, oh nine or 2010 or something like that. And, and I was like, so tell me the Lady Gaga story. And he said, basically I heard her stuff. And I was like, this is amazing. And I called her up, or I called, I think you called maybe Troy Carter, who was managing her at the time and said, you know, I wanna assign you, to my Interscope imprint.And she's like, I'm already on Interscope. So, so they just kind of like moved her around, within Interscope and, you know, they were able to, you know, that first song Just Dance. a lot of people forget that was like, when that came out. Akon was much bigger than Lady Gaga and, you know, that was at the height of Akon's fame.He's not out there as much now, but he is out, you know, he's all over the world making probably even more money than he was, back then. But, you know, yeah. He was hosting or appearing on SNL with Lonely Island and all those guys and, you know, he's kind of like showing up in the back of just dance, you know?Oh, yeah, you know, doing his Akon thing and, you know, and kind of really helped get her off the ground you know, and then just kind of like, pieced out and Lady Gaga became this incrediblesuperstar. So, you know, I think that's, certainly some serendipity for Interscope there, but, yeah, I wouldn't give Jimmy full credit for that one. [00:34:45] Dan Runcie: Yeah, definitely not Interscope, collectively. Sure they had her on the roster, but yeah, that one has to go to Akon on that one by extension, who himself, you know, clearly worked with Interscope and then just given, cuz we didn't even mention him himself, just that whole run he had from like oh four to what, 08', maybe 2010 if you wanna go a little bit longer. He was everywhere. [00:35:05] Zack Greenburg: yeah, yeah. [00:35:06] Dan Runcie: So of course we talked a lot about consistency. We talked a lot about Janet and the role that he's been able to do there, and I think consistency does naturally lead itself going further. So let's flash forward 10 years, let's go to 2030, 2033. Do we still think that Interscope will be at the level that it is now, where if you look at the market share numbers, it's roughly alternating, right? Around 10% of recorded music may be a little bit less, but I feel like it's like them Republic and then Columbia alternating to some extent. And it all kind of depends on who releases when but do you think that changes? Do you think they're more likely to stay there? Or what do you think 10 years from now [00:35:46] Zack Greenburg: Yeah, I think they're gonna stay, I mean, it's not like, one of these situations where their top artists are leaving or, you know, you're really too concerned about it, or they're kind of in the wrong genre mix. I mean, they're really heavy in hip hop. you know, they have some of the biggest stars out right now.I mean, we already talked about Olivia Rodrigo, Kendrick. Billy Eilish obviously is enormous Machine Gun Kelly, but you know, they have Black Pink. That's huge. Like, that could be a big place for growth [00:36:11] Dan Runcie: You got SZA through the TDE deal, right? [00:36:13] Zack Greenburg: Yeah. yeah. I mean, that's a great point, you know, hard to find anybody, who's having like a bigger moment that says it right now, so, You know, there's a lot.let's say that to go back to the sports analogy, it's not like this is a team of like, you know, 38 year olds who are nearing the end, you know, this is, like a win now team, with plenty of talent in the pipeline. and they've proven that they can keep working the farm system or something to continue the sports metaphor.But, and you know, I mean, John himself is not an old guy. I mean, John is, [00:36:40] Dan Runcie: Mid Forties? [00:36:41] Zack Greenburg: You know, I I forget old he is. Exactly. Yeah, you're talking, you know, where are they gonna be in 2030? I mean, you know, he'll be like in his early fifties and, still I think doing what he's doing, and doing it really well.So, you know. Absolutely. Yeah, I don't really see them fading. And if anything, you know, all it takes is like, You know, like another Monster Billy Eilish album in a given year. you know, and they start to gain even a little more market share. So I think they're in a pretty darn good place. [00:37:09] Dan Runcie: And it's arguably one of the best jobs in the recorded music industry because of the amount of leeway that I think Janet and by extension, the Interscope Geffen a and m umbrella is given relative to a lot of the other labels that are either under Universal or even others under the majors in terms of the decision making, the things that you could do, and when you have that much control based on his relationship with Lucian compared to others, it does make a huge difference. [00:37:37] Zack Greenburg: Yeah. And you know, I think another, another guy who's kind of in the background, who's been in the background, you know, for a really long time there is Steve Berman. He's another executive, who doesn't get you know, like a ton of limelight, but, you know, is kind of like quietly, like, like the cons.He's been kind of the cons area type over the years. and, you know, I think that might be part of the, you know, continuation, the connective tissue between Iovine, and, john Jank as well.[00:38:02] Dan Runcie: Right. Good point, especially just given how important lawyers and they are in terms of the influence direction of this industry. Another thing that I think is interesting, just thinking about the future, is also looking at the past of Interscope and how this record label did start and rise because of this controversy, because of the pro clutching business model.Do you think that could work today? Because I have my skepticism, but what are your thoughts?[00:38:31] Zack Greenburg: I think it depends, you know, what sort of pearl clutching is about, right? I think, know, in, in many ways the world is a nicer place than it was in the nineties. Like, you know, things were kind of a little rough and tumble in the nineties and it wasn't as sensitive a time as it is now.you know, I think, I think in general it's, good that, you know, we're like a little nicer, a little more sensitive, but, you know, in other ways, you know, I think, sometimes perhaps too much. But, you know, I think that, you know, certainly when it comes to music, I don't know, in a like this moment, for whatever reason, music isn't at the.Forefront of the culture wars and the way that it was in the nineties. And you know, instead it's like books in Florida, right? I mean, who knew? But, you know, people aren't really like, kind of, this is not a, like a campaign issue in the same way, that it might have been in the 90s, you're not seeing as many politicians sounding off about it.I mean, I think certainly you're hearing stuff, about, you know, can lyrics be used as evidence in court? you know, which is, can be a really troubling topic. But, you know, I think the sort of focus of that argument is, it's not like in the middle of national campaigns in the way that this was in the 1990s.So, yeah, I think, you know, like Interscope certainly as an experience. walking the line and it's maybe a little bit less of a delicate line, that they need to walk these days for just whatever reasons, with the political headwinds. [00:40:00] Dan Runcie: Yeah, I don't think it would work in the same way because I think the people that do try to create shock value were so desensitized to things compared to when we were the way things were in the nineties. Even for people that weren't that threat to society, but because of how they were depicted, it was easier to do that and still release great music, right?The chronic could be a shock value type of work, but it's still something that is critically acclaimed. That is in the National Registry and Library of Congress and all of these other areas. But now the stuff that creates shock value in music, whether it's even someone that's like more on the personality side, like a dj academics or someone like that will literally just say like, you know, the wildest shit just to go viral or partner with right wing organizations in order to create momentum that still has this area where it lives in somewhere like YouTube, where yes, you can get a following and you can make a living and you know, do things for yourself.But I think there's somewhat of a ceiling to that in terms of how much you can like, create, you know, broader impact and truly monetize the bases and the masses. And some of it even extends to artists as well, like those, I think someone like NBA Young Boy is quite popular and has had a bit of a number of transgressions in his track record, but still I think there's a pretty big gap of, you know, him relative to like some of the other names you mentioned just from some of the exposure and opportunities that he's given that doesn't lend itself to that.So, you know, Interscope in the early nineties probably wouldn't have wanted to try to sign Olivia Rodrigo because it didn't make sense. But it makes perfect sense now just given where things are and where things are going. So you can maybe do it on a niche level, but I think it's hard to have shock value sell in mass quantities and for the mainstream in that same way. [00:41:55] Zack Greenburg: Well, I think it's also just harder to shock people now, right? I mean, you know. [00:41:58] Dan Runcie: Or desensitized [00:42:00] Zack Greenburg: Yeah, exactly. I mean, if you were to put out the chronic today, you know, with, the marijuana leaf on the cover of it, it's like, and you know, and like this has been legal in California for like how long, you know?And certainly in terms of like things you could say or do that would be truly shocking. It's like after Donald Trump has been president in the things, you know, that are kind of, came out of that, it's like, you know, I don't really know many things an artists could do that would be more shocking, you know, and in this sort of like, hilarious, I dunno if it's hilarious, but this, let's say, ironic juxtaposition, you know, you had Eminem, the king of shock value Like making a track against Donald Trump when he was in office, you know, you have the rappers protesting against the politicians, instead of the other way around.So I think we're still, as a society, been kind of turned on our head, you know, by some of the developments of the past. you know, let's say eight years, eight years plus the past decade or so. you know, it's, guess in some ways hard for politicians to be complaining so much about music when, a lot of the obscenity is coming from them. So, [00:43:05] Dan Runcie: Right, and I think too, you were mentioning about how what Congress or what the American government can rally against in how so much of the nineties was. I still remember that infamous cover of Snoop Dogg on the cover of Newsweek, and I forget what the title of the magazine was, but it was something, along the lines of, oh, this is the greatest threat to America, or this is the greatest threat to our country, or something like that someone could probably pick me and find it, or maybe you'll link to in the show notes. And that's what people were able to get riled up around, right? Now, the biggest thing in music that has gotten anyone on a congressional level or congress level riled up is ticketmaster and Live Nation and Taylor Swift's tickets, which just shows how different things are, people used to be riled up about the content. Now this is a way to try to get at big business or whatever the exact complaint is. So, such a different time. [00:43:58] Zack Greenburg: Yeah, yeah, No, I Couldn't agree more.[00:44:01] Dan Runcie: Yeah. So we definitely spoke a lot of praise about the current era of where things are with the Interscope and the work that Janet has done the past decade. If you were in his shoes, would you be doing anything differently? And I do think that he's done a few things. So you mentioned black pink earlier.So there's clearly a way to be able to pivot and move more into music that isn't from the United States. It isn't domestic, and you're able to rise there, clearly done different types of deals from a flexibility perspective. Some artists do have, licensing deals like Olivia Rodrigo will own her masters for the long term just based on what she's shared about the nature of her contract moving forward.But for him himself, I mean, I think there's other IP things that could be interesting, but what does the type of things that Jimmy was able to do back in the late 2010 or late two thousands with beats? Like what could that look like or what could that look like for Interscope [00:44:59] Zack Greenburg: Yeah. You know, I think it's a different time. One of the things that's changed so much is over the past few years, I would say it's like, it's not quite as cool to be rich anymore, you know? I think sort of the Bernie Sanders movement, the sort of like this, right? I remember seeing it at Forbes, you know, when I started out it was like, woo, like I wanna be a billionaire and [00:45:20] Dan Runcie: The Forbes Remix [00:45:22] Zack Greenburg: Right. Exactly. Yeah. I mean, you had, Jay-Z, Diddy, and 50 being like, you know, the Forbes, yeah, they put out this Forbes 1, 2, 3 billionaire remix they called it. But you know, even now, even within the past couple years, you know, certainly, I think the Pandemic really crystallized this.But even before that, you know, with sort of like Bernie and, that whole, you know, movement, There was this kind of questioning of like, should there even be billionaires? And you know, I remember starting to see, people who you had thought, you would've thought would be, you know, jumping to be on the cover of Forbes.Just say like, eh, you know, like, I don't want to be seen as crowing about my wealth. so, you know, I think that's a big cultural change. And that's post beats, right? That's post, you know, Dr. Dre's situation. And, you know, I think that there's certainly a lot of leeway for Interscope still, to be entrepreneurial and they've always done that. But I think the challenge for Interscope or for anyone really is like, how can you be entrepreneurial in a way that is sort of like, you know, not necessarily charitable per se, but has some kind of impact, you know, like some kind of impact investing sort of thing. how can you, like, make money but, you know, drive change at the same time?I think that's sort of like, as we look going forward into the, you know, celebrity earning, you know, celebrity business sphere, I think that's gonna be the big question because it's no longer the thing that's just, it's cool to make a bunch of money on some random app or, you know, selling, some crypto thing as we've seen.And you know, you can get a lot of blowback, people think you're selling out. People think you're greedy people don't think you're selling outta greedy just cause you're doing something business related. But, you know, I think, over the past couple years it's become a lot more like, well, you know, is this something that really helps the world are using your money for good?and so I think whatever it is, if it's gonna be public facing and, you know, and I think. That's the value when you have a stable of celebrities, right, is to do something public facing. It's like, what is this doing, to help the world. So, you know, I think there are a lot of ways to take that, but certainly, you know, I think that's a bigger, bigger and bigger component going forward. [00:47:22] Dan Runcie: This is something that has changed in a relatively quick time span. You even think back to the Obama era and just the Obama presidency and just how music was and how people interacted and thought about music. You look at a album like Watch the Throne In, which I do think was one of the more popular albums from that decade.Granted, I don't think JayZ or Ye are even on the terms or desire to put something like, like that out again. But if they put that out about now, it would not get the same reception. There would be all these think pieces about, oh, here are these two men talking about, you know, their, you know, Hugo watches and there other, other bends and all this stuff.And people would be complaining about that in a way where just as recent as 2011, they were celebrated, like people, like revered so many of the songs. And just the talk about black excellence and wealth and even some of the conversations around Jay-Z himself as a figure, I know you know this well as probably some of the responses you've gotten over the years when you've talked about Empire State of mind and how people react to him, statements he's said and stuff like that.And yeah, we're just in a very different spot and now we're kind of in this space where, Yes, people can have commercial success. People, businesses can do it too. But I think it's especially difficult for companies in music because of so much historical context of how people view the record label as the enemy.People view the record label as this, and then even when the topic of the prices potentially raising for some of these streaming services, the number one thing you often hear from fans is, well, I hope that extra dollar or $2 for a potential raise in the streaming service goes back to the artist. And it's like, yes, you, you do eventually want those things, but we're losing the opportunity to talk about the value that these record labels create because of how media disseminates, right?If you talk about, oh, Olivia Rodrigo has a very favorable record deal. No one wants to hear that. But if there's ever a report, oh, Olivia Rodrigo's upset about, you know, Interscope, that thing would be a news topic for five days. Cuz that's where we are right now.[00:49:27] Zack Greenburg: Yeah. Yeah, for sure. And you know, so to to your point, I mean, you mentioned my book, empire State of Mind, which was this business focused biography I wrote of Jay-Z. it came out in 2011. but you know, It was such a different world back then. And when it came out, you know, their response was basically like, whoa, awesome. Like, this is Jay-Z's blueprint for how to, you know, be a centi millionaire. And this is so cool because now I can apply this to my career, or I can, you know, learn some lessons from him. And, you know, and there was just definitely like a sentiment of people rooting for Jay-Z to become a billionaire, race to a billion, and who's gonna get there first?Is it Jay-Z or Diddy or, you know, whoever. And, you know, and then it happened and Jay-Z you know, crossed the threshold in, I think it was 20, early 2020, something like that. I think late 2019, early 2020 was when we put him in the magazine as a billionaire for Forbes. but even when that, like, by the time that happened, you know, about 10 years later, I put out the billionaire edition of the book. after, you know, let's say, what was it, in 2021, this was 10 years later. It was a totally different story, right? people were like, why is this guy, you know, like, who cares? Like, you know, like he should be giving it all of it back, you know? Why are there billionaires in our society? Something's wrong in society that has billionaires. So, you know, and I think it has gone, that narrative has gone even faster than Jay-Z has kind of evolved into this, like very socially aware, you know, type of philanthropic mogul, you know, people are not even that into the idea of like, oh, I'll make a lot of money so I can give it back, people are like, just, you know, do the good, like do philanthropic stuff, do impact stuff the whole way through and like, don't even try to become a billionaire. So, it really is such a different world, and it's, been fascinating to write about this stuff as these attitudes have changed on a broader societal level for sure. [00:51:25] Dan Runcie: Did you hesitate naming it the Billionaire Edition, knowing like this would change and seeing things over the years?[00:51:32] Zack Greenburg: Well, I had it in mind that it would be a cool thing to do whenever he did become a billionaire, because it was like, it was almost like the realization of a prophecy. It's like, you know, in, in 2011, I sort of like, I'm telling you he's gonna be billionaire and he's telling you, you know, and it's like, okay, here it is.He's a billionaire, you know, and I actually wanted to get like a, gilded cover and do the kind of watch the throne type of thing and you know, like embossed gold and all that stuff. But, it's not the right era. I mean, like, you're saying, it's just not, it's that era anymore.So yeah, I did wonder, like, should I kind of like back off of that narrative. But, you know, to go back to the Jimmy Iovine Interscope conversation, it's like, whether it's good or bad, it starts a conversation and you want the conversation to start, so that people will read the book, you know? And it's not like, a bad thing for me if people think it's bad that Jay-Z's a billionaire, it's just a fact. And even since I put out the Billionaire edition, he's like, more than doubled his net worth, you know, again. So that's just, that's just how he operates. And, you know, that's Jay-Z. [00:52:34] Dan Runcie: Yeah, you had to put out something. So much had changed since when you first put that book out. And this is how, in many ways the. Business model of books works when there is something to be able to add, that's a refresher new forward based on this one. you had to do it. So, yeah. I think it made sense.But to bring this all full circle with Interscope in this conversation, the last thing we'll dive into is who is the biggest winner, artist, executive producer, so on from everything that has happened with Interscope in the past 33 years. [00:53:09] Zack Greenburg: Hmm. it's a great question. I mean, to me it's between Jimmy and Dre. but I would probably go with Jimmy because, you know, Dre was gonna be centimillionaire, you know, music legend no matter what. And although Jimmy had done a lot of great work, you know, in the rock world before then, and I'm sure, you know, was, very adequately compensated.You know, he wasn't sort of like a, an international business superstar in the way that he became as a result of, Interscope. And, you know, Jimmy and Dre both got a lot of money out of it. but I think Jimmy really got a lot more than he would've otherwise. in his, prior iteration of his career and Dre, you know, I mean, Dre has founded a bunch of things, right? And Interscope, you know, obviously he wasn't the founder of Interscope, but, you know, I kind of tied B to Interscope and that whole thing together. So it, Dre had lots of different paths to wealth. and so did Jimmy, but I think Dre had more, and, Jimmy kind of like ultimately got more out of it. [00:54:07] Dan Runcie: Yeah, I think between the two of them, even if Interscope had said no back in 92 or 91, whenever the initial deal was made, I do think that Dre would've likely found a home. Dre and Suge would've found a home. It's still been able to do something similar elsewhere. Maybe it would've made the Tupac thing a little bit more challenging, but I think they still would've figured that out too. [00:54:30] Zack Greenburg: Yeah. [00:54:31] Dan Runcie: I don't think the same would necessarily be true for Jimmy though, because if you don't have them, you don't have this. And a lot of this, I'm sure a lot of people listening to this unlikely watch the Defiant ones or maybe you've seen should do a few interviews. I don't know if a lot of that would work. But I think I'll actually take a different approach. I think the person that probably won the most, just from a situation perspective, I know we've talked about him a fair amount, but I'll say Janet with this one because he didn't build this company himself. But the fact that when it's your time to come up, you have this opportunity to be able to step into, you have this much leeway, this much assets that already work in your favor because we just know how valuable the bat catalogs are.You walk into that position and then that has you then. Then that just makes it much more easy for you to have things set up because we know how a lot of this stuff is, right? People leave record labels all the time, especially if there's an opportunity to go to that next level. And this was before streaming really broke out.So if it wasn't Interscope, it may have been one of the other opportunities that could have opened up. And for him to be able to take that and then continue things for the next decade and then prove that, to our point earlier, this isn't just a one trick pony. This was able to live beyond and in some ways, maybe even operated things a bit more efficiently than Jimmy did as well with some of the recklessness at points from spending too.I do think that there's a case to be made for Janet, in terms of how that's been able to help that career too.[00:56:00] Zack Greenburg: Yeah. Yeah, that's a good pick too. Although, I think probably if you're going in terms of wealth creation, Jimmy, [00:56:06] Dan Runcie: Jimmy, for sure. Yeah, a hundred [00:56:08] Zack Greenburg: you gotta give it to Jimmy. But point, taken, for sure. [00:56:11] Dan Runcie: Yeah. Well, good stuff. This one was fun. I feel like after this we definitely went on a few different tangents on beats about even one on Apple music. We didn't explore too deeply. And even some of the other record labels here, there's a lot we could dig back into with this one. But yeah, Keith, and though controversy can sell, but not in the same way it did in the nineties. [00:56:33] Zack Greenburg: Yeah, that, that's absolutely, absolutely, [00:56:36] Dan Runcie: Well, Zach been a pleasure to us all, man.[00:56:39] Zack Greenburg: Thanks, Dan. Have a good one.[00:56:41] Dan Runcie: You too, man.  

This week, I’m running back an interview with one of the most popular episodes we ever did with Matt Pincus from 2022. Matt Pincus is without question one of the most successful entrepreneurs in the music industry. He sold his independent music publishing company, SONGS, for $160 million five years ago. And now, the music holdings company he co-founded, MUSIC, just raised $200 million to invest in music and music-adjacent companies. Though, Matt doesn’t see MUSIC as an investment fund, but rather a holding company. That’s because he’s taking an operator role in the companies he funds. And unlike the splashy catalog acquisitions that’ve dominated the space over the past few years, Matt is looking forward with his investments and targeting brand-new growth opportunities instead.In particular, Matt sees big opportunities in the technology sector, web3, and even record labels and publishing. At SONGS, Matt was able to spot and develop up-and-coming songwriters, inking early deals with the likes of Diplo, Lorde, and The Weeknd. He’ll be tasked with finding similar success at MUSIC.  Matt and I dove deep into a wide-range of topics during our conversation. Here’s a few highlights of what we covered:[2:47] Why Matt created MUSIC[7:19] MUSIC’s investment thesis?[13:22] What Matt doesn’t like about the music business [19:36] Recent inflow of capital into the music business[20:54] Two lanes to entering music business[24:08] Finding left-of-center opportunities among musical talent [27:30] The structural problem of the music business[30:44] Continuity was key to SONGS success[35:59] The Weeknd as a business blueprint for other artists[36:53] Sync business opportunities [43:46] Have streaming subscriptions peaked?[48:12] Tiktok brought back music frequency[51:13] Matt’s five-year predictionsListen: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | SoundCloud | Stitcher | Overcast | Amazon | Google Podcasts | Pocket Casts | RSSHost: Dan Runcie, @RuncieDan, trapital.coGuests: Matt Pincus, @mpincSponsors:MoonPay is the leader in web3 infrastructure. They have partnered with Timbaland, Snoop Dogg, and many more. To learn more, visit moonpay.com/trapitalNewsly is your all-in-one audio super app to hear the trending topics on the entire web. Download newsly.me for free and use the promo code ‘TRAP’ to receive a 1-month free subscription.Enjoy this podcast? Rate and review the podcast here! ratethispodcast.com/trapitalTrapital is home for the business of hip-hop. Gain the latest insights from hip-hop’s biggest players by reading Trapital’s free weekly memo. TRANSCRIPT[00:00:00] Matt Pincus: Defensibility in the music business is not a patent or a technology or some special recipe you have someplace. It's your understanding of music, the people that make it, and then your ability to develop relationships with people around the business and to keep your reputation such that people want to be with you. But the real key in, at least in the music technology side of it is you need to be able to spin the technology yourself and understand really how it works. [00:00:37] Dan Runcie: Hey, welcome to The Trapital podcast. I'm your host and the founder of Trapital, Dan Runcie. This podcast is your place to gain insights from executives in music, media, entertainment, and more, who are taking hip-hop culture to the next level. [00:00:56] Dan Runcie: Today's episode is with one of the most successful music entrepreneurs of the past few decades. His name is Matt Pincus and he is the founder and CEO of MUSIC, which is a holding company that invests in music tech and music-adjacent companies. MUSIC just launched a 200 million fund to invest in this space, so Matt and I talked all about it. He's looking for companies that still have a clear understanding for how music gets made and understand the art behind it. He's also looking for startups that have a true defensible moat that is something unique that they can do. And he's also looking for the companies that have a huge total addressable market that can clearly grow and expand as we're seeing things continue to grow in this space. Our conversation covered a bunch of topics in this space. We talked about sync and the impact of that. We also talked about how much further streaming can go. And we talked about a bunch of insightful music trends. Really fascinating conversation. I feel like every few months we have one of those conversations where people reach out to me and say, Hey, I took a bunch of notes in that conversation. Thank you for this. And I have a good feeling, I have a good feeling that this is going to be one of those conversations. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did. Here's my chat with Matt Pincus. [00:02:16] Dan Runcie: All right. Today, we're joined by Matt Pincus, who is the founder of MUSIC, which is a holding company that invested music and music-adjacent companies. Matt, I'm really excited to have this conversation because you have had a very impressive career with what you did with Songs and everything that you had done in publishing specifically. And what always stuck out to me about you in this space is how you've identified opportunities where others didn't see them. So I know when I saw the announcement for MUSIC and the $200 million fund you launched, I said, okay, he's seeing something and he's seeing an opportunity to dive in. So what did you see? What made you want to get involved with this?[00:02:58] Matt Pincus: Well, first of all, thank you so much for having me. I'm a big admirer of Trapital and your work in general. And I'm really happy to be with you here today. So, you know, I started music, it was sort of an organic process. I sold Songs after running it for about 13 years. And it was a fairly abrupt end. So we decided to sell the company and neither me nor my two partners really wanted to run it for somebody else. So we decided that once we sold it, it was time to step away and it was fairly quick. So, you know, I ran the company for 12-plus years. And then 90 days after the sale, I was out in the street, like, what am I going to do with my life? So it was a bit of an organic process. It started with meeting a lot of really interesting founders of music businesses and companies that were around the music business. It's obviously an interesting time in our business in a number of different ways. The streaming market has matured. There are a lot of music tech businesses with interesting founders cropping up over the past four or five years. The web three crypto business has, you know, started the early days of really coming online. And the way that labels, publishing companies, management companies reach audiences is really different than it was like, you know, six, seven years ago. So I met a lot of really interesting people. The first one was Steve Martocci, who was the founder of Splice. He and I hit it off particularly well. And I sort of said, listen, I've been, you know, doing talent deals with young people, you know, in the early twenties for the past 12 years, I think maybe the next chapter is working with founders of companies that are more like 10 years younger than me, as opposed to, you know, 20, early 20s. And taking the experience that I had in the last, like, four or five years of songs when we were trying to figure out how to really realize returns on the business and build on that to try to help people do the same thing. So I was out looking for, you know, are there interesting companies that I might be able to work with in some way or another? And the answer to that quickly became kind of yes, on the music tech side originally, in growth companies, when online music and music technology was shifting to a subscription-based backbone as opposed to a packet software business. And then also on the music side of it, you know, interesting independent labels, music companies operating in a different way. And so the first thing was, are there interesting companies out there? The second is, do they need capital and where would they get it from? And the third was, how am I going to get the money to invest in these businesses? So it was kind of a bit of a bootstrapping exercise where I would go find an opportunity to invest in a company, put some of my own money in LionTree, which sold songs for me and has been a partner and champion of mine since I sold the company, would invest some money too, and then we'd find some other people to round out the investment. We did that first with Splice, put about 20 million into the company over a period of time. We also did in the same way, made an investment in a company called HIFI, which is a FinTech platform benefiting artists in a bunch of different ways, and also with DICE, the ticketing business. And you know, they started, a couple of them did well and actually, they all did well. And so I decided that I wanted to raise some capital and have my own sort of, it's not really a fund. It's more of a holding company 'cause I'm less of an investor and more of an operator. And so the question became, how are we going to raise the money? Now Aryeh Bourkoff who runs LionTree is somewhat of a magic maker, and he took me on and introduced me to two families, the Schusterman Family and JS Capital, which is Jonathan Soros's capital vehicle. And they agreed to invest in a four-way partnership. So it's between me, LionTree, Schusterman Family, and JS Capital. And we formed MUSIC, which is a $200 million holding company. We do deals in a couple of different areas, music tech, which is sort of where I spent most of my time after Songs. We also invest in independent music companies like Songs. So labels publishing companies, management companies. Increasingly, a few of those functions are in one company, as opposed to when I was running Songs, it was like you were either a publisher or a label or a management company. And then we partner sometimes with a larger private equity firm if we are interested in acquiring something that's, you know, of a larger size. And so we're in the middle of one of those right now. And so we were able to find a bunch of interesting opportunity, a bunch of interesting ways, and it seems to me to be, you know, a really good time to be putting money to work in the music business. [00:07:32] Dan Runcie: Yeah. It's an exciting time to be investing in these companies and to be acquiring them too. And you mentioned something there about the types of companies you're looking at and whether they are modern music companies or whether they are doing something that's unique in the space. Can you talk a little bit more about your investment thesis and what you're looking for, and specifically, because, as you mentioned, you're not a fund, you're a holding company, so you're not necessarily just doing, you know, angel investments or early stage. You're trying to make investments for the long haul. So how does that shape your strategy?[00:08:07] Matt Pincus: Very good question. And I think the answer to that depends somewhat on the different areas of investment. So the first is in the technology side of the business, which is kind of where I started as an investor. So, you look for a couple of things there. So first of all, you need to invest in companies, not products. So some of the music startups can be sort of, it's an interesting widget, but can it be a scalable business? So you need to make sure that you have a couple of things in order to know that you're investing in a company that has the ability to grow. So the first thing is you need your own tech stack and it needs to be built to suit whatever market you want to be in. So for example, with Splice, one of the reasons, and there were several, but one of the reasons I invested in the company was because Steve had built this subscription stack from day one of the company. So it was a native SaaS company in a world where the rest of the market needed to move from the old way of doing business to the new way of doing business. Splice was always in the new way of doing business, so it was going to be ahead of the curve. And so you need to make sure that your technical capabilities and your technical assets are going to, you know, be where you want to go. The second is that you need to make sure you're in a part of the market that has a big enough user base to make a real company out of it. You know, it's great to make a widget that, you know, 1500 people love, love, love, but 1500 people is not a lot of people. So you need to make sure that the addressable market around the business has a lot of users. And again, in Splice's case, you know, they are the content business in music tech. So they can be used in an infinite amount of applications across the business, which gives them, you know, a really solid user base. And so, you know, that's kind of the second thing. And the third thing is that you need to kind of own where you live or have the ability to own where you live. So, you know, it's great if you get into a category in the technology side of the business, that, you know, breaks some ground and shows everybody what can be done. But if then, you know, Apple or Google just says, thank you very much and does it instead of you, it's not so great. So you need to have a defensible business that you can build and scale. And again, back to Splice, you know, they are the content leader and I'm a music publisher by trade, so content is the water supply in the music business. You know, in publishing, it's the song that starts the whole conversation. Splice owns music. And so no matter where the market is going to grow, no matter where it ends up going, they have the supply that feeds the music tech business. And so it's inherently defensible when it gets up to a certain level. You know, at this point they have 3 million works in their database. To catch up to them is, you know, difficult, if not impossible. And so you need to be defensible now on the music side of what I do, which is investing in music companies, there's a couple of things I look for. So first of all, I don't do catalog acquisitions. I invest in people. So the first thing is that you need to have really talented executives that understand music and know how to find repertoire and make it bigger. I tend to like businesses that give advances to artists. There's a certain way, like at Songs, we built a catalog over a long period of time, but we built it through signing young writers and giving them advances. So I call it a mattress out of sheets. If you do that one after another, over many, many years and you do it well, all of a sudden you wake up, you know, 7 to 10, 12 years later, and you're like, holy shit, it's a big catalog. And so I tend to like businesses that advance money to artists and build catalog that way or manage catalog that way. There's a certain magic to understanding how to compensate artists and doing it fairly. So I tend to look at that. You know, the music business has changed a lot. It used to be that if you wanted to be an independent, you needed to own your own vertical. And you know, at Songs, we had our global administration business that we owned and built. We had our own technology. So we were self-contained, standalone competitor. Now I think, you know, solutions have become available everywhere. There's a lot of good publishing administration, a lot of good record distribution solutions. There's a lot of off-the-shelf stuff you can get. It's really about music. It's really about understanding artists and the music that they make and connecting them with an audience. So I look for people who uniquely understand that. Now that can be, you know, somebody who has a geographical lock on a particular kind of music. It can be somebody that has a particularly unique understanding of how the studio works because I think if there's one big change in the music publishing business lately, it's that it's gone really back to the studio. And the interesting companies are actually making songs in real-time in a studio environment. So it can be that. It can be that you have another business that you do and music is associated with it. So why not, you know, get into the music business while you're doing whatever else you do, but you need to have some reason why you have access to a particular group of artists in a particular kind of repertoire, and you're helpful to that in some way or another. And so it's quite a different set of things that I look for on that side than on the technology side. [00:13:34] Dan Runcie: And with the way that your firm is structured, too, I see parallels with the types of companies you're looking at, right? You're not just focused on one particular type of investment area. You have the music tech companies that you're looking at. Splice is an example. You also have the companies that are working more directly in music itself, whether that is giving advances or companies that have a unique edge on who they're reaching. And I think that translates as well when you're talking about the types of companies you're looking at because a lot of times, especially 10, 15 years ago, as you mentioned, there were more silos and now you're starting to see companies have different types of roles that they do or different divisions to try to be this nebulous term that I've heard several times as broader entertainment company. And while I think that that's effective, I could also see how that could challenge some of the challenges of being able to have a business that is defensible or having a moat and the focus that comes with that. So how do you balance that and what are the things that you look for when evaluating companies that are both trying to do it all, but also are trying to have something that they can be defensible with? [00:14:40] Matt Pincus: Well, so on the music side of it, you know, it's about relationships. You know, the good companies, their equity is their relationships with different people around the business. And it's really a human-centric business. So, you know, defensibility often is correlated with reputation in the independent music business, at least. That was certainly true of Songs. One of the big success factors of the company and in fact, like, kind of our asset was that me and Ron and Carianne had really good relationships around the business that we built over many years, and that allowed us to punch above our weight class. You know, when we were a very small business, you know, we acted as a bigger business because we were able to get champions that helped us along the way, both in terms of the artists that were willing to sign with us, but also in terms of, you know, other people around the business that took us on and helped us out. Oddly enough defensibility in the music business is not a patent or a technology or some special recipe you have someplace. It's your understanding of music, the people that make it, and then your ability to develop relationships with people around the business and to keep your reputation such that people want to be with you. You know, on the tech side of it, it's a little bit different. You have to make sure that your innovation curve is constantly there. You have to make sure, like, I would not invest in a business that did not have a technical co-founder. You know, ideas are great. Everybody's got ideas. You know, there's an app for anything. But the real key in, at least in the music technology side of it is you need to be able to spin the technology yourself and understand really how it works, which when you get into the crypto side of it's really interesting 'cause a lot of people understand the implications of it, but they have no idea how the shit works. They don't actually use it. And they get kind of confused thinking that it's much more complicated than in fact it really is. Or, you know, they get so fascinated with the technology that they don't make a product that stands on its own bottom and has value to the end user. So it's a little bit different in the different areas of the market that you look at. And one of the reasons why I like the field that I play on and I feel very lucky to be able to do the different things that I can do with music is because some of it is about sort of analytical, scalable technology-oriented investments. And some of it is just about people in tunes. And so you're kind of mixing a lot of different things together. You know, the one thing that I don't like so much about the recent music business is somehow we all slipped into talking about music as assets and fractional finance and cash flows and securitization. And I'm like, listen, if I wanted to do all that shit, I do it not here. You know, the music business is not assets and finance and cash flows and, you know, securitization. The music business is moving people, motivating people, creating an audience, assembling humans to want what you make, and distributing that and delivering it and all the rest of that stuff. You know, the fact like, listen, what I'm doing is either really smart or really dumb because either you can make a real investment business just out of the music business. And I think you can because there's lots of different types of investments in music and there's lots of growth and lots of possibility. But also, you know, it's a pretty small business. And I live in, play, you know, a neighborhood, the size of a postage stamp. We'll see if they can be done, but I think originally, you know, it starts with the creative and it starts with the means of delivering the creative to the people that want it. And then all of the rest of this stuff, you know, yield, debt payments, multiples on equity, bonds, all the rest of this stuff just is a happy accident that comes from doing your job well.[00:18:35] Dan Runcie: I'm glad you mentioned this because there's a version of what you do that could easily look more like a traditional private equity firm, where they are just going in and doing all of the things that you just mentioned and they're coming more from that perspective, but in many ways, your defense is having this laser focus on music, but you're going deep within all of the areas that it encompasses. And with that, I have to assume that this also maybe has a bit of a flavor on what your take is about the money that has come into the music industry and some of those other non-music companies or those that are purely looking at it for the financial opportunity or for the noncorrelated opportunities and how that in a lot of ways, even though on paper, someone that's fundraising may see the money they can get from you versus the money they get from others. But I'm hearing it from the record labels. And especially the independent ones they're getting reached out to all the time now about acquisitions. And a lot of those calls are coming from non-music related companies that are trying to make those moves. So it's been fascinating to see how that shapes, but I do feel like you are going about this in a much more unique way than a lot of them are.[00:19:49] Matt Pincus: Well, thank you. I really appreciate that. I will say that the recent, like, huge inflow of capital into the music business has one very good byproduct, which is it's giving a lot of money to songwriters and artists. Some of these catalogs getting valued at 20 times, 30 times, you know, NPS where they would've been valued at 10, you know, four or five years ago, maybe 10 years ago. It just results in people that make great music, making a bunch of bucks. And there's nothing at all wrong with that. On the catalog side of it, it makes a little bit more sense that some of these like larger capital vehicles are coming into the market and, you know, bidding things up and structuring the leverage in a certain way that makes sense. There's a big difference between what's going on now and what was going on when this first happened, like in 2006, 2007 timeframe because the people that are doing it now can afford it. They've got lots and lots of money. They don't need big returns on that money. They have the ability to structure this stuff financially in ways that don't make no sense. And so it makes, you know, more sense that people are doing that with the IP catalog acquisition business. When it gets to new music, you know, I think it's still a human business. I think you got to know the people, you know, and you have to understand how it's really about managing what I refer to as the working capital of the business. So, you know, you need to advance money, you need to collect that money, you need to reinvest the money. And so a lot of that, you know, it's not a big enough business that you can structure it like a bunch of bonds. You need to kind of understand the market that you're in, how many deals you could possibly get, and what about you ought to pay for them, and what kind of infrastructure you need to address all of that to do a good job. And that's hard to know from outside of the business. It's even hard to know, like there's sort of two lanes in the music business. There's people who came up through the building where they started at majors and they kind of built their career, you know, up from coordinator to director to senior director to VPs, SVP, EVP. And then they end up running the company, a lot of great people who came up that way. And then there's people who kind of feed in the wild. Like, come outside of the building and need to figure out, like, what's available. And there's some real differences, you know. Sometimes they cross over like Ron Perry who was an instrumental person at Songs from, you know, the very beginning to through time we sold and now runs Columbia. So sometimes that happens. Or Carianne who, you know, also was my partner at Songs who now runs Warner Chappell with Guy Moot. It's like there, you know, it happens, but there are really two lanes. And I think in the independent side, it's a lot about systematic A&R so about looking at, listen, none of us are overfunded with tons of money. So, you know, everybody's stretching the dough. And it becomes about how can I build this system in the world that I live that can do deals inexpensively, and then find the ones that are working and invest and push them forward. And all the great independent music companies, you know, Chrysalis, Jive Zomba, A&M Rondor, all the great ones throughout history sort of did that really effectively or were usually like the other ones. So everybody goes to the majors to get their offer. And then there's these other cooler guys that are there, like, you know, kind of fucking with the majors by picking off all the left to center stuff that was us at Songs. You know, and all those other companies I just mentioned were kind of some version of that. But there's kind of, all of these mechanics that come both from history, so understanding the history of the business, but also understanding the people and how they sort of work 'cause as much as the world is changing and it's changing a lot, it's still kind of about A&R. It's still about creative in some way or another. I mean, Carianne's superpower, which she's got many, but the original superpower was understanding not only what works well to picture, but the people that choose music in film and television, advertisements, video games, she's particularly uniquely talented at that. And that's still a core skill that people need to understand. So, you know, I'm the guy that kind of pulls the pieces together. I don't do any of those things. I, you know, originally hired some great people and now I try to invest in great people that do all that stuff, but it's still about understanding it and if you're coming purely from the outside, I think it's challenging.[00:24:22] Dan Runcie: Yeah. And I think your career experience speaks a lot to this, right? You mentioned being able to find the left-of-center opportunities when you're at Songs, whether it was Lorde or The Weeknd. And you saw how those turned out. It worked out brilliantly. I'm curious to hear what you think about the way things are right now because, especially with the way that TikTok is and so many of the companies, whether it's the major labels or the independents, they all have access to the same information. So the cost of acquiring and being able to find and develop those same artists is much more expensive. So what do you think those left-of-center opportunities look like today in the current environment where it feels as if there are more and more outlets to find different types of people, but the way that people are going about it, it does seem like a lot of people are now playing a pretty similar game.[00:25:13] Matt Pincus: You mean like a moneyball...[00:25:15] Dan Runcie: Yeah. [00:25:15] Matt Pincus: ...type of, yeah. So, you know, again, I go back to like, there's sort of in the building and there's outside of the building way of thinking. So in the major system, it makes logical sense that they want to sort of hang back, see what reacts, and go and get it when it reacts, the more predictable something is the more you're willing to pay for it. That makes logical sense. There's nothing wrong with it. They're not idiots for doing that. It's just the way that they traditionally operate. And now it's about, like, seeing the shiny pennies and then grabbing them right away, whatever the cost, because music is much more efficient than it used to be. It used to be that you'd have to, like, release a whole album and sink a bunch of capital into seeing if something works. Now you can kind of tell pretty quickly if something's going to work. So it makes sense to pay a lot for something predictable, as opposed to, you know, paying a little bit for stuff that is wildly uncertain. So, you know, that makes total sense. I think on the independent side, and I really count in that like A&R mentality, like people who are finding artists and developing artists. So it's not just like, you know, independent labels, but it's also like, you know, Electric Feel is a really interesting company that does this, Hallwood. You know, APG is obviously the really great example of this, of finding artists really early and developing them into something or representing people who do that. A lot of, you know, that is about iteration and about understanding, you know, what makes a good story in a particular market. Now, part of that is the music itself. Part of that, most of it is the music itself, but part of that is also all the other stuff around it. You know, how you unfold the narrative, how you stage market entry for an artist. You know, all of those things, again, I come back to the stick to your knitting thing where it's like, as much as the world changes, it kind of remains the same to some degree. So, you know, the interesting and frustrating thing about the music business for people that run companies like I did at Songs is that there's just not that many good, really good, talented people, you know. If there's one structural problem in the music business is there's not enough, really good A&R people, promotion people, you know, creative people. [00:27:29] Dan Runcie: And why do you think that is?[00:27:30] Matt Pincus: I think it's hard, for one, I think it's hard. And as much as people try to play moneyball, now I'm a big believer in systematic A&R, which some people would consider, you know, moneyball. So in other words, like having a funnel that gives you a group of things that might work, that I'm a big believer in that as a starting point, but that only gets you like 51% confidence. That's not much more than a coin toss. The rest of it is really doing the work of developing the product itself, the music itself, and then the story around it. And it's just a hard business, plus you got to know everybody, you know. So it takes a while to develop those relationships and those skills. One of the things that's interesting when I look on the music tech side of it that I think is one of the great things is that the technological development in music production is allowing people to learn how to use the gear quicker. So you're going to have hit singles coming from 13-year-olds within no time at all. And that used to not be possible because it would take you four or five, six years just to learn how to twist the knobs on a board. Like, it was hard. Now with like, you know, presets, with things like Splice, with AI-assisted creation, you know, anything that makes it easier for an artist to get what's inside of them out, the learning curve is becoming less steep. And that's a good thing because talent shines in that environment. You know, it's one thing to be able to, you know, have a knowledge-base to tweak things. It's another thing to just be a talented and expressive artist with urgency. And so maybe some of that will happen. And on the executive side, like on the A&R side, as things like radio, you know, radio's been so monolithic and so hard to penetrate. And now maybe it's loosening up a little bit, but it still takes a while to figure out what's going to work. It's very hard. And it is one thing to be a fan and be like, this is good, this is not good. It's another thing to take a look at something that doesn't yet exist and be like, this is what it will look like if we can pull it off. I don't have that talent, you know. I'm not an A&R person, but I watch people do it and it's pretty miraculous. And it's not just A&R, it's also promotion, which is an undervalued piece of the equation and increasingly, marketing, digital marketing, like the first cut of it was just, you know, sort of advertising on Facebook. Now it's much more sophisticated than that. And so I feel like it's just hard and I wish there were, you know, there's also the part of the problem in the music business is nobody trains anybody. There's no HR infrastructure. You know, I went to Columbia Business School and I had been in the music business. I didn't have one single meeting about a job that came through the school. [00:30:14] Dan Runcie: I'm not surprised. That wasn't the case for me either. [00:30:17] Matt Pincus:  That’s what I'm saying like, nobody trained you. I mean, I remember going on a job interview when I was like 21 coming right out of college or 23 coming right out of college with a guy at ICM. And he said, what do you want to do? I said, I want to be an A&R .He said, great, find a band. That was it. That was the interview. And so it's like, it's that kind of business, which is kind of wonderful in its own way, but it doesn't train people really. And so that's also part of the reason. We don't develop our talent, executive talent pipeline in a really great way.  And that's why people like, you know, Mike Caren at APG is so special. You know, the LVRN guys are so special because they bring along executives in a really concerted kind of way. And I wish there was more of that in the business in general. [00:30:58] Dan Runcie: Yeah, I think that's a huge opportunity for it. And I think you see a lot of it play out when there are executive shake ups and who gets picked for certain things and why people get picked for certain things. And to some extent, you see this in other places too, whether there's a mix of internal hires versus external. But one thing that I have noticed is the units that do tend to stick together, or there is some continuity there. You do see a lot of success happen if they understand what works, everyone's into it. And I think some of these other places where it could be a bit of revolving doors with who's in leadership, who's trying to get where it's very tough to have that infrastructure. [00:31:35] Matt Pincus: And that was one of the great blessings for me at Songs, which is not, doesn't speak well for the industry, particularly, but, you know, Ron and Carianne were two of the most talented people of their generation for sure. And the business didn't know what to do with them. The fact that I could get the two of them and we could all stay together for 12 years and build a company is like a miracle. And that was a big part of the reason why it all worked is because we knew each other really well and people knew us as a unit. We had different things we did. It's a little bit like, you know, kind of what's going on with the professional sports a little bit too, is, you know, it's great that all these individual players are celebrities. And again, great that athletes are making more money, but great teams don't stay together in the same way that they did before. And I think that's changing a little bit now because you don't have to do a deal with a major and get your money the traditional way in order to build a company. And that's one of the reasons I exist as MUSIC, is because there's opportunities to bring outside capital into the business under terms that look a little bit more like sort of venture capital or private equity, which is in a way more fair than the traditional music business has been on a per transaction basis. There's natural reasons why the major music companies finance the music business for as many decades as they did, and it's not to rip people off, it's because nobody else would do it. But now it's a different world and so hopefully some of these things will change. You know, when you have really great entrepreneurs that own their own business, as opposed to, you know, in some JV with a major that's really a compensation agreement, then it's in their interest, like it was in mine when I was running Songs, to bring along really talented people and find new ones. And so that's one of the things that I've sort of hoped for in some way. [00:33:24] Dan Runcie: Are there any artists that stick out to you as examples of yes, they're building their business and they're doing this the way that could be a blueprint for what we'll see more frequently moving forward?[00:33:34] Matt Pincus: Ones that I talk about all the time is The Weeknd, which we were involved with, you know, from fairly early on. And Sal who's, you know, has been his manager for a very long time, and Cash. You know, I think you're going to see what they did with XO happening in a lot of different ways going forward, where you get a group of people that form a partner and distribute responsibilities between artist, manager. You know, there's people like La Mar Taylor involved with those guys that does all the visual. There's a lot of cooks that need to be in the kitchen to make something really successfully work. The label model of sign to a label, they'll do everything that existed in, like, the nineties is way long gone. Even management where you sort of have somebody who's a commission person that's just doing the business of an artist, that's not true of the good ones anymore. The good ones get in it with the artist and really help them build an entrepreneurial life. I mean, to be an artist now, you need to, like, be like a 140-character joke writer. You need to be an accountant. You need to have a corporate entity. You need to deal with all these different vendors. And you need to be like, you know, P. T. Barnum, like, step right up, step right up, check this out, you're going to love it. It's a complex skill set. And so I think one of the things that you're going to see in the talent representation business, like the management business is I think you're going to see more entity partnership formation, where people are going to go into partnership together. Managers and artists will be like Sal, Sal and Abel have been together for, how long now? Like, I mean...[00:35:08] Dan Runcie: It's at least a decade, right?[00:35:09] Matt Pincus: Yeah. And they've been able to scale and grow and make a lot of money and still be together. And that's because everyone provides value. I'm sure they adjust their relationship, however, over time, I don't know. But I think you're going to see that approach because it takes a village in a way to make really durable stuff. I mean, if you're talking about a viral hit that's here today, gone today. That's one thing. But if you're talking about really building a franchise over a period of time, it requires a lot of work from a lot of people. So I think you'll see sort of, you know, entity formation with partners that include business people and artists in with interest aligned. You know, Diplo's another one. I mean, you know, TMWRK and Diplo have been together for again, going back to since I started working with them. So that was 2011, you know? You look at firms like CRUSH, Jonathan, Daniel has built franchise after franchise of artists that stay with him forever. And he works with him as a partner and that's why it works. So I think you're going to see more of that going forward and and I think that's a good thing.[00:36:13] Dan Runcie: Yeah, definitely. The Weeknd's a very good example because even from the origins of his career, you could see the mentality of where he saw things. Drake famously offered him the opportunity to come on OVO Sound. They had the whole Toronto connection, Drake put him onto that blog post and everything, but then he was like, no, I don't want to be under another artist when I think I can be just as big as that artist, even bigger and do my own thing and look what he's been able to do now. So I think a lot of it...[00:36:41] Matt Pincus: And by the way, the record deal is a distribution deal. [00:36:43] Dan Runcie: Right. [00:36:44] Matt Pincus: You know, I mean, there you go. And so in terms of distribution of value, you know, if you can do it, if you're smart enough to have a cool head and plan like those guys did, you know, you can have a much larger enterprise than you normally would. So I hold them up as an example of, you know, what I think is going to happen and is happening really in lots of different areas of the business now.[00:37:07] Dan Runcie: One of the other areas that has gotten a bunch of attention right now has been syncs, and this has been growing, I think, especially given what we've seen with people, especially from outside the music industry, trying to get more involved, but especially this past summer with Kate Bush being featured in Stranger Things. This conversation has been happening more and more. This is another example where it's a mix of that art and science of what does finding a good sync looks like and what happens with it. And I think so much of it, there's maybe a little bit of luck with just how the internet works and how things take off, but there's also a good amount of work that's put into finding the right type of placement for the right type of artists that could make all those things work to make it happen. So how do you view the opportunities for sync right now? [00:37:53] Matt Pincus: You know, it's interesting. I was sort of a student of Carianne. She taught me the sync business. I literally remember she had a binder where she kept every single interaction she ever had around a song and a placement. And she not only showed me how it all worked, but then we made a software platform out of her own process of how she did it. So I was trained by the best. One of the interesting things about sync is how it always comes back in cycles. You know, when we started Songs, it was like 2004, sync was the whole game. Like, between 2006 and sort of 2009 timeframe, it was the most important thing in a pitch. You know, it was responsible for a lot of our really early successes. And then when it became a largely pop business there in the early days of streaming, it was like sort of radio and super reactive and viral repertoire. It sort of stepped to the background for a minute. And now with the way that kids are bouncing around on a playlist from like, you know, Taylor to like a hip-hop track to, you know, Kate Bush back to Metallica and they don't care. It's become all of a sudden, perhaps one of the top, most important ways repertoire gets discovered now. It's amazing the enduring power of synchronization over time. The thing about sync that I think is interesting is part of it is selection. Like, is this song going to work to picture? But there's a lot that goes into making the deal happen. I mean, that Kate Bush deal as my understanding, I was not involved, but my understanding from, like, just hearing about it was that it took 'em forever to get the clearance done. So a lot of it is not only just is this going to work the picture? Is it the right BPM, the right mood, you know, the right tonality, the right cultural notes, which is a very special thing that music supervisors are particularly good at, but it's also the real politic of like getting the fucking thing cleared. And one of the things that I look at, I tend to have thesis sort of areas when I look at investing in the music business, and one of them is just how fuck the sync business is. That, you know, there should be a buy it now button in the music business if you want to use something for your film, buy it now. And if it was easy, people would pay more. But the problem is they have to roll around a glass to clear a copyright, getting the same deal with 13 songwriters and the master side and it's horribly inefficient. So I think part of the interesting thing with sync in the next generation is how do we do right by the music by making it more usable. Because there's also a couple of different ways this sync business cuts. So, you know, you have stuff that's used in a more traditional sense, and that has a real, like the standard pairing of like, it matter, it makes a huge creative difference and it's very hand selected. Front title and title, you know, big placement in a film television advertisement, but then you have this huge blanket sync business where a lot of the new promotion platform are AV platforms. It's technically synchronization, TikTok, YouTube, you know, Instagram it's technically sync. And I would argue that if there's one element of the business that gives radio a run for its money, it's AV platforms because what happens is people use it in so many videos that you end up hearing the song a thousand times, however many times it takes for you to be like, oh, my God, I have to hear it again. That's really the only place it happens and that's sync. There's a couple of different ways it cuts. You know, the great, like, placements of all time, and we had quite a few of them at Songs that sort of are like, you know, really make a song and make a film. Those are works of art. But also a lot of handling everything else is like maybe 50, 50 at best creative to handling. And so a lot of it is understanding, having those relationships, understanding how to price things, understanding how to clear repertoire, getting permission from the artist to do it. There's a lot of process that goes into it.[00:41:49] Dan Runcie: Is there a sync from your days that song that you look back on that you were like, yeah, that's the one. It took some work, but looking back that's the one. [00:41:56] Matt Pincus: Wow. That's really, that be would a really better question for Carianne than for me. In terms of like the stuff that really made a difference to us as a business, one of the things that I think was meaningful was when Lorde did the Hunger Games soundtrack in the follow-up movie. That gave us a really good look at how music can be a content element in overall entertainment. The Weeknd did a similar thing with Black Panther where, so it was those sort of tie-in, you know, big-ticket where our music was woven into the substance of the film or the ad in some cases. That I think are really the special moments. Those are two that pop out. There's always like the random one where you have a relatively smaller artist and you get them a sync and, you know, it changes their life. It gives 'em more money than they ever thought was possible. There's also the ones, we had an artist who had a very high level of ethic and I won't name the artist, but independent artist, good earnings, but not a pop artist. And we got a $90,000 ad and for very good ethical reasons, he said, fuck, no, it's not going to happen, not going to approve it. And as much as I was like, it was to do early days of the company, it would've made a huge difference to write 90 grand into my books in a quarter. There's some beauty in the level of control that artists have over their own work in the music business that they don't in a lot of other media that I was like, you know what good for him, I guess we're saying no. There's this artisanal component to it that's really special.[00:43:32] Dan Runcie: Yeah. Being able to have that power and knowing when it isn't right. I've heard similar things as well from other podcasters I'll talk to when they get pitched with certain deals and stuff, and they'll be like, you know what, that's just not a product I'm willing to do, or that's just not an endorsement I'm willing to have. And it could have been a game changer for them and their business and everything. But I think we're going to see more of this with creators as they just are leveraging their own independence and being able to make their own decisions. [00:43:59] Matt Pincus: Yeah, exactly. [00:44:00] Dan Runcie: Yeah.[00:44:00] Matt Pincus: Exactly. [00:44:01] Dan Runcie: I want to close this conversation out talking about streaming 'cause I know this is a topic that you've shared a number of insights on over the years. And one of the things that you've said before that has always stuck out to me and resonated is this path that streaming has been on where it has been growing year over year, but a lot of people, especially in recent months, have started to question how many more subscribers out there are willing to pay the full price for streaming services and even if there is growth in some of these other regions where the revenue coming in is only a fraction of what it currently is now, what does that growth necessarily look like? So I hear that there's two camps there. Some people are skeptical about the future, but others are looking at smartphone adoption and just the way that things are trending as an indicator of where things are going. But how do you view the opportunity and especially streaming's growth from here on out. [00:44:55] Matt Pincus: Okay. So I think there's a couple of different things there. You know, one is just on-demand streaming and what the growth curve looks like for on-demand stream. I think the broader question is what does overall growth look like for music consumption going forward? And I'm not sure those are totally the same thing. So, you know, listen, Spotify's done an epic job growing that business. It's a difficult business from just the word go, you know, you're relying on content licenses, you're inherently undifferentiated. Like on paper, it looks like this is impossible. And yet they build an unbelievable business out of it. And I really, you know, sort of think it's worth, you know, whatever opinions people have about streaming, to take a step back and realize that the people who did this originally, you know, Larry Jackson and Apple Music, the people who did it originally did a really fucking tremendous job of making it work. It will mature. There's some debate over whether it may have already started to mature in some distinct ways in Western, you know, sort of developed economies and even maybe in some of the larger sort of secondary territories. The really interesting places that we used to see at Songs in our own data are high population, low discretionary income countries, Indonesia, Philippines, a lot of the African continent. I'm not sure it's necessarily in all of those places going to be an on-demand streaming function that, you know, ultimately wins the day. There are people fucking with a model in a bunch of different ways over mobile. Boomplay in Africa is doing a buyout model. You know, it can be woven with other kinds of entertainment in a bundle in a bunch of different ways. So the question of where on-demand streaming goes, it is a little bit like anyone's guess, but there are different opinions between reasonable people about how the growth curve looks. You know, one of the things that I really love about the web three thing, and I think it's in the early days of really grinding the gears to figure out what actually works, 'cause like this sort of, you know, sucking on the laughing gas tank and you know, watching your crypto go up or over now. So it's entering into like a moment where people actually like have to figure out how it works. But the thing that I think is true is that it's unlocked a premium, that people are willing to pay over the cost of consuming music permanently. How big that premium is, we'll see. I think it was overinflated and inorganic in some of the early times of crypto, not a lot, humans are doing it and they're doing it for high ticket prices, you know, but if you look at some of the stuff, for example, that's going on in Asia, where people are throwing money at artists they like just because they want to you know, people paying sort of eye of the beholder price to be associated with an artist that they feel strongly about, that they love early in their career. Like, that's not going away. So whether, you know, the subscription fatigue is a reality, whether effective penny rates, times units of consumption are going up, flattening, going down. You know, we'll see. I mean, the Goldman Sachs people think they're going to go up forever. I'm not sure I totally agree with that. But what is true is that the willingness of people to invest in artists they love is increasing. And I don't think that's going back to zero, so it may not be, you know, that subgrowth continues on forever and on-demand streaming, but it may be that there are other ways that people can figure out how to engage with artists that keep the value, you know, exchange going up. Now, the one thing about streaming that's interesting is that, you know, the TikTok thing, in ways that people, like, talk shit about it all the time, whatever, but the thing that's interesting is that it did introduce frequency back into the equation. And one of the things about music that's unique is that you need to hear a song a number of times before you like it. Like at first you're like, I hate that. And then you hear it like five times and you're like, maybe I want to hear it again. And then by like, whatever end time you hear it, you're like, I can't get it out of my head. I got to hear it. It's like, Barry Weiss used to call it a record finding its bottom, where it would kind of come out and people would spin it, and then it would drop and then at some level would start to rise again. That's a function of promotion. That's a function of frequency. And in the early YouTube time and on-demand streaming time, you didn't really have that. Like, the people couldn't make something frequently play. And the AV platforms, not only TikTok, but also Snap and Instagram changed that equation and that music needs that. The thing that I'm wondering where it will happen, where it will come back into the equation though, is the music press, which has largely disappeared. And so I'm looking for who, on a consumer level there, people like yourself covering the business, part of it, that are doing an extraordinary job, but who sort of tells people what's good, gets it in front of them, filters it and what does that look like? It's probably not printed on a page. It's probably, it's sort of associated, I think in some way with what's going on with the NFT world, you know, with getting people to buy in, getting a community of people bought to projects, but it's still that same mechanism of filtering. And so I'm wondering where that's one of my thesis areas that I have my on. Where's the next one of those? [00:50:08] Dan Runcie: Yeah, I think this is a role that, of course, MTV and so many other places own and were able to do so well decades ago. And now the commonality I've always referred back to is that TikTok in many ways is the new MTV, but it's more so in the broader sense of just the cultural appeal, but not in that solo aspect of yes, if you want to know what this group of people are pushing, or what is the thing that's in, this is the place to go to find that. And I think it's very tough, the way that things are right now, just with how fragmented things are. But people are always going to want to feel like they're part of what's in or feel like they know what's in that desire also isn't going away. So I think there were always be a space for this, no matter how fragmented.[00:50:53] Matt Pincus: And people don't always know what they like. I mean, who knew that all these people love Kate Bush? [00:50:58] Dan Runcie: Right. [00:50:58] Matt Pincus: We all understand why. She's amazing. Song's amazing, but people don't always know what they like until somebody shows it to them and repeats it. And then all of a sudden they can't get it out of their head. And that's the magic of music. So how that happens, you know, the cool kids like it up from the bottom, you know, like to be selective, know about the stuff first. The general audience likes to hear things multiple times and then, you know, be addicted to it. And I think that those things will reinvent themselves in a bunch of different ways going forward. [00:51:27] Dan Runcie: For sure, Matt, before we let you go, do you have one big prediction for us on where you may see things in the next five years or one thing that you think will change from where music is right now to where things will be come 2027?[00:51:40] Matt Pincus: Well, I think as I touched on before, I think younger and younger people are going to be making music that the world reacts. And that is going to be miraculous when it happens. And not necessarily in like a sort of criss-cross Whip / Nae Nae type of way, but in a real, like expressing the core thoughts and feelings they have and getting them out there in a way that sounds good to the world. I think that's going to happen in a bunch of different ways. I think the way that repertoire moves across the planet is going to be revolutionary in the next five years. If there's one thing that's really going to change, you know, it used to be that sort of music went west to east and technology went east to west. Now, I think that's all scrambled eggs right now. If you look at stuff, like, you know, some of the music that's coming out of West Africa right now and how it gets into the global culture. It's not like in a, you know, used to be like you had like a world music business. Like, that's ripped up and thrown away. And so I think, you know, the way that the in-country community relates to the diaspora community in around the globe is going to be really different. You know, I think if there's one thing I have my eye on, it's sort of how all that stuff travels. And obviously, there's some obvious examples like BTS. But I think this is going to happen anywhere and everywhere. And one of the things that I heard somebody say the other day that I felt was really interesting is that the music business thinks about countries in its marketing. You know, they've Europe and Asia and Australia, Canada, US. It should be cities because music is about scenes and it's going to travel that way. And so your Amsterdam strategy is going to be different from your Seoul strategy is going to be different from your São Paulo strategy. And so if there's one like broad thing, I think we're going to look at the way that music travels around the planet in a completely different way. [00:53:37] Dan Runcie: That's spot on. Look at the way we think about music here in the US. That should be an indication of how it should be looked at elsewhere, right? We know what Atlanta hip-hop sounds like compared to what you may hear in LA or even the New Orleans bounce sound. Like, it's so different place to place. So you look at a country like Nigeria, which is soon going to eclipse the US in population. What you may hear in Lagos would be completely different from other parts of the country. So that's a really great point. [00:54:05] Matt Pincus: Yeah. So that would be like, if I, you know, sort of, if I had to obsess about something, it would be that. [00:54:10] Dan Runcie: And I think a lot of people listening probably will too. This is a good one. I think that you got a bunch of notes for people to jot down. So Matt, thank you for making the time for this. This is fun. Thanks for coming on. [00:54:21] Matt Pincus: Thank you so much. I just really appreciate your thinking to me. And it's a pleasure to talk to you about all this stuff.[00:54:27] Dan Runcie: If you enjoyed this podcast, go ahead and share it with a friend. Copy the link, text it to a friend, post it in your group chat, post it in your Slack groups, wherever you and your people talk, spread the word. That's how Trapital continues to grow and continues to reach the right people. And while you're at it, if you use Apple podcast, go ahead, rate the podcast. Give it a high rating and leave a review. Tell people why you liked the podcast. That helps more people discover the show. Thank you in advance. Talk to you next week.

The first weekend of Coachella is here: Bad Bunny, BLACKPINK, and Frank Ocean will headline for 2023. Coachella is expected to gross well over $100 million with over 100,000+ attendees per day.In this episode, broke it all down withMIDiA Research’s Tati Cirisano. Coachella started in 1999 as a niche festival for indie rock and quickly morphed into the biggest brand-name festival in the United States. These days, the Coachella brand is big enough to sell the experience itself, regardless of who’s performing — a rarity in the festival business.  Tati and I discuss why that is, the implications, and what the future of Coachella could hold. Here’s what we hit on:[1:20] Coachella’s brand sells itself[2:19] Festival’s origin story[7:09] Advantages and disadvantages of performing at Coachella[9:09] Success by the numbers[11:28] Coachella bump for brands, influencers, and local economy[16:38] Untapped opportunities for future Coachellas[22:02] How individual music show prices influence festival attendance[24:22] Artists that are above playing Coachella[27:08] The festival that’s the antithesis of Coachella [31:10] Festival lineups becoming homogeneous [39:36] Predicting Coachella’s 2024 headlinersListen: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | SoundCloud | Stitcher | Overcast | Amazon | Google Podcasts | Pocket Casts | RSSHost: Dan Runcie, @RuncieDan, trapital.coGuests: Tati Cirisano, @tatianacirisanoEnjoy this podcast? Rate and review the podcast here! ratethispodcast.com/trapitalTrapital is home for the business of music, media and culture. Learn more by reading Trapital’s free memo.TRANSCRIPT[00:00:00] Tati Cirisano: Being a performer at Coachella has become almost like a badge of honor or like something that goes on your one sheet, you know what I mean? Like, it's something that like gives you leverage as an artist and also is just, I don't know, seen as like it has a certain level of prestige.Like I would compare headlining at Coachella to like, in the same way that a lot of artists would love to get like a rolling stone or a billboard cover, even if like, regardless of whether that's selling or regardless of what that does, just that as a concept has, is just something that's like on a bucket list for most artists.I feel like headlining Coachella, if you're someone who's trying to be a superstar, that's like a bucket list item too. So yeah, it's, interesting How entrenched this festival has become in the music industry when you really think about it.[00:00:43] Dan Runcie Intro: Hey, welcome to the Trapital Podcast. I'm your host and the founder of Trapital, Dan Runcie. This podcast is your place to gain insights from executives in music, media, entertainment, and more who are taking hip hop culture to the next level.[00:01:25] Dan Runcie Guest Intro: Today's episode is about the business behind Coachella and the unofficial start to music festival season in 2023. Coachella's history is pretty impressive when you think about it. This festival started in 1999. It was announced the week after Woodstock 99, and the shit show that that festival. With just 60 days’ notice to then put on this festival that attracted just 25,000 people and ticket prices cost $50 each, and the headliner was Beck and the festival didn't make it money that year.Didn't even make enough to continue in 2000, and it wasn't until its partnership with Golden Voice in 2001 that it was able to get things back on track and slowly build up to the behemoth of a festival that we see today. It's an event that attracts well over a hundred thousand people per day for the six days of the festival itself.Two straight weekends and it attracts some of the biggest artists in the world. And this year they're especially making its footprint scene on the global scene. The headliners include Bad Bunny, Black Pink, Frank Ocean. There's also artists like Burna Boy, Calvin Harris, and many others that are making up this year's lineup.To break it all down, I'm joined by Tati Cirisano from MIDiA Research. We talk about what this festival does well, how it's shaped music culture overall, and its broader impact on music festival culture. Here's our breakdown. Hope you enjoy it.[00:02:55] Dan Runcie: All right. Today's episode is all about festivals and the granddaddy of them all, at least in the US, Coachella. We're here to break it down with Tati Cirisano from MIDiA Research.Tati, welcome back to the pod.[00:03:09] Tati Cirisano: Yeah, thanks for having me, excited to dive in. [00:03:12] Dan Runcie: Yeah. One of the reasons I wanted to talk about this with you is because I feel like Coachella reminds me of some of the conversations we've had about, a lot of these platforms that they, in many ways have become the bigger brand and the destination than the actual creators on some of these platforms. And I feel like Coachella, at least from a music festival perspective, has some of that because at least in the US this is the most popular music festival.We've seen it expand over the past two decades. And while most music festivals do rely so heavily on their headliners, Coachella is one of the ones that it's still able to, in many ways, capture the same audience and just get a consistent following and culture around it. That doesn't seem like it's stood as dependent on the headliners, but they still get big headliners.So how do you think that shapes the festival and how fans themselves interact withthat festival?[00:04:10] Tati Cirisano: Yeah. I mean, just to like prove out what you're saying, I think, I'm pretty sure Coachella tends to sell out or at least sell a lot of tickets before their headliners are even announced or before the lineup is announced at all. So you're totally right. I think it's become a big enough brand in itself that people are just kind of, ready to buy into it. And I think it's because Coachella has It's kind of created a culture. I remember kind of the celebrity era of Coachella when like, you know, Vanessa Hudgeons was like the queen of Coachella and you could go and run into Rihanna and Paris Hilton and like they kind of created that aesthetic of like the hippie style and all of these things.And so, when people buy a ticket, it's like they're buying into a lifestyle and a culture more so than the music itself. I think a lot of people go for that experience and to dress up and like buy into that, that lifestyle, maybe even more so than the music. and it does seem like Coachella over time, maybe because of that.The lineups have become a little bit more like crowd pleaser and mainstream to me. Like I was looking, just in preparation for this episode, like kind of looking at the history of Coachella and I didn't realize that when it started, part of what Paul Tollett wanted to do was create like a more niche festival where you would bring together like a lot of niche artists and hope that they all have big enough individual following that, you know, putting all that together. Would be enough for a festival. and it seems like the complete opposite today. In many ways like I think Coachella still sometimes tends to have like more left of center artists that line up this year is like super diverse and interesting. But it does seem like they've maybe become a little bit more mainstream over time.And maybe it is because the people are going not as much for the music as they're going for, like the vibe of it all.[00:06:02] Dan Runcie: Yeah, and dating back to that first festival, it's kind of crazy that this even became what it is today because it starts in 1999. They announced this festival and put tickets on sale. I think it was two months before the actual festival started, so not that much time. They announced it the same week or the week after Woodstock 99, which is just a complete shit show, which said so much about where people viewed a festival like this and their headliner was Beck. They didn't make as much money, I wanna say like 25,000 people showed. So they couldn't even have a festival in 2000. They had to wait until the next year and do the partnership with Golden Voice and make it happen.And then, yeah, fast forward to where we are today, where it is mainstream pop artists that are doing it. And what was once this niche culture of people that just really enjoyed indie rock music. It now is this mainstream thing. It almost reminds me of something like Comic-Con in that same way where it was this nerd thing with people that you know wanna do live action, role play, and Dungeons and Dragons, or dress up like Zelda.And now every mainstream celebrity is there to promote their movie.[00:07:19] Tati Cirisano: Yeah. And in the same way, you're going to dress up, you're going to like, kind of put on a costume, Coachella, it is kind of a costume for most people and like have that experience regardless of who's playing.so yeah, I totally agree. And I think the other thing, like over time Coachella has gotten to a place because of all that we're talking about, where it has such a, power on the festival market, like written into its contracts, like it has a radius clause that they get to release their lineup first.They are the first festival of the season, mid-April is like pretty early, so there's also now like I think built in ways that Coachella tends to be kind of the North Star for all of the festivals, and so it's just the one that people are going to regardless of, yeah, regardless of who's playing.[00:08:09] Dan Runcie: Yeah. I also feel like because it has a bit more of that brand and that audience command, regardless of who the artist is, I almost feel like it has a little bit of that Super Bowl effect where artists want to be able to perform on that stage because sure, they may bring some fans themselves, but they're likely gonna be reaching a new audience and having exposure to people that may not necessarily have tapped in general compared to, and I think Coachella is similar, but if you compare that to some of these other festivals that are so heavily reliant on that headliner themself. There's a case to be made that, okay, well if the headliner pulled those fans into the festival, then they have to then share those tickets essentially, you know, soft tickets with everyone else.How does that compare to actual hard tickets that they could have done themselves? So, I feel like there's a Coachella advantage there. [00:09:01] Tati Cirisano: And there's also a disadvantage in that you don't get, I mean, I know that I'm pretty sure already, like the data that you get on who's in your seats at shows is pretty minimal. But when you go to a festival, you don't really know who's going to see the festival for you and you don't really know who dis how many people discovered you or how many people came to your set. It's not the same as like if you sell out an arena, you know, the number of seats that were there, you know what I mean? So that's also an interesting thing is like you are probably getting a greater audience and this artist might be the whole reason the festival is selling tickets, but nobody's actually able to quantify that.[00:09:34] Dan Runcie: Right. And I feel like for some artists too, there's almost a bit of risk mitigation that can come with doing a festival. Risk mitigation may be the wrong word, but I think that's certain artists that have a lot of buzz or may have a lot of fanfare, it may be a lot harder for them to sell hard tickets.But if they could perform in front of this large festival crowd, they get a big advance or they get a big guarantee with the, promoter and through their agent as well, they can feel much more confident performing in front of, you know, thousands of fans or maybe even tens of thousands of fans on stage, even though they may not be able to sell, you know, sell out a house of Blues for instance.[00:10:14] Tati Cirisano: Totally. Yeah. No, and it also feels like being a performer at Coachella has become almost like a badge of honor or like something that goes on your one sheet, you know what I mean? Like, it's something that like gives you leverage as an artist and also is just, I don't know, seen as like it has a certain level of prestige.Like I would compare headlining at Coachella to like, in the same way that a lot of artists would love to get like a rolling stone or a billboard cover, even if like, regardless of whether that's selling or regardless of what that does, just that as a concept has, is just something that's like on a bucket list for most artists.I feel like Coachella headlining Coachella, if you're someone who's trying to be a superstar, that's like a bucket list item too. So yeah, it's, interesting How entrenched this festival has become in the music industry when you really think about it.[00:11:02] Dan Runcie: Yeah, let's look at some of the numbers here, cuz I think that's another fascinating piece. So we don't have hard numbers for this. A lot of it is based on past things that have been shared. But in 2017, this festival grossed to 114 million. And they had around 125,000 people coming per weekend.So if you roughly do the math thing, you look at ticket sales, I feel like that's like just under $500, like per attendee that ends up coming to the festival. And we likely saw similar, maybe even greater as well, because that doesn't take into account sponsorships that doesn't take into account these brand activations and other things as well.And I know that Coachella is a festival that has taken some shit for not paying artists well, at least the artists that are further down that list, that have much smaller font size, I think it's seen as paying the headliners. Well, at least I was talking to, someone that understands the business well, and their estimates were that the headliners this year, so you have Bad Bunny, Black Pink, and Frank Ocean.Their thought was, Frank Ocean and Black Pink got 4 million per weekend, so 8 million total and that Bad Bunny likely got 5 million per weekend. So then 10 total and then I believe that Calvin Harris's name was, towards the bottom of that list, like returned to the desert, Calvin Harris, I think he got one and per weekend. And then the artists that are on let second row, like Burna Boy and a few others, I think it was around like seven 50K per weekend but then it's a steep drop off after that, right? I mean, I remember hearing from Cardi B, this was, you know, after invasion of privacy, but still before, you know, she blew up, blew up. Or maybe it was the year before that, I forget. But she talked about how she was paid 70K, but she saw it as an investment in her career as an opportunity to pull up and get more. And obviously she's someone that you know, is now getting a million dollars. Private shows where she's doing 35 minute sets, but I feel like that like plays into that.So I don't know if all of those artists are getting paid, but yeah, I think some of them are willing to take that because of the exposure. [00:13:14] Tati Cirisano: Right. Yeah, I think you're probably right. And the number that I would love to know is like how much money that, cuz I know you, you were also talking about the boost of the local economy and that I think it was400 million, in Coachella Valley. I'm also wondering, like, even outside of that, just the whole business of it, like you mentioned the sponsorships, the influencer deals, you know, H & M having a Coachella section in their store.Like all of these things, I'm almost more fascinated by all of these kind of like satellite businesses around Coachella than the business of Coachella itself like I would love to know the total number for how much revenue this festival is just kind of generating for all these things outside of it, if that makes sense like, cuz it seems to go so far, like e every store has a festival section in March and you know that what they're really talking about is Coachella.[00:14:06] Dan Runcie: Definitely. Yeah. Like, could we look at, I'm sure they wouldn't share this, but if Forever 21 and H & M and those types of stores shared, how much more do they get from, you know, their festival and attire, whether that's, you know, the flower headdresses or whatever, you know, the crowns and the stuff that people wear or just shut general outfits as well. And then I forget the name of the brand, but there's one of those brands that I'm sure many of them do, but they pay for all the hotels that are in Palm Springs, that are in Indio in the general area, put all the influencers there, buy all the clothes for them, and then buy all their tickets and just have them work almost the same way a reporterwould work the festival. [00:14:47] Tati Cirisano: Yeah. like what is the influencer economy around Coachella specifically? Like how much money is there? I would love to know.[00:14:56] Dan Runcie: Yeah, I feel like, because if you count that, I wouldn't be surprised if you're over a billion, especiallylike just when you count the overall impact for sure. [00:15:05] Tati Cirisano: did you happen to see the price of the first Coachella ticket? When you were doing your research, [00:15:12] Dan Runcie: I saw this a while ago, but I forget now. How much was it? [00:15:16] Tati Cirisano: Guess, guess, [00:15:17] Dan Runcie: oh, guess. Okay. I'm gonna guess it's like $75.[00:15:20] Tati Cirisano: It was $50[00:15:22] Dan Runcie: Oh, wow. [00:15:23] Tati Cirisano: Was and this year's was $550 and that's before, so [00:15:28] Dan Runcie: Wow. Wow. What a come up 50 bucks to see all those artists and then only 20 other 25,000 other people there. Wow, that's something crazy. Yeah. I mean, so 10X there, everything's grown. And then even just the expansion, right? Because I think it was around like 2007 or so that they first went to multi-day, then they went to multiple weekends. Yeah[00:15:51] Tati Cirisano: I wouldn't be shocked if they added a third. I think anything more than a third weekend would be kind of overkill and maybe wouldn't be special anymore, but I actually would not be shocked if they made it a three weekend thing. [00:16:02] Dan Runcie: Yeah, [00:16:02] Tati Cirisano: One of these days. [00:16:04] Dan Runcie: I feel like it, because if you look at the opportunity, we can talk about this now, but if you look at the livestream play that's been happening, they've only been expanding that. So this was the first year that. So YouTube has been partnering to livestream this show since 2011, I believe, but this is the first year that all six stages are now gonna have a dedicated stream.And I think the pattern that we've seen now is you have a artist like Beyonce, she obviously gets the full recording of her show. She then sells that to Netflix for 20 million dollars or however much that deal is, and then she ends up monetizing that. I assume that there's likely some compensation or some participation that Coachella and more broadly golden voice get from that piece of it.But what could the stepped up livestream look like further. I mean, I've watched it in past years and it's nice, but could there ever be a Super Bowl level production that goes into at least some particular part of these artists sets? Because they're clearly putting more and more into it as it does become a big stage and you do have a little bit more flexibility of Yeah, it's not a 13 minute set, it's a hour long thing and the higher the production value, the more fans are gonna wanna see it, the more YouTube can get more ad dollars for it and the more goes to Coachella too.[00:17:26] Tati Cirisano: Yeah, no, I think there's definitely an opportunity for that and not just higher production quality of filming the show, but also when you mentioned the Super Bowl, like having like commentators and doing interviews and there's like know what I mean like there's like a halftime like conversation.I could see there being like hosts and like interviewing fans and things like that. I feel like that's probably happened at festivals before. before. I haven't watched that many festival live streams but I'm trying to remember, like Glastonbury's was really good, this past year and it was everywhere like, because they did such a good job with the live stream. There were clips on every social media app I looked at. It was all over the news. Like it really became this cultural moment.so I think, yeah, I think there's definitely an opportunity to like have a higher quality live stream that people will pay for.I also think on the other end of things, I wonder how much more. Like UGC Live streams will come into play. I was thinking about this because, bill Wordy, who's the former, billboard, like editor-in-chief, he has a newsletter, you probably know, what is it called? Full Write No Cap [00:18:28] Dan Runcie: Full Rate, No cap. [00:18:30] Tati Cirisano: Yeah, he spoke recently, or he wrote recently about how so many Taylor Swift fans are live streaming the entire. concert for the Eras tour on TikTok and on YouTube and getting tips for it. And these streams are like pretty low quality and they're often like from the nosebleeds and you can't even see Taylor, but they're getting like thousands of viewers and people are paying them to do it, and he kind of suggested, like what could the opportunity be here, whether that's artists partnering with TikTok to livestream it or what I think is more interesting maybe is like partnering with creators to do this. If they're already doing it, why not create an infrastructure around it? But then I also don't wanna advocate for like, everybody to be at the show live streaming the entire show and like have their phones in their faces and like I know artists hate that.I know fans hate that, I hate that. So it's an interesting question and I don't know exactly how it would look, but I feel like UGC live streams could come into play like on the opposite end of these, like more high production shows or live streams. [00:19:34] Dan Runcie: Yeah, I think so too because you, of course, there's always gonna be something for the high production quality camera that you see, and even that I still do believe is under monetized to a lot of extent. I mean, we don't have public numbers, but I could just assume based on what you see from sports and other rights.But the UGC thing is huge because I just feel like you could have some unique angle. You're getting the experience yourself. I'd love to know like what those tipping numbers do look like. But yeah, I think it's huge because while a tour. I think there may feel like a less scarce aspect for that, and just in the fact that, yeah, you know, Taylor is only doing this once, but she's doing roughly 50 shows, right?But there's only gonna be two of these times that, at least right now, that Frank Ocean is gonna be doing this headline set and it's, you know, when we release this podcast, it'll be right in this timeframe but like that's it. Like there's scarcity around that people wanna see that they're gonna wanna go back and watch it time and time again.So I think there's something there. I feel like we start to see some of this where, I'm sure you've seen it. Artists are starting to record one of the shows from their concert and then have that as something that you could watch on Amazon or something you can watch on HBO Max or Hulu. So we're seeing some of that, but I still feel like there's an opportunity to get more fan, like even if you get fan views in there and get them, have some type of participation from when the doc ends up getting sold or whatever that is. I feel like there's a few interesting ways to do it.[00:21:04] Tati Cirisano: I mean, I even think about like YouTube reaction videos and how like that's such a huge space of people. For all sorts of things, like listening to the new Taylor Swift album and live reacting, and people watched that and I could see a similar thing at a festival like live reaction to the Frank Ocean Set.And then afterwards you're like telling everyone what you thought. Like again, I don't wanna advocate for more phones at shows, but I feel like people are already doing this and so maybe it's a question of like how to support it and make it a better experience. I don't know.[00:21:36] Dan Runcie: Yeah, it'll be interesting to explore. I feel like the other unique thing about Coachella, we can talk a bit about pricing. You mentioned itself the price is 10X'd in 24 years since the first Coachella. But as this festival becomes more expensive as touring itself, especially to see these headliner type artists becomes more expensive.You talked a lot about, or you mentioned how does that impact the actual experience and how does that impact what fans may wanna do? Like how do they justify buying separate tickets to see just one artist versus being able to see multiple ones in a festival?What are your thoughts on that?[00:22:13] Tati Cirisano: Yeah, no, I mean, I think there's multiple factors kind of pushing toward festivals. Being a kind of solution for a lot of fans today. One is, as I've, you know, shouted from the rooftops in so many of our conversations, like listenership is really fragmenting and people tend to listen to way a wider spread of artists today, making it kind of hard to have a mainstream or a superstar, or harder to have a superstar.And they're also focusing more on songs often than artists. and then on top of that, costs for pretty much everything are skyrocketing. So yeah, if you're someone who listens to a wide range of artists and you're more likely to be, to kind of center your fandom around songs than artists themselves, and you also are not maybe able to afford going to five different shows anymore, why would you not rather go to see a festival?And not that festivals aren't expensive, cuz their enormously expensive, especially when you factor in travel and the outfits like we've talked about and all of these things. But I just given all the trends with, listenership that we're seeing, I feel like festivals will become even more popular for consumers.[00:23:23] Dan Runcie: I also think some of this may shift genre by genre, and to some extent I do look at it. A bit bittersweet to some extent because I look at festivals like, let's look at two of them rolling Loud and this Lovers and Friends Festival that I know had been canceled and I know they, had recently had one rolling loud, of course, is primarily rappers and hip hop artists, lovers and friends is more of that R and B that I think that a lot of millennials and even some,younger Gen X folks grew up with.Because those festivals exist in that same way. It's great to be able to bring those artists together. I do wonder though, has that dynamic hurt any of those artists impact to be able to generate not just real fans that may definitely wanna see them by buying hard tickets, but how does that help them grow the fan base in a way that doesn't make them just reliant on doing, rolling loud and then just getting an upfront check to do that as opposed to the long-term gains that could come from. Okay, yeah, you may not be performing for as big of an audience relative to your social following, but what could that build up to down the road? And I think even for some of these legacy artists that are doing lovers and friends fest, I remember I was talking with someone, about this recently and they were like, yeah, you know, as much as you like lovers and friends fest like t hose artists are the more indirect way, seeing them all the way they do now. [00:24:48] Tati Cirisano: Right, like the festival makes a lot of like on paper, logical sense for consumers, but does it make sense for fandom? Like is it actually helping artists nurture fan bases or is it just feeding more into what I was saying about, you know, a lot of people just kind of listening to songs and not artists So yeah, I think that makes a lot of sense and a lot of these artists that are playing. Those smaller, more niche festivals are playing a ton of them. And if it's like Megan Thee Stallion is playing at 10 different festivals, why are you going to buy a ticket to her tour? Like, I think it could kind of cannibalize some of those sales or like diminish people's interests in, going to the tour as well, or maybe they go and they're like, oh my God, Megan was incredible during her shorter set. I want to go see her on tour like, I don't know, maybe it, goes both ways, but I do think that we might see more and more of those smaller and more niche festivals for all of the reasons that I've mentioned.Like I think we've seen more and more, there's so many nostalgia festivals now there's so many, like speaking to a very specific scene, like, I forget what it's called, but there was one that was almost like, it was kind of like emo night, but as a festival, like I think we're, I think we're probably gonna see even more of that, and those are gonna be the ones that don't cost you, you know, two grand to go to Coachella. and it's maybe a little bit more accessible. so yeah, I think, I think we're probably gonna see more of those type of niche ones.[00:26:14] Dan Runcie: Do you think that there's certain artists that don't need Coachella? I know we talked about how it's beneficial for headliners, but I thought a lot about the weekend doing Coachella last year, and he was a late edition, Travis Scott was supposed to be the headliner, but after Astroworld and the tragedy there, he didn't do it the weekend does it?The weekend already had this tour planned. He did that tour in Southern California, he had still performed at SoFi Stadium later on that year. I don't know how the radius and the timeframe works out there, but I'm sure there must have been enough time there. But I wonder if, okay, beyond the $8 million, we could assume that he got from that.I mean, that's roughly what he would make from one of these stadium rougnights that he would do on his own tour. Did that benefit him in the same way? I don't know. I mean, I think I can clearly see the benefit for Black Pink or even Bad Buddy and others where, hey, this is a statement. You're here on one of the biggest stages we have in the US and you aren't from this country and you don't live here.There's a big, influence that that can have, but does it make sense for the weekend, right? I know that people have often talked about when would Taylor Swift do it, and whether that's talking about the Super Bowl or even Coachella, but even if we just talk about Coachella even if you paid Taylor 10 million dollars or 12 million dollars, is that going to be more beneficial for her when she can sell out football stadiums herself doing her own thing?So[00:27:47] Tati Cirisano: Right. It's been more important for Coachella than it is for Taylor Swift. to be at Coachella, I guess.[00:27:54] Dan Runcie: I would think so, because I mean, on one hand, yes, we know Coachella is gonna sell out regardless, but they could get more of those fans that may do participate in other, you know, economic, you know, aspects of the festival.[00:28:08] Tati Cirisano: Totally. Yeah. And they have more control over things and everything. Yeah, I think, you're right, for an artist like The Weeknd or Taylor Swift, it's probably more about like checking off that bucket list item or like having that prestige of performing at Coachella than it is like a material benefit.I think you're probably right to question that, but then you're right. for an artist like Black Pink, it means a lot more and is probably a lot more impactful in terms of like revenue and fan building and things like that.[00:28:35] Dan Runcie: Another topic you brought up about festivals right before we had started recording, you're talking about a festival you had went to recently in Knoxville, Tennessee, and it was spread out across different music venues in the city itself. And you also said you're done with festivals on festival grounds.So can you talk a little bit about that? Cuz I think that could be interesting to dig into a bit.[00:29:01] Tati Cirisano: Yeah, no, it was perfect timing to do this episode because I went to the antithesis of Coachella last weekend, which is, a festival called Big Ears in Knoxville, Tennessee it was a 10 year anniversary of this festival and in terms of the types of performers there, it was a lot of kind of like experimental and independent and folk music, instrumental artists, like Sun Ra Arkestra was one of the performers.I also, my favorite performer was a rock band from Niger called Atron Delea, like it was all these kind of like from all over artists and so that was one part of it that was cool. It was very niche and it was very much a scene, kind of like I'm talking about having these like more niche scene oriented festivals and it was held across the venues in Knoxville, of which there are like, 10 or 15, and they're all about a 10 minute walk from each other.And they also had performances in movie theaters and in cathedrals and in these sort of like non-traditional spaces and. It was just such a more enjoyable experience to me than being locked in a pen in like a parking lot and like, you know, having to pay $10 for water and like feeling very Lord of the Flies for 12 hours like, it was such a better experience and it also struck me how much it could be, you know, a big thing for the venues in that area. It's a big thing for the community and for the culture of the city, like, I don't think you could like turn Coachella into a festival, like across the venues in LA or like New York or something like, I don't think it would work for something at that scale, but it did make me think that, there could be more of, I think, and I'm sure that there are, I'm sure others exist, but that there could be more of these types of festivals that are a bit smaller, a bit more niche, and are held in a city.And you're also bringing the music to consumers rather than people having to travel to someplace like LA like just having these festivals in smaller cities. I just think there's a big opportunity there and also just to innovate the festival experience in general. Like, why do we have to be, you know, in a parking lot and, you know, all that kind of stuff.There's been better. Innovations in like, like I know the food at festivals has gotten a lot better over time. It used to be like frozen pizza was like your only option, and now there's like crazy food tents. But yeah, it just got me thinking about like how to innovate the festival experience and what the future of things looks like.[00:31:23] Dan Runcie: That's a good point because it makes me think of the film festival variety that we see where there's different vibes, but a lot of it is based in existing venues, and it does bring a bit more traffic in general activity to that area, but it's a bit of a different experience, right? Whether it's, you know, Tribeca or even here in San Francisco or in Sundance, I mean you could also get a little bit of a different vibe too, where, okay, if you wanna go skiing in Park City, then you can go to Sundance in January, right? If you want to go on the French Riviera afterward, you can go to Cannes like there's so many different vibes, but I feel like in general, when people think of music festivals, it is wearing that Coachella outfit and being somewhere in an open field with not a lot of shade and, you know, like that type of thing. So I feel like it couldn't then, yeah, it could just bring a little bit more variety to some of these things. And the fact that it already exists is good, but it could probably bring a bit more, you know, boom, to some of these other areas that may want something unique and ideally, if they're not overlapping on headliners, which is another thing that I know is an ongoing challenge with these festivals. I feel like when Outkast did their whole festival run where I forgot how many they did in 2014, that was the first year that stuck out to me where I was like, oh, some of these artists are just going boom, boom, boom.Same festival. Same festival. So you have that some artists that would do it in the same years, but then you also have some artists that will just come back and do the same festival time and time again, and it really isn't that much different.What are your thoughts on that? [00:33:02] Tati Cirisano: Yeah. I wanna say one more thing about the big years thing, really quick before that question, which is, how that kind of festival could expand the audience, like the tam of festival goers like I would say about half of the people at Big Year's were 55 plus, these are not people that are going to Coachella, you know, like, I mean, maybe they are, but I, I think there's other demographics and other age groups that would enjoy going to a festival if there was a bit of a different experience.So I feel like there's a lot of groups that were not hitting with the traditional festival market. and like this venue model could be kind of like that. but yeah, in terms of festival lineups getting a lot more homogenous, I kind of can't help but attribute it to the fragmentation trend that we've been talking about and how much harder it is to create a new mainstream superstar today. Like, y eah, I think that a lot of festivals are finding it harder and harder to find these kind of crowd pleasingheadline acts and there aren't as many new ones coming up. And it also seems like, festivals are kind of continuing to dip into these legacy acts from times when the industry was less congested and less fragmented like the Glastonbury lineup, it's Yeah, Arctic Monkeys, Elton John and Guns N' Roses. And it's like this could be the lineup a decade ago. So it does feel like not only are festival lineups becoming more homogenous, but a lot of them are tending to book legacy acts rather than newer, mainstream stars. Maybe because there aren't as many newer mainstream stars, I don't know.[00:34:43] Dan Runcie: Yeah, I think that, that headline spot is probably where some of, I don't even wanna say contention, but some of that decision making can lie in, maybe a lot of this applies to festivals that aren't like Coachella a bit because they are a bit more reliant on the headliners themselves, and because of that, they're more likely to make, what they feel is safer picks and unfortunately, a lot of these safer picks end up being more male, more white, and more legacy acts that have likely been there before. So if they're like, okay, well we knew that Arctic Monkeys were, you know, huge in 2012, then let's bring them back in so we can try to command some of that same audience that is like, well, you also have local stars and others around the world that don't fit into those same categories that could do it. But they feel like that's a risk, unfortunately, and then if they do invite those folks, it's for less money and their name is smaller and they're not presented as a headliner in the same way. So I think that's one of the downsides of it.And the fact, I think fragmentation plays into this, cuz I think, you know, regardless of who you are, it has just become even harder to have artists break out. The artists that do break out, they're more likely to maybe break out within their particular region. It's harder to have that same global appeal in that same way and I think we've seen maybe a few outlier examples of that more recently.Especially when you look at Coachella's lineup this year with Burna Boy and Black Pink and Bad Bunny all having prominent placement in their festival. I'm curious what that looks like in future years. How do you maintain that? Because even from that perspective, yeah, there's other artists that are huge, but they've already kind of gotten some of the biggest ones that we've at least had at this particular moment.But there's others. I'm curious. I forget if Dual Lipa has headlined one of the big, huge festivals in the world, I don't think she has yet, right?[00:36:41] Tati Cirisano: That's a good question. She hasn't headlined Coachella, she definitely had a big set at Glastonbury, but I don't know if she headlined. I don't know. [00:36:48] Dan Runcie: Right. Yeah. I feel like that may have been a few years ago, but I forget if that was like before or after, [00:36:53] Tati Cirisano: Oh yeah. [00:36:53] Dan Runcie: of Nostalgia tour and then after that, just thinking of other artists that have gotten huge in the past recent years, whether you have Billy Eilish or SZA, I mean, there's a few but.I'd be interested to see whether or not those names have become headliners, maybe we're seeing some of these festivals do this now, where outside Lasnier, which is, you know, right here in my backyard of San Francisco, their most recent poster. Instead of having three headliners, one per day, they have 10 artists that have big font size names, and then they have the other 60 or 70 that all have, you know, smaller, but it's all kind of the same.And, you know, you just look at the names of these artists. I'll just say right now for outside Lasnier, Kendrick Lamar, Foo Fighters, Odessa, Lana Del Ray, the 1975, Megan Thee Stallion, Zed, Janelle Monáe, Maggie Rogers, and Fisher. and I mean, I'm, I'm not shy to be mean, I'm not trying to call anyone out, but there's certain artists on that I just mentioned there that would not headline outside lands if it was presented as, oh, these are the three headliners. And they may not even be on that second row either, but. Is that in some way reflective of where things are, where it may make it easier, and of course you could probably guess based on the order of those names, Kendrick Lamar's name is at the top, you know, of this list. But still like, is this some type of reflection of this fragmentation where you have all these different genres, most of these artists, more modern, current artists, except for, you know, Foo Fighters, a bit more legacy that has continued to play on but I wonder how often we'll see that with other festivals that are maybe closer to outside lands and Coachella where, you know, still a major huge festival, but they're not getting the same headliners that Coachella is.[00:38:42] Tati Cirisano: Yeah. No, I think, you're absolutely right and I think we're gonna see that type of lineup more, at the same time as we're seeing that, there are fewer of these like Beyonce level mainstream stars, we're seeing a growth in the middle tier. We're seeing a lot more of these like, cult stars and also artists on that list who are huge but aren't really at the level of, you know, some of like Madonna or you know, these artists of the past, these icons of the past.So I think it makes more sense rather than having, you know, three headliners to have like six, not as huge artists still have a really big following. I think that makes a lot more sense, for the festival, the people going, and I think we will start to see more of that just because of the way that fragmentation is playing out.Yeah. I also wonder, when we're gonna start to see like the millennial version of legacy artists start to perform, like, was funny when I saw like the lovers and friends line up, I was like, oh my God. when you start getting an nostalgia festival marketed to you, that's when you know you're getting old.That's when you know you're no longer like the youngest And like, I wonder, when we'll start to maybe tap into like 90s and 2000s era. Sort of icons, like I would love to see like Missy Elliot headline, Coachella, like that type of thing. And I wonder if that's gonna be like the next step once we've exhausted all the times that like Foo Fighters can possibly headline a festival [00:40:09] Dan Runcie: I know, right? Like [00:40:10] Tati Cirisano: Who are also that era but, you know, what I mean, like. [00:40:13] Dan Runcie: For sure. For sure. Yeah, because I feel like we saw. Dr. Dre and Snoop Dogg were headliners maybe around 10 years ago, and then they had brought, the Tupac hologram out infamously. You remember that? So, we did have that. And of course, you know, that kind of reminds me of the Super Bowl that, from a couple years ago.But I do feel like there's a sweet spot there, given. Where Usher is right now, the popularity of his residency, I wouldn't be surprised if he jumps back on this circuit and he's doing less of the lovers and friends and he's doing more of the headlining major music festivals [00:40:49] Tati Cirisano: He would be amazing. [00:40:50] Dan Runcie: There's a huge opportunity there.Yeah. Great performer. I think he still does great stuff. I wanted to see if I can go make it to Vegas to go catch this, residency before it ends. But yeah, I I think that there is a sweet spot there for that. I mean, you think about other artists, I think Justin Timberlake has probably done some of these already, so we've seen him do them.I don't know if Britney Spears would probably perform in that same way. But we'll see. I feel like there's a number of artists that they can tap into from that era.[00:41:18] Tati Cirisano: Yeah. Yeah, exactly. [00:41:21] Dan Runcie: And yeah. I guess before we wrap things up, are there any predictions you have then for let's predict what 2024 would look like? Three headliners. Who would you think would most likely be a headliner for Coachella 2024? [00:41:37] Tati Cirisano: I would say SZA, probably, I would say Dua Lipa I think she makes a lot of sense as a headliner too, just in terms of like how, I hate like, I don't wanna say like crowd pleasing or mainstream, but like, cause I feel like that sounds like I'm giving her shade and I'm not. I think she's incredibly talented, but like she would please a, a big swath of people with her music and she's a cool performer and she has some time now, I think, since she's not touring. but, okay. So Du Lipa, SZA, This is about to be an all female headliners. This is a bit of wishful thinking, but I would love to see, cause I don't know if she's ready for this yet, but I would love to see Rosalia, headline Coachella.I think she's getting there and I actually saw her in 2019 at Coachella. She was playing the tiniest stage ever and she treated it like she was in a stadium. Like the production quality and the dancers and just like everything she put into it was incredible. And she's risen a lot over the past few years.So, yeah, that's my trio.[00:42:35] Dan Runcie: Nice. Nice. All right. We have one in common. We have SZA, so I'm gonna go SZA, Madonna, and Usher. I think that's gonna be my prediction, I feel like, Madonna has this tour coming up. Maybe she'll cap things off with a Coachella performance. But I feel like yeah, if you're gonna have this tour, I forget the name of it, you're gonna go back through all her eras.I feel like there's something unique there, so, so, yeah. I know, I know. And we'll have to revisit this. We still have a number of festival lineups to get announced this year, so we'll have to check back in and see how do these continue to develop, what continues to shape in how these festivals continue to evolve over time.So tati, this was great. Thanks for coming on.[00:43:17] Tati Cirisano: Yeah, Thanks for having me. Oh, it's a pleasure.[00:43:19] Dan Runcie: Yeah.[00:43:20] Dan Runcie Outro: If you enjoyed this podcast, go ahead and share it with a friend. Copy the link, text it to a friend, post it in your group chat. Post it in your Slack groups. Wherever you and your people talk, spread the word. That's how capital continues to grow and continues to reach the right people. And while you're at it, if you use Apple Podcast, Go ahead.Rate the podcast, give it a high rating, and leave a review. Tell people why you like the podcast. That helps more people discover the show. Thank you in advance. Talk to you next week.

This week, I’m running back an interview I did with Will Page in 2022. It was our most popular episode of 2022 and we talked about a lot of topics that are still timely and still being debated right now in the industry. One of the most unique insights into the state of the music business today doesn’t come from a record label exec. Not from an agent. Not from an artist. No, it comes from Scottish economist Will Page, who served that role for Spotify from 2012 to 2019 — a period of explosive growth for the streaming giant. But if you ask Page about streaming’s future, he’s not nearly as optimistic as the rest of the industry. “The party has to come to an end,” as he told me on this episode of Trapital.Page believes the music industry is transitioning from a “herbivore market” to a “carnivore” one. In other words, future growth will not come from brand-new customers — it’ll come from the streaming services eating into each other’s market share. Not only has subscriber counts possibly tapped out in Page’s opinion, but streaming services have also put a ceiling on revenues by charging only $9.99, a price that hasn’t budged in 20 years despite giant leaps in technology and music catalog size.  That against-the-grain prediction was one of many Will shared with me during our in-depth interview. But he has plenty more research- and experience-backed thoughts on touring, vinyl records, Web 3.0, and everything in between. Believe me, this is an interview you don’t want to miss. Here’s everything we covered: [3:21] The Global Business of Music[4:15] Vinyl Records $1.5 Billion Recovery[08:54] Will’s Bearish View About The Future Of Streaming[14:46] Ongoing Price War Between Streaming Services[18:33] The Changing Economics Of Music Touring [21:44] Performing At Festivals Vs. Tours [24:57] The Evolution Of Music Publishing[28:34] How Music Revenue Gets Distributed To Publishers[32:41] What Does A “Post-Spotify Economy” Look Like? [33:44] The Current Business Landscape Of Hip-Hop Listen to Will’s mix right here: https://www.mixcloud.com/willpagesnc/we-aint-done-with-2021/Check out Will’s Podcast, Bubble Trouble, where he breaks down how financial markets really work.Read Will’s book, Tarzan Economics: Eight Principles for Pivoting Through Disruption.Listen: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | SoundCloud | Stitcher | Overcast | Amazon | Google Podcasts | Pocket Casts | RSSHost: Dan Runcie, @RuncieDan, trapital.coGuests: Will Page, @willpageauthor Trapital is home for the business of hip-hop. Gain the latest insights from hip-hop’s biggest players by reading Trapital’s free weekly memo. TRANSCRIPT[00:00:00] Will Page: When you have 110 million households, and you have more than 110 million subscribers in the United States, then we are in a race to the finishing line before herbivore turn into carnivores.In oil, we have this expression called peak oil, which is we know that we've extracted more oil in the world than is left to extract an oil that's left is gonna be even more costly to get out the ground. I think we're in peak subscriber territory where at some point soon we're gonna start seeing growth happen through stealing other customers as opposed to finding your own.[00:00:29] Dan Runcie Intro: Hey, welcome to the Trapital Podcast. I'm your host and the founder of Trapital, Dan Runcie. This podcast is your place to gain insights from executives in music, media, entertainment, and more who are taking hip hop culture to the next level.[00:01:12] Dan Runcie Guest Intro: For today's episode, let's revisit the most popular episode that we did in 2022. That's the conversation that I had with Will Page. Will Page is the Former Chief Economist for Spotify, the author of Pivot, and Advisor consultant to many of the companies that are leading the music industry today. In this conversation, Will and I talked about a lot of topics that are still timely and still being debated right now in the industry.The price of streaming. Streaming, especially for Spotify, is still $9.99 in the. Pound and Euro in many markets. But Spotify wants to keep that price for several reasons. They want to continue to grow as much as they can. They also want something in return from the record labels. They want some type of concession if they're going to raise their prices.But as we've heard, the push has got louder and louder from the record label CEOs that want that price to increase. So we talk about some of the origins of that debate and where that may be. Then we also talk about some of the competition among the digital service providers as well, whether it's Apple Music, Spotify, Amazon Music, and others.We talk about how it's transitioning from a herbivore market to a carnivore market now that the market's getting saturated. You probably heard that term a bit over the past year that originated from this podcast. So we talk about that a number of other timely things and more we'll eventually have will back on the podcast soon.But this is a nice precursor to refresh the memory a bit and with some of the topics that are still going on in music today. Here's our episode. Hope you enjoy it.[00:02:48] Dan Runcie: Some of the work you've done for a company that is very heavily focused on playlist, which is Spotify, and I think more broadly looking at the streaming era we're in right now.This is a great time to chat because we just saw the IFPI results and streaming as continuing to grow as we've seen. But I feel like you probably spotted a few interesting trends about where things are heading, and I think that's a question mark for a lot of people. Streaming continues to grow, but how far can it grow?What are we seeing in terms of differences within genres or regions? What are some of the things that stuck out[00:03:21] Will Page: to you? I'll give you a couple. The first one is the global business. Well, last time I looked at United Nations, I think there's 208 countries in the world. The global yearbook that we're discussing here has, I think 58.So we have to be careful what we define as global. I think Africa's clubbed together as one continent and where they need to work on that. But I think the global business is growing, but it's also becoming more American. So if you go back to when Spotify launched America, 22, 20 3% of the business round about just over a fifth.Today it's 37%. So we have seen the business grow and become more American, and that raises questions, you know, economic questions like globalization, questions, should poor countries catch up with rich ones? The theory says yes. The reality often says no. So we're seeing this kind of lopsided growth where the business is growing, but it's growing in favor of an American market.The biggest country is growing at the fastest. That's a positive problem, but I just wanna flag it, which is, that's not how it was supposed to play out. And then the second thing I'd wanna point to as well is just vinyl. this vinyl recovery is just, well, I don't know how much my bank balance is responsible for this vinyl recovery, but I'm telling you, Is define the laws of gravity.Now, we're now looking at vinyl being worth one and a half billion dollars, which is more than it's been worth in the past 30 years. It's worth more than CDs, cassettes, and downloads, the three formats that we're supposed to declare that vinyl is dead. But there's two things you can kind of cut out the vinyl recovery, which I think will be of real interest to your audience.Firstly, on the consumer side. I saw a survey which suggested that the majority, just over half of all vinyl buyers today, don't own a record player. I mean, something's cooking here. So what are we buying it for? I'll extend that as well. the cost of wall frames to frame vinyl on your wall often cost more than the record itself.So I'm willing to pay more for vinyl to you know, framed on my wall than I am for the record. And by the way, I don't have a record player. There's a lot of people who will tick those bizarre boxes. But on the crater side, something else is interesting. This'll take a little bit of working through.But if we think about the streaming model, it's monetizing consumption. That's what it does. So if there's an album with 10 songs, three killer and seven filler songs, and an album, and let's say Dan Runcie wrote the Three Killer Tracks and Will Page, he wrote the Seven Duff Filler Tracks. On streaming, Dan might walk away with all the money and I'll walk away from none because we're only streaming the killer tracks and nobody's touching the filler.As the album model kicks out from vinyl, I would get 70% of the cash. That's crazy because nobody knows what's being consumed and it's a lot of cash. If I just kind of do some rough math here of a million fans streaming your hip hop record on Spotify, and let's say they're stream. 200 times in a month when the album drops, you only need 20,000 of them of that million to make the same amount of money from vinyl than you would do from streams, which is entirely plausible.But then how do you pay the copyright owners from those songs on an album is very different from how you pay them on a stream. If you go back to the late seventies, the, one of the most successful records of all time was Saturday Night Fever, the Bee Ges and a bunch of other people. It's crazy to think that Ralph McDonald's Calypso strut his record there, which nobody has listened to, got the same royalty as staying alive by the Bee Gees because it was a vinyl record.So to reiterate, on the consumer, I don't know how many of these vinyl records are being played, and on the crater side, it raises questions about how these craters are gonna getpaid.[00:06:53] Dan Runcie: That's a good point book that I don't think is being talked about as much about the vinyl search because there's so much like wow, about just how much is being purchased.I think I even saw the stat that Adele's 30 album sold 8,000 cassettes. Or there was stuff tied from Stat about that, and I think the similar thing that you said, lines up having those people actually still own a watman or whatever type of cassette player that they have. So I do think that that is something that probably there could be a deeper analysis on because.A lot of the people that write the filler songs, how do they feel? Or whether you're a songwriter, whether you, you know what's behind it, especially when you know that there's so much clear path to be able to determine, okay, this is going to be the lead single, this is what we're gonna push most from this album.It really shifts things even more to where things are going in terms of a single market. Like the way that people have talked about pop music for a while now, right? And I guess that brings a, brings me back to the streaming trends that you mentioned. Overall, we're in this area, as you mentioned, streaming itself, the US penetration is grown from 22%, I believe you said is now through your 35, 37, somewhere around there.But where do we go from here because as you've written before, the price of music streaming, at least the monthly subscription hasn't necessarily been increasing. The average revenue per user overall because of the international growth is decreased, and you have plenty of people that are still trying to get there, fair share of what they can.It's streaming so. It's in like five, 10 years from now. If you could see into the future, where do you think streaming distribution is? I think the good thing is that people have smartphones and there's more and more growth from that perspective. So streaming is going to grow, but on the other hand, the economics of these things do have some theoretical goal point where we've maximized the global penetration of this.What do you think about, where that is going?[00:08:54] Will Page: Let me unpack it in two different lanes. Firstly, I'll deal with the saturation point question, which is, you know, how long can this party keep going for? It's three o'clock in the morning, who's gonna call time on it? And then secondly, I wanna deal with the pricing point on its own lane as well, but on saturation point, you're now in a situation where I put it as in America, we've had herbivores. We've had Spotify growing Apple, growing Amazon, growing YouTube, growing. Everybody's reporting growth, Pandora even is growing. What we are gonna see some point soon is carnivores.Which is Apple will grow by eating into Spotify's growth, or YouTube will grow by eating into Amazon's growth. So the key question we gotta ask is when do we go from the herbivore market? We're in today to a carnival market of tomorrow, and I output Spotify's US subscriber number around about 45 million, Apple at 49 million. We dump on top YouTube. Amazon, Pandora, you're well past 110-120 million. Now, that's important because I reckon and there's around about 110 million qualifying households in America that has at least one person who could pay for a streaming service. This is crucial because if you look at what Apple One's bundle is doing $30 a month for news, music, television, gaming, fitness, and two turbos of storage per six account holder. It's a household proposition they're saying to the home, I got you convenience. Everyone under this roof is covered with Apple products. So when you have 110 million households, and you have more than 110 million subscribers in the United States, then we are in a race to the finishing line before herbivore turn into carnivores.In oil, we have this expression called peak oil, which is we know that we've extracted more oil in the world than is left to extract an oil that's left is gonna be even more costly to get out the ground. I think we're in peak subscriber territory where at some point soon we're gonna start seeing growth happen through stealing other customers as opposed to finding your own.So I just wanna put that warning flag out there. Just now we're partying like it's 1989, fine, but at some point the party has to come to an end and gross is gonna come at the expense of other players that then flips, you know, from the A side to the B side of this record. We flip it over to price and then the pricing debate is interesting.I published this work called MELD Economics,uh, which we can cite on your, your wonderful website there. Which was to look at 20 year history of the nine 19 price point, and its crazy story back in the 3rd of December, 2001, over 20 years ago. Today Rhapsody got its license for a $9.99 offering, which had 15,000 songs.First point. The origins of 9 99 bizarrely date back to the Blockbuster rental card. Some coed up label executive would've said, if it cost 9 99 to rent videos from Blockbuster, that's what it should cost to rent music. Secondly, there was only 15,000 songs with limited use case. There was no smartphone back then.No apps, no algorithms. That was all a weird welded into the future. So you just. 9 99 for 15,000 songs. We are now chatting in early April, 2022, and it's still 9 99 in dollar in Euro and Sterling, but we're offering a hundred million songs. That's the crazy thing. So in the article, Mel Economics, what I do is I strip inflation out in the case of the uk, 9 99 has fallen down to six pounds, 30 pence.Remember, you know, Family Plan makes music cheaper too. If 2.3 people are paying $40.99, that's six pounds 50. There's way too many numbers in this conversation for Trapital, but still we'll stick with it. Student plan makes it cheaper too. So music in real terms, has fallen to six pound 30, which is less than a medium glass of Malbec wine, so 175 milliliters of Malbec wine costs than a hundred million songs, which is available offline on demand without adverts. That for me, is certified bonkers. I don't understand what we've done. We're offering more and more, and we're charging less and less, and you only have to leave the ears to the eyes on the video streaming to see what they're doing on the other side of the fence.Netflix has got me from $7.99 to $8.99 to $12.99, to now $14.90. In the space of 15 months, and I haven't blinked Disney plus. The reason I'm paying $4.99 on Disney Plus is because I paid $19.99 to get Cruella live on demand. So they're charging more and more, but only offering part of the wells repertoire set for eyeball content.We are charging less and less and offering more and more of the wells. Ear hole content, so it's like two ships passing each other in the night. It's a very interesting dilemma.It's intriguing because when you look at the way that video is structured, as you mentioned, you have all these price increases, and I think Netflix for some plans is, you know, $18.99, it's approaching that level, but in music, It's this thing where, yeah, there's some price differences where I think I saw today that Amazon music is increasing a dollar, but that's from $7.99 for prime subscribers to that being $8.99. So we still have to cross that.I wonder if I won't cost that.[00:13:57] Dan Runcie: I mean, honestly, I feel like there's something here because when I think about this, I think about a few things.Obviously you do have this fight where the artists wanna get more and the labels wanna get more, you know, not just for the artists, but for themselves. And obviously Spotify wants to earn more logically. You would think, okay, if you increase the price and people just understated the economics of what's likely.If Spotify increased up to 1299 a month for the standard base rate, how many folks would boing. But to your point earlier, I have to imagine that the fear is looking at the trends and where that penetration is. If they jump up to $12.99, then they're going to lose those customers to the other streaming services that haven't jumped there yet because of that thought of, you know, shifting to that carnivore mentality of competing with each other. So because for roughly 80% of the content that they do offer, it is roughly the same between each of these services. It's led it to be more of a price war then in video streaming, where most of them do have some differentiated content.[00:15:02] Will Page: A hundred percent. And two things to bolt onto your very eloquent points there. And firstly, let's just remind ourselves that Apple launched superior sound quality. You may remember the, commercial of Lossless audio. You buy your AirPods, which cost two years of Apple Music or Spotify to put in your ears and you get superior sound quality, the subtext underneath it said at no extra cost. That was the actual marketing message. So there again, we are improving the offer we're supplying more but we're charging less in real terms. And that's a really interesting kind of point kind of cut into. And the second thing, and we should get balance into this discussion cause it's delicates, we have to remind ourselves that, you know, there's 120 million subscribers in America.There's still another 120 million to go, but we know they're not that interested in paying for music because they haven't paid yet. Now the best way to attract them is not necessarily to raise price. So we gotta remember that there's still, you know, oil to extract. It's not gonna be easy oil to extract, but the best way to get to it might not be to raise price, but there's a catch to this.I can remember in the early nineties, right up to 2010 piracy, ripping the asset out of this business and concept promoters were saying. We love piracy because the kids are getting music for free so they can pay more on concert tickets. I wonder if now they're saying we love Spotify because they don't raise prices, which means we can raise ours.This is not a discussion of how to rip off the customer. This is a discussion about value exchange and I just wonder whether recorded music is leaving value on the table. That's the key pointto hammer on.[00:16:32] Dan Runcie: That's a good point. And I think that also made me think too, could there be some notion of maintaining the perception of Spotify as something that still has high pricing power and still has high consumer surplus, because then that helps the stock price.And then seeing that the major labels are all invested in Spotify itself. It's about like having that perception of, you know, the future growth and whatever it is. So what you just said made me think about that being a factor potentially too.[00:17:02] Will Page: A hundred percent. And of course, you've gotta distinguish the Spotify Apple music cost structure from that of the video streaming companies in that they have a kind of variable cost.You double your business, you double your cost base. Whereas Netflix, you jump up costs and you have, you jump up your revenue, you know, you raise me from 7 99 to 14 point 99, the cost of that content was fixed. And I'm still consuming the Fresh Prince of Bel Air on Netflix to this day. That was a fixed cost deal that he did to get that content and that's margin to Netflix.So, you know, the cost structure matters to this one as well.[00:17:33] Dan Runcie: Definitely. And you mentioned live music there, and I think there's a lot to think about from that perspective. I Feel like we're in this post pandemic. I mean, we're still not out of it, but we're in this post quarantine era, more artists than ever are trying to tour and get out there trying to capture what's there, but also from an economic perspective from that.Most people are only gonna go to a certain number of live events per year, and we have this 18 to 24 month run coming up where everyone wants to make up for what they couldn't do in the past two years. How will that shift, not just who then goes on tour together, and then how they may split those profits, what the availability looks like?And if they're not able to do what they may have done on tour in the late 2010s, how does that affect future touring? I think that's a piece of it that, you know, we still haven't necessarily seen the impact of, but it just feels inevitable based on where things are heading. You did it.[00:18:33] Will Page: Absolutely. Now on touring, I was lucky and I gotta do some great work on the UK live industry, and I can only speak for the UK here.I know a lot of your audience in the US but I think these points will carry. The first one was to work out how much is spent on concert tickets in Britain during the, the normal year of 2019, and the answer was 1.7 billion pounds. That's more than was spent on recorded music a lot more than was spent on recorded music, which makes sense, you know, you pay 120 pounds on the Spotify account, you're paying 240 pounds to go to Redding Festival. Two days in the muddy field in Redding, cost more than 365 days of all the wells. But what I noticed there was the industry is changing in its growth. I showed that between 2012, the year of the London Olympics and 2019, The live music industry in this country had exploded and grow, but it was lopsided.All the gro came from stadiums, festivals, and to lesser extent arenas. The theaters, the 2000, 3000 capacity theaters like the Philmore West over where you are, they were getting crushed. They were actually shrinking in size. So we have this lopsided live music industry, which is going right in the direction of the head as opposed to the long tail, the stadiums, the festivals, the arenas, as opposed to the theaters, the clubs, the university venues.And that's interesting cuz that's gonna change the dynamics of how you make money from live. Do you go from doing your tour of an album to doing a tour of your festivals for that record? And what does that mean? The cost structure for the insurance and all those things that bands have to consider when they're hitting the road.I mean, credit to capital. You've had some great podcasts recently on this topic, but as, a big rethink coming along in this live music market, it's not the same as we had back in 2019. It's changed fundamentally, and it is the breadwinner for most artists' income. I think it makes up about 70% of what an artist has to live for comes from the road that vanished.How do we get it back?[00:20:22] Dan Runcie: I feel like Cardi B has been a good. Case study on this specific point here, right? It's been four years now since she released an album, and she's yet to go on a true proper tour in that time. That said, she's done plenty of festivals where she's earned more on those festival guarantees that she likely would on tour.She's also done many private events where she's likely earned that save amount, if not more. So there's a whole economic argument to be made, and I think there's also some risk involved too, right? I think that festivals do give you the opportunity to. Get that major bag, you get the high number, the revenue that comes through, but maybe your fans will be a little bit more forgiving if your set piece at your festival isn't the most extravagant thing, especially if you're not the headliner at it.But on a tour, I think it changes. It's a little bit more pressure, everyone wants to see that Instagramable or talkable moment to then sell future tickets and just the production cost and everything with travel. It still is something that is very worthwhile, but I think we've just started to see some of that segmentation there.Especially for someone like her. I would add residencies too. I know she's done a few different things in Vegas here and there, but yeah. Still yet to do that 30 city worldwide tour.[00:21:44] Will Page: Yeah, I think you gotta think with your head and your heart. Your head says like you point out the economics favors festival.Your back line's there, your insurance is covered. Travel's already covered. I have numerous hip hop bands perform at festivals in Europe, and that's one of the big advantages. The costs are all taken care of by the festival, but your heart says, what does that do to intimate relationships with your fans?[00:22:05] Dan Runcie: Right?[00:22:05] Will Page: I mean, you're staring at 50,000 strangers in the muddy field. That's different from staring at 2000 friends in the Fillmore West. So the head and the heart's gotta come into play here. What I would add though is that there are rumors, I would say here in the UK at least, that the promoters are saying, I'll pay you a ton of money to perform at the festival to make sure that you don't go on tour.And that's an interesting situation. If you build one too many houses, you collapse a property market. If you have one too many tours or one too many festivals, you collapse live music industry. So there's ways in which people are trying to restrain the market to festival. At the expense of the theaters.That certainly is coming through in the data. We're seeing the theater business take a kick in while festivals go on a roll.[00:22:45] Dan Runcie: Yeah, because I think about, you look at the artists that are touring stadiums now, whether it's your Taylor Swift's or Beyonce's, they wouldn't be able to do that if they didn't have the individual tours at smaller venues when they were starting out. Being able to build that intimate fan base, like you said, like you get to that point, right? And I do think that as good as festivals can be, it is much more of a lucrative cash grab that is, I don't wanna say necessarily short-term thinking, but I think you ideally wanna have some type of balance there, right?Get the big bag that you can get from something else. It's almost no different. I think running a business, right? Okay, sure. You may be able to do a speaking fee or do some type of, you know, thing here or there, but hey, you can't do that all the time, especially if it's not an audience you're tapped into.You still need to do some of the things that could set you up for the long game.[00:23:37] Will Page: Yeah, and there's an infographic that I'll share with you to pass onto your audience here. I wrote an article in The Economist called Smells like Middle-Aged Spirit as opposed to Teen. Nice play on Words hat to Dave Gro and Kurt Cobain.But what I was looking at was the average age of festival headliners over time. This is a du pessimistic Scottish economist. This is what you do with your spare time. Okay, so in the nineties when radio head to Glastonbury, the average age of a festival headliner is 25, 26 years old. all these hot bands were coming through the Brit Pop era.You know, there was so much development of new talent. By 2012, I think it had got up to 58 and I got a lot of criticism for that article. But then Glastonbury that year had the WHO and Lionel Richie headlining, which I think was 17 and 73 years old apart. And then you can see the conveyor belt problem, which is okay, it's a quick cash grab.It makes sense. But that's not the conveyor belt of how we developed talent for tomorrow. That's just how we cash in our chips at the casino today. So it does raise questions, I'm not saying it's like the doomsday scenario here, but we just need a healthy balance of, you know, a seeded for future growth and then the big stage for exploiting that moment today, which could be the pyramid stage at Glastonbury, the headlights stage at Monterey over in the States.So I just think we're getting a little bit lopsided here. We're a bit short termist and how this business needs to develop.[00:24:57] Dan Runcie: Agreed on that. Switching gears a bit. One thing that you wrote recently that stuck out to me, you did this deep dive on music publishing, and I think this is another area that kind of has some of that short-term, long-term perspective on it, because you look at the people who get the share of the copyright pie, at least today, and from music streaming perspective, a lot of that has been much more in the favor of, the recorded side and then the people getting compensated on the recording side. But with that, the songwriters and the publishers, a lot of them necessarily in that timeframe, didn't get a lot of that. But I think in this wave now where we're seeing more catalog deals and we're seeing people understand the value of that, things may be starting to shift and there's likely other things as well.But what do you think about the way that the publishing side has been seen in what the future opportunities are for that side of the business?[00:25:54] Will Page: Well, the way that labels and publishing were taught to me in terms of what makes them distinct from one another goes back to my Aunt Dorian Loader, who worked in the music business from 1959 at Deca Records, right the way through to 2012.She ran Enzyme records with Nigel Grange, Lucian's Half-Brother. They were responsible for Shead O'Connor, who sold 11 million albums based on the Prince cover. And she once said to me, will, this is how the music industry works. The record label pays for your drugs and the publishing pays for your pension. I just kind of, that's a nice succinct way of summarizing how the business works.That was then, this is now clearly times have changed, I think, but it reminds us about, you know, what makes the business different. And then that piece of work that you cite is something called global value of copyright, where I'm really keen to educate this. Regardless of whether you're coming from a label perspective, a manager, an artist, a songwriter, there's a C with a circle on it called copyright.We get that, and it involves record labels. It involves sound exchange. It involves artists. It involves ascap, BMI, GMR, Czek. It involves publishers, David Israeli, and the great folks at the NNPA. It Put the whole thing together for me, all this spaghetti and strain it out. And what I was able to show was that in 2020, copyright was worth 32.5 billion, way bigger than what you've just heard from IFPI way bigger than what Czek would say.This is the entire thing. And the split was about 65% labels, 35% to the publishers. Now, if you go way back to 2001, when we used to sell CDs by weight of pate. In the cocaine capitalism days, you know, record labels back then. The split was much more in favor of labels, you know, more than three quarter labels, less than a quarter to the publishers.And what we've seen happen in the years in between is quite an interesting story. Labels went from boom time with CDs to bust with piracy, and now they're booming again with streaming. And the inverse, the opposite happened. Publishers as labels went bust. ASCAP, BMI kept on reporting record breaking collections, so you have a hair tore toys analogy here of labels going really fast and falling off a cliff.Publishers just trundled along with record breaking, not massive record breaking collections, but it kept on growing their bases. So, the questions these throw up is what type of industry are we moving towards? Are we going back to a business model which paid labels over three quarters of the pie and publishes less than a quarter, and is that a good or a bad thing?Or in this post Spotify economy where we're seeing companies like Peloton, Twitch, TikTok, come to the business, is that gonna have a completely different balance? Now why this matters to your audience is not just on the crater side, but also on the investment side. You pointed out catalog valuations. We can dig into that if you want, but just a high level point is, let's say that in a few years time, I go into my back cave again, calculate the global value of copyright, and instead of 32 and a half billion, it's 40 billion.I'll come on Trapital show, I'll make an exclusive announcement. Copyright today is worth 40 billion, seven and a half billion new dollars. Have come into this business, I want the audience to start thinking about who gets what share of that marginal new dollar. Is that gonna split publishing side or is that gonna split label side?And if you're investing in catalogs, be the master rights, be the author rights that really bears, there's a huge educational drive here to understand the balance of this business of copyright.[00:29:15] Dan Runcie: So there's a few things you've said there that I wanted to dig into. Of course, for streaming Spotify and its competitors around 75%.Is going to the recorded side a quarter to publishing. But from a breakdown, what does that look like for the TikToks, the Roblox and the Pelotons? What does that share of revenue from those plays look like?[00:29:38] Will Page: So, The best way I could do this is if I just talk about ratios. There's three Rs in this business.There's share of revenue, there's ratio in this rights pool. They mean different things. Most experts get confused. With these three Rs, I'm gonna stick to ratios. That is, if I give the label a dollar, how much do I give the publisher, the songwriter, this collective management organization. So we stick to the conventional streaming model Today, I would say that if you give the record label a dollar, you're giving the publishing side of the.24 cents, you know, a decent chunk of change. But still the pure cousin of the record label on YouTube, I think it could be as high as 35 cents, 40 cents even. Because there's a sync right? Involved in those deals. And then when you take that observation of imposing the sync right into deal, and you expand it to Peloton or TikTok, potentially even more, and then you can flip it and say, well, what happens if the future of TikTok is karaoke?Not saying it's gonna happen, but it's not implausible if that was the case. That favors publishers even more. So there's all these weird ways that the business could develop, which could favor one side of the fence. The labels and the artists continue getting three quarters of the cash or the other side of the fence.Publishers and songwriters start enforcing their rights and getting. A more balanced share and that that's what we need to look out for when we're investing incorporates. That's what we need to look out for. If you're a singer and a songwriter and you're trying to understand your royalty statements[00:30:57] Dan Runcie: mm-hmm.Well, like how much higher do you think? I mean, if you had to put a percentage on it for the TOS or the Pelotons, and I guess as well, you made me think of sync deals, right? Like for the folks that are selling, or their song gets placed on one of these hulu series or one of these HBO Max series, like what does that ratio look like, you know, from a ballpark for those.[00:31:20] Will Page: So I think a 50 50 split would be the upper bend of the goal. If, if a song is placed in a Hulu TV show or you know, an artist I've worked with for many years, Yu Dito Brazilian composer, his songs now in this famous easy Jet commercial over here in Europe. The artists and the publisher would see around a 50 50 split of those revenues.Now, would that happen in the world of streaming? Unlikely. But I think if you can get to a stage where you're giving the record label a dollar and the publisher 50 cents as a ratio, and I've gotta repeat the word ratio here, you know, that's potentially achievable with this post Spotify economy. I don't think it's gonna happen with the business we're looking at today, but I think that's a potential scenario for the business developing tomorrow.That's the thing. If I can quote Ralph Simon, a, a longtime mentor to me, he always says, this industry is always about what's happening next. And then he goes on to say, it always has been. It's a great reminder of just, you know, we're restless souls in this business. We've achieved this amazing thing in the past 10 years with streaming.Got there. Banked there what's coming next, who would've thought Peloton would've had a music licensing department 18 months ago? Now they're like a top 10 account for major labels.[00:32:30] Dan Runcie: It's impressive. It really is. And I think it's a good reminder because anytime that you get a little bit too bullish and excited about what the current thing is, it's, we always gotta be thinking about what's next.And you mentioned a few times about a post Spotify economy. What does that look like from your perspective? I think there's likely a number of things that we've already talked about with more of these other B2B platforms or where these other platforms in general, having licensing deals. But when you say, or what do you think about post Spotify economy?What comes to mind for you?[00:33:02] Will Page: Let me throw my fist, your words, your jaw, and try and knock you out for a second. We talked about price for a minute, and we talked about streaming. We haven't talked about gaming, but you noticed the Epic Games. It's just acquired band. I learned a fascinating stat about bandcam, which relates to my book Tarzan Economics.There's a chapter in the book called, "Make or Buy", where I sat down with the management of the band radio head. We went through the entire in Rainbow Story for the first time ever, a real global exclusive. Explain how that deal worked out, what they were really achieving when they did their voluntary tip jar model.And by the way, can I just put a shout out to one of your listeners and live from the Ben Zion. Best remix of Radiohead I've ever heard in my life is Amplive, Weird Fishez hip hop version of the entire album. But Radiohead tested voluntary tip jar pricing. Now check this out. If you put your album out on Band Cap, could be a vinyl record.Remember, it's the people who are paying to stream who are also buying vinyl. So if you put a ban, an album, my own banquette, and you say name your own price, no minimum, and there's a guidance there of 10 bucks, the average paid is. People go above 40% asking, and that could be for a super rich blockbuster artist who tries something out in band camp.That could be for some band who's broken Brooklyn, Robin and coins together, trying to make them breed. People go 40% above asking when you say name your own price. And that's interesting for me. there's a great academic paper by Francesco Cornell from Duke University. She asked, how should you price a museum?An intuition says Top-down. Museum should set the price. Adults 10 bucks, kids, five bucks, pensioners, some type of discount arrangement. But she said, no, let the visitors set the price because that way rich people will give you even more and poor people can attend and you'll see more cash overall. And I would like to see a little bit more of that experimentation around pricing compared to the past 20 years where we've had a ceiling on price, where if you really love a band, all you can give a platform is $9.99 and not a penny more.I think that's, we're suffocating love. We're putting a ceiling on love and we need to take that ceiling and smash through it and let people express love through different means. But I love that ban camp story. Whatever you suggest, I'll give you 40% above cuz it's art. We're not dealing with commodity, we're dealing with culture and that's why we gotta remind ourselves.[00:35:13] Dan Runcie: It's like the Met model, right? Where at least the last time I went, it was like $20 was the recommendation. But to your point, it at least had some vary of a threshold. But the people, a lot of the people that go there that have a lot of money end up giving much more. So I hear you on that. That's a great note to end on. Will, thanks again. Thank you so much.[00:35:33] Dan Runcie Outro:If you enjoyed this podcast, go ahead and share it with a friend. Copy the link, text it to a friend, post it in your group chat. Post it in your Slack groups. Wherever you and your people talk, spread the word. That's how capital continues to grow and continues to reach the right people. And while you're at it, if you use Apple Podcast, Go ahead.Rate the podcast, give it a high rating, and leave a review. Tell people why you like the podcast. That helps more people discover the show. Thank you in advance. Talk to you next week.

If you had a billion-dollar fund to buy the full rights, masters, and publishing of ANY music artists — who are you acquiring to maximize shareholder value? This question was top of mind for real-life portfolio managers the past three years as music catalog sales boomed. Now my guest on the episode, Denisha Kuhlor, and I are asking ourselves the same hypothetical question.In this episode, we’re doing a mock music rights draft. Akin to the NFL Draft, each of us getting seven picks. Any artists’ catalog, living or dead, is on the table for us to acquire. Our goal is to score the biggest ROI for investors on a 10-year timeline from purely catalog revenue — streaming, syncs, and partnerships, among other sources. Touring or merchandise revenue isn’t factored in, and neither are future catalog releases, only what’s already been released. As you’ll see on this episode, Denisha and I took very different approaches to our portfolios. One was more “risk on”, while the other was filled with more “blue chips.” Here’s what to expect:[0:01] Draft parameters [4:51] First-round picks[9:42] Second-round picks[14:21] Third-round picks[18:49] Fourth-round picks[21:55] Fifth-round picks[26:04] Sixth-round picks[29:20] Seventh-round picks[37:33] Honorable mentions [52:21] Up-and-coming artistsListen: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | SoundCloud | Stitcher | Overcast | Amazon | Google Podcasts | Pocket Casts | RSSHost: Dan Runcie, @RuncieDan, trapital.coGuests: Denisha Kuhlor, @denishakuhlorToday’s episode was brought to you by feature.fm. Grow your fanbase  and music career with their marketing suite. Get 50% off your first three months by using code: TRAPITAL50Enjoy this podcast? Rate and review the podcast here! ratethispodcast.com/trapitalTrapital is home for the business of music, media and culture. Learn more by reading Trapital’s free memo.TRANSCRIPTDenisha Kuhlor: We've talked about Burna Boy on the podcast before, so don't necessarily have to go over all of his stats, but I think that in one thing I'm finding with people discovering, music from the continent. Is that when they like the artist or there's things they like about the artist or the genre, they go back and listen, to the past catalog.And so I feel like there's still a lot of untouched ground in terms of people discovering his music and listening to his whole catalog and given how timeless in a lot of ways some of his music feels, I think that we'll have new fans discovering him over and over for a long time and getting to also benefit from the upside of that catalog is great.I'll also say, he's pretty feature light as well. He's increased the amount of features that he's had in some of his more recent albums, but even like him, some of his breakout singles, whether Ye or Last Last, were Independence, or songs that he did independently and didn't have people featuring.So I think in terms of some of the big records, there's solo records, which is exciting and that his catalog has a lot of value for people to discover and wanna to.Dan Runcie Intro: Hey, welcome to the Trapital Podcast. I'm your host and the founder of Trapital, Dan Runcie. This podcast is your place to gain insights from executives in music, media, entertainment, and more who are taking hip hop culture to the next level. Dan Runcie: Today's episode is one I am really excited for. This is a music rights draft. We are going to be breaking down the artists that we would most wanna have their music rights for. So today's guest friend of the podcast, Denisha Kuhlor, founder of Stan, her and I are both managers of billion dollar funds and we can acquire the full rights, Masters and publishing to any artist, living or dead.And our job is to maximize value for our investors for the next 10 years. We each get to pick 10 artists and their full rights of music, and we draft them one by one. Denisha, are you ready? How are you feeling?Denisha Kuhlor: I am, I'm super excited for this. like keep racking my head, I think till the last minute with each pick. but yeah, I'm ready to get Dan Runcie: started.Right. It's funny because we're chatting about this yesterday and I almost wonder like if our chat yesterday like shifts anything, it's like, oh, okay. That's how you're thinking about this. Okay. That's how I'm thinking about this.Denisha Kuhlor: Exactly, in a funny way, I have some more compassion for venture investors because I can see how societal shift or even group think can shift your perspective even if just a bit. Dan Runcie: Yeah, it's fascinating, and I mean with this, we did try to keep the parameters of it a bit clear because obviously in the real music rights acquisition world, there are many different strategies about how these firms are buying and acquiring these rights. Some of them are sitting and holding on them, but we are putting ourselves in a different bucket.We are assuming that we have the means to maximize this catalogs and this artist's value through multimedia, through sync, through other partnerships, and just the revenue that it naturally generates as sound recordings themselves. And we assume that we're only acquiring what that artist has released up to that point.Of course, what that artist continues to do in the future may shift the perception of the value of what they've done, but we are only looking at what they've done up to this point. So we're saying that just to lay the groundwork, because someone may be like, oh, what about so-and-so and so-and-so may be an artist that blew up in the past five years.They may not have Steve as a catalog, but who knows? Maybe we'll both have a few of those picks.Denisha Kuhlor: Exactly. Super exciting Dan Runcie: All right, so we are gonna be so a few things to just keep in mind as well for listeners. So a few of the factors you both considered were expected longevity of the artist music themselves, which is a big piece of this. You're acquiring these rights, you're trying to get a sense for what is the music that people are still going to listen to, right?It's one thing if you dominate the charts, that you have a song that takes off, but there's a decay curve. So we're trying to find those artists that have the value, but have the much less steep decay curve as it goes down year over year. There's also a mix too. There's the stable picks, which a lot of the rights go after, which are attractive, but there's also some higher upside picks or some riskier bets.Where do those fit in? And then we're also taken into account the share of the song recordings that the artists actually have given that certain genres such as hip hop or r and b and pop music specifically, there's a lot more collaboration. There's a lot more hands being shared in that pot. So, how does that line up with another genre where that artist may have a higher percentage of those things?All those things get factored into how we pick this. So I'm ready to get started and I wanna give you the first pick so you can go and then I'll go after that.Denisha Kuhlor: Oh, thank you, so my first pick is Mariah Carey. for a few reasons. One, Mariah Carey has one of the most amazing songs in her collection, with Christmas, right? Like it's just being Christmas time, every Christmas, you know, you're going to get, a spike in revenue. Mariah Carey's also been very notable, about talking about that.She writes a lot of her own music, and I don't think how many people realize how much of a prolific songwriter that she is as well. And with the nature of R and B, much to what you talked about earlier with it being collaborative, Mariah Carey seems to be embraced by a lot of rappers for samples.So while I definitely think it will be pricey based off literally, all I want for Christmas, if anything, I think that it's. It's a bit of a safe, but also Sure. Fire and, and stable. expectation revenue. Dan Runcie: That was my number two pick. So we're definitely aligned there. It makes perfect sense because even if you, all I want for Christmas is a big piece of the pie, I wanna say 300 million streams per year on Spotify was the stat that I heard, and I forget the exact revenue number that it generates. I don't wanna quote it, but it's huge.Almost 20 number one singles that she's had. So the longevity's there, and as we know we're talking about this a little yesterday, but there's a reason that catalog isn't one that's getting acquired because, A, the people that own it, and I know she may own maybe some of the more recent stuff. I don't know if, Columbia still owns, you know, the stuff from the nineties, especially given the nature of her deal and stuff like that.But I mean, it's up there, it's definitely one of the most valuable ones. So good. Yeah. Good for you on that one. So I'll take my number one pick here and the number one pick. For this, for me, so much of it was thinking about how millennials and this group are the dominant users of streaming.Streaming makes up a bulk of the revenue for these streaming services. And who is the biggest artist for millennials overall? Just you look at the sheer numbers and everything like that, it has to be Taylor Swift. Miss 1989 herself, I will take those albums, especially these rerecorded ones, Taylor's version, because they'reDenisha Kuhlor: That's just what I was gonna ask.Dan Runcie: Yeah. I may not get Scooter bronze version, but I'll get Taylor's version and I'll keep that. I think that it's rare to find a star that has as much impact as she does that is as recent in this way, I mean, just the pure demand for this Eras tour. She could have done 10 x times the number of shows and been touring for the next five years in a in stadiums and still had plenty of demand left over.And of course, we're not counting touring revenue in this, but it just goes to show how big everything else is. The fact that midnights broke records, both in streaming and in hard sales, I think I saw 230 million dollars that album generated in its revenue. Of course. That her entire rights will likely be owned, you know, herself just given the Taylor's version of everything.Currently I'm licensed with Republican Universal Music Group. But if in a perfect world you could acquire that, I will take that. She's able to dominate in all of these multiple platforms and if we're really trying to say, okay, 10 years from now, each of her albums is still in the top 50 of the billboard, 200, just from like a rankings perspective.Well, not all of 'em, but a lot of them, and I think it's harder to come by. So yeah, I'll take T Swift.Denisha Kuhlor: Yeah, I think it's definitely a solid pick her music evokes so much nostalgia especially as her fans get older, that they'll be listening to it for life, right? Because it's not necessarily attached to a moment or even a recency of today, even though they can appreciate that.it's, yeah, it's music that's the soundtrack to their lives. So, it makes a ton of sense. And she's also another prolific songwriter, so I would assume, from an ownership perspective, it's quite attractive.Dan Runcie: Yeah. Not as attractive as Mariah though, because I feel like Taylor more recently, especially with the more pop albums, there was a lot of Max Martin production and a lot of other big name folks and you know, Kendrick Lamar, guest verses and stuff like that. And Mariah had some of that, but I still feel like she always had like her single, you know what I mean? It's like Yeah.fantasy was, they had a remix with ODB or they had a honey remix with the lock, but there was still the core Mariah version that was justDenisha Kuhlor: Yeah, that's a great point. The breakout has frequently remained just her. Yeah. Dan Runcie: so we'll see. But yeah, who's your second pick?Denisha Kuhlor: So my second pick, I thought a lot too about, like world music as we say, or just music that's global. much to your point as well around streaming. I kind of think that it's exciting to pick, an artist that can dominate globally that's, not necessarily a pop artist. And so for that, I went back and forth.Probably two of the biggest artists. but landed on Bad Bunny, Bad Bunny to me is one just an amazing and exciting artist. He also has a great amount of volume, but much to the point we just made about Mariah Carey's, Taylor Swifts, I think he's really optimized a lot of his catalog, for music that he makes and that music that he solely makes.Additionally, and I know we're not counting touring, but the sheer amount of numbers he's done touring, I think has not only earned him new fans, but earned him kind of the same type of fan appetite that Taylor Swift has in which the music will evoke a certain nostalgia, whether they saw him perform it on top of a gas station or when he was driving through the Bronx, that leads them to want to continue to listen to this music for the rest of their lives, which hopefully will be financially lucrative.Dan Runcie: He was on my list as well. You can't ignore just the huge, massive success of this last album, UN Varano Centi. We saw that album dominate week after week after week, and it, the songs are still on Spotify's Top 50 and they're still having traction there. And in an era where there's just so much more music, if you can get a song like that that comes out in 2022 that's still coming out or just an album, it's rare and I know we talk a lot about how monoculture itself is just harder to come by from a artist that is in the US or UK just because those markets are so much more saturated. But the closest we get to anyone reaching Beatlemania is someone like Bad Bunny. So that's a great.Denisha Kuhlor: Exactly, exactly. I also think a lot both, Drake's wrapped about Bad Bunny numbers and Kanye's reference Bad Bunny's, success. And so I feel like even if his peers in the industry are kind of in some ways either looking at him aspirationally or like he's one that could potentially, hit my success, is also a great indicator.Dan Runcie: All right, so the next pick I have here is, you mentioned him a second ago, the streaming king himself, 70 million streams. Drake, it's hard to think about the streaming era and not think about him. Just the massive hits that he's had and every time that he releases an album, it still creates this moment that few have the ability to be able to reach moving forward.I know Birdman will never give up those rights, and Young Money extensively will never give up those rights, but if I had the choice, I would take it. I think the knock against Drake potentially though I will acknowledge is that one. Just the high number of features and samples with all that, there's a high, there's a less likelihood that he may own all or just have a higher percentage of the revenue coming in for this stuff.But just the sheer volume of whether it's the mixtapes, the playlist, the little two packs that he puts out, the albums, especially some of the ones from like, especially the cash money albums, honestly, from, when was that? So I guess you had 2010, it was official first album, but you had so far gone oh nine and then everything up to Scorpion.Yeah, those are the biggest albums of the last decade. So I'll take DrakeDenisha Kuhlor: Yeah. Yeah. super solid pick. As someone who has seen Drake in concert 10 times, there's a few things recently. Yeah. 10 times. Yeah. So a few things that stuck out to me with Trigg specifically, The Serious Show. So the serious show was a lot of like deep cuts or songs that he hasn't recently performed on some of his tours. And you could just see that fans loved it, right?A lot of people wanted access to tickets and really loved the music. And then, lastly in part of, in going to these tours, there were so many times that I saw, that he would like go off of stage and to keep the crowd like engaged. They would do a whole set of his music that he wasn't going to perform, and the crowd literally went just as crazy as if he was on, if he was on stage so much to just like the emotional factor that his catalog has.I feel like Drake has provided the music of a generation. And so, regardless volume wise, they'll be continuing to listen for a long time.Dan Runcie: Who's your number two?Denisha Kuhlor: So next I'm going with Burna Boy. one, we've talked about Burna Boy on the podcast before, so don't necessarily have to go over all of his stats, but I think that in one thing I'm finding with people discovering, music from the continent. Is that when they like the artist or there's things they like about the artist or the genre, they go back and listen, to the past catalog.And so I feel like there's still a lot of untouched ground in terms of people discovering his music and listening to his whole catalog and given how timeless in a lot of ways some of his music feels, I think that we'll have new fans discovering him over and over for a long time and getting to also benefit from the upside of that catalog is great.I'll also say, he's pretty feature light as well. He's increased the amount of features that he's had in some of his more recent albums, but even like him, some of his breakout singles, whether Ye or Last Last, were Independence, or songs that he did independently and didn't have people featuring.So I think in terms of some of the big records, there's solo records, which is exciting and that his catalog has a lot of value for people to discover and wanna to. Dan Runcie: Yeah, he was on the list as well, and I think the attractive thing with him is similar to the bad Bunny perspective where almost more so because if you are one of the signature artists that is on this entire continent, well, I think for him, obviously more West Africa, but if you're one of the signature artists that's on this entire continent, you have the closer thing to that Beattlemania effect.And as more people there have access to streaming as more of that just grows and develops, you're going to get that curve too that just grows naturally with what's already there. And you can't undersell that. And I think given an artist like that too, there's probably huge sync opportunities as multimedia and entertainment starts to grow from that, from, from those parts of the worlds too.So there's a lot of value there. Yeah.Denisha Kuhlor: exactly. Who do you have Dan Runcie: pick, this is a pick with the mind and not necessarily with the heart, but I am a, in the role of a asset manager or not the role of a fan. And my pick here is Eminem and my pick for Eminem, and the reason I pick him is because his music is still some of the most streamed music across the board.And his Curtains Call album was the bestselling rap album in the UK in 2022. His greatest hits album from 2005 was the best selling rap album 17 years later. And I remember seeing that stat and I was just like, wow. And then you just think about the nature of his music. And even though he's someone that I feel, if you're someone that lives in the Twitter circles that you and I live in, Eminem is someone that I think has largely fallen out ofpopular discourse.And people do look at him a bit more, distinctly in a way that they did in 20 years ago. But if you don't live in those circles, which the majority of people don't, they still listen to his music and still revere him. And just on a sheer number perspective, there's probably more people that listen to hip hop that have an artist like Eminem and their top three and they're top two and not two.And you look at some of the numbers as well for songs like Till I Collapse and Lose Yourself, that just get played over and over for people working out and all of these things. Those songs have a timelessness to them. I mean, on stats, he was the bestselling like recorded artist of the two thousands. He was up there for the 2010s.He still tours massively, and even though a lot of his albums that probably generate the most revenue are songs that I'm no longer listening to, I can acknowledge that this has huge value. And as an asset manager, as a fund manager, I would do quite well with that, with his rights.Denisha Kuhlor: Yeah. No, I don't know if that's where I would have went, but after hearing your explanation, it makes a ton of sense. Eminem fans are, independent in the sense that they're fans regardless of whether he's the top of a pop culture, relevancy or not. yeah, I think, that's really, really interesting.And the Stan's side, he literally pioneered the word we all use today, so I think in some ways too, people forget just, how impactful culturally he's been. so yeah, that makes a Dan Runcie: Nice. All right. who's your.Denisha Kuhlor: So for my next one, I kind of wanted to go in a direction of some newer artists that are still proving themselves out of it, but I think have a lot of potential. but keeping in mind to what they've done so far, I wanna go with Lizzo. I. think of Lizzo, you know, a lot of us were actually introduced, to her in because of a sync, in one of the, in a movie on Netflix.I'm blanking on the name of the movie, but that sync actually introduced me, to her. I think that Lizzo's music is just like the perfect type of music for a movie trailer, in the sense of some of her upbeat, more like pop, pop records. It's like the perfect songs to usher in like a romcom.So from a sing perspective, I think it has a lot of potential. She's also known as, pretty talented on the songwriting side, so I think the ownership would be, I think the ownership would be attractive. and in her last tours, she's done pretty well while also there were smaller venues, the fan base and her having an engaged fan base is definitely there as well.Obviously and from an asset manager perspective, definitely wouldn't be looking to pick it up. But the numbers I've picked up, some of my earlier bets, but I think it would be a fun bet to have and see how it does in the future.Dan Runcie: It's funny because she's someone that I think she has a very high diehard fan to fan ratio, if that makes sense. And I say that because she's someone who. Does quite well. She sells out arenas and she does multiple shows in some cities, in arenas, in an era where it's very hard to get artists that are topping the charts with their streaming to sell out the same venues.The knock against her though is that she doesn't stream necessarily as well. Like she hasn't had an album that's like top the charts. I don't think she's had, you know, a 100K in the first week necessarily. But those fans do show up. so there's something to be said there. I think the other thing too, when you're mentioning the sync, I was thinking about, you know, that car, I think it's Carnival Cruise, that commercial, and it has that song that's like Hands to the Sky.Show me that your mind, like, I didn't even realize that was a Lizzo song until I just looked it up because it was stuck in my head and I'm like, oh, that's a Lizzo song from like 2016, like Pret Truth. So I think you're right with the sync piece of it. I mean, a song like Truth Hurts Itself, juice, literally anything from whether it's special or the album before this, I think that there is strong potential there.So I think Lizzo is definitely a good multimedia play. Assuming like we are in this role, you have the ability to maximize the asset.Denisha Kuhlor: Yeah, exactly, exactly. It definitely comes down to maximization of the asset on her part, and in a way. I don't see streaming continuing to go up. I think her engage fans like her, they listen to her, and they keep it at, and they keep it at that. So without kind of very targeted, like a targeted approach to maximizing her syncs, the asset becomes less attractive.Dan Runcie: So the next pick, and this is a bit strategic because I wanna take this artist before you take them, is SZA and. picking SZA because she obviously doesn't have a huge catalog. We're talking two studio albums really, that have came out. But if I could get those studio albums for a good price, I'm getting an album in control that is literally stayed on the charts for five years.People are listening, streaming and buying the hell out of that thing, and it hasn't really stopped. And this album is setting all these records and every time you see what the 10, 11 weeks that SSA's SOS has been at the top of the charts, that's in the territory with like Adele, Beyonce and all these other artists because first here's breaking records for female R and B artists then is just, you know, female artists.Now it's artists in general, like how many people are at those levels. So sure. I don't think I'm necessarily gonna have to pay Taylor Swift, Drake or Eminem numbers to get SZA rights, but this is a hits game, and if I can get two of her hits, certified hits albums, that could be worth more than 10 of someone else's mediocre ones.Denisha Kuhlor: I completely agree. SZA is it makes so much sense. It makes so much sense. I'd also say what's so exciting about CSA when you think about it is two studio albums and being able to maintain that relevancy and the sheer amount of time that those albums have lived, is so exciting and you can continue to maximize those two albums even for years to come.Because for everyone, it still feels very relevant.Dan Runcie: All right. Who's your, you've picked five, right? Okay, so last two picks. who's your sixth pick?Denisha Kuhlor: Yes. So I'm gonna keep the S theme here with SZA. and this one was somewhat a big streaming play. but Summer Walker, summer Walker was one that initially when I first made this list, didn't come to mind to be honest. But as I thought about it, and I will probably mention this more in some of my honorable mentions, but I was going for Usher, and I thought about the record that they had together and thought about a lot of the records that Summer Walker has broken. and shout out to the folks that love Renaissance, I think that people don't even realize or truly understand how big of an artist she's been, from a streaming perspective. she's had some really impressive numbers when she releases the album, she's done great numbers. and People continue to listen to her. I also think, you know, she's toyed around with retiring as well as not doing, as well as not doing tours, creating less opportunities for fans to be able to interact with her, which, fortunately or unfortunately leads them back to her music as that's one of the only sources of ways that they can interact with her.So, I don't know if I see as much sync potential with an artist like her as I would maybe a Lizzo, but I think she can continue to generate solid, solid streaming numbers, for years, foryears. Dan Runcie: a good pick. It's funny, she's someone that's not on my list, but when you mentioned her I was like, I can't believe I'd even think of the think of her. But you're absolutely right. She has, especially from a streaming perspective, she has numbers that rival some of the artists that we mentioned before when it comes to streaming and on average, streaming is making up 70 to 80% often of the revenue that comes in from these music rights.So, it makes sense to be able to have that. And I think that just given how much she's been able to speak to an audience that doesn't really have as many people speaking directly to them as well in this way of, okay, who is making music for black women, who is making like doing that? And I think when you think about it that way, that list does become slim.Especially when we're talking about artists at this level, obviously, you know, touring and some of the more personal things of just like being out there that isn't her style, that isn't her vibe or her personality necessarily. But we don't necessarily need that and I think that there's clearly value in over it, still over it.And, you know, the small features and things that she's done here and there since then. Denisha Kuhlor: Yeah. Dan Runcie: All right. So mine, I have two picks left. this is where it does get tough because, looking through some of these names and there's some ones that I like and, okay, so I am going to take Bruno Mars and I'm gonna take Mars because the fact that he has music that I think honestly can transcend in terms of the versatility of the music.Songs like 24K Magic or Uptown Funk, or.Denisha Kuhlor: Very intergenerational as well. Dan Runcie: Yeah. You hear, could hear it in the supermarket, you could hear it being out, like you could hear it in syncs or different types of things, even the more recent stuff with Silk Sonic and getting his chair of that with with Anderson .Paak there, I think there's a huge potential there.I can't speak as much to the hard numbers, but I do think that the multimedia opportunities are there. He's a pit maker and I think it would be valuable to have his stuff in there.Denisha Kuhlor: Yeah, so from kind of a multimedia or even multidisciplinary perspective, my next one is Pharrell.Pharrell's been a part of a lot of really big records, records that feel intergenerational. I would say, and I don't know the numbers of this. I would say his streaming probably isn't in the highest percentile, but it's also not in the lowest percentile.Like it's somewhere probably in the media, in the middle, given all the records he's been a part of. That makes it kind just a steady asset and also transcends multiple decades in a way that if something does come back in style, You can benefit from that upside. He also has a few records, I think about a record like Happy, that sync wise I think will continue to be used for years and years to come, in a host of ways.So Pharrell is one that could be a really safe bet or maybe a really unsafe bet, just dependent on how, things go. But I think there's enough factors, in, which he falls kind of nicely in to justify the bet. But I will say I don't think it will be, I don't think it will be cheap but I do think it can have a big upside.Dan Runcie: The upside smart thing about that pick, he's someone else I didn't think of, but I think it was a really good pick because you get the artist Pharrell and you get the producer Pharrell, so you get everything from, I forget that Sta but when was it? In 2002 or 2003, the Neptunes were responsible for 43% of the music that was on top 40 radio that was on, you know, pop So you get all those songs and then you get any of the stuff you did with NERD, you get any of like the Child Rebel Soldier stuff. I mean it makes a lot of sense. And then even songs like, Get Lucky was huge as well. I know that there's been a bunch of controversy around blurred lines, but I'm still sure that the revenue from that song continues to be massive.So I think that's a smart pick.Denisha Kuhlor: Exactly. And I think in the future we'll see kind of that doubling, right? artists like a Pharrell will continue to be super valuable when it comes to being able to capture the peak of their rights because they just have them.Dan Runcie: Definitely, definitely. so then with the last pick, it's funny, I hesitated with this one a bit, but I'm gonna go ahead and pick it anyway. It's probably the catalog or the rights that would go for the most money if anyone's was on the table at all right now. And it's Michael Jackson and I'm going to take his, because the fact that Thriller is now over 40 years old and I think that the baseline for streams from that song and streams from everything else is quite high.It is strong and there's value there. This is another one where I think I'm separating a bit of the personal versus the, you know, actual like business asset aspect of it, because I do think that the multimedia aspect of it. Yeah. You know, that would be difficult, and even me as an asset manager would probably be finding ways to create multimedia opportunities for that asset continuing forward.But on the other hand, there's still Broadway musicals, there's still Vegas intimate shows that they are creating off of this person's music. I think Variety had released that report a couple of months ago that said that they were in talks of a 900 million sale for half of the rights. I forget like exactly what the terms would be and including a few things, but I felt like that was too big not to ignore from an asset management perspective.So it would be the Michael Jackson rights for the final pick.Denisha Kuhlor: Wow. That's a really strong, a really strong final pick and makes my last pick even harder. Dan Runcie: You had seven though, right? Denisha Kuhlor: Yes, I did. I did. My seventh one is just a different caliberDan Runcie: Wait, wait. You, oh, oh, oh. With Pharrell you mean?Denisha Kuhlor: no, no, no, no. So my seventh one actually is, Dan Runcie: Wait, wait. Did we miss one? Hold on. Let me just run through it real quick. You had Mariah, Bad Bunny, Burna Boy, Lizzo, Summer Walker, Pharrell Denisha Kuhlor: YesDan Runcie: Oh, oh. We both have one more. Oh, okay. I missed up. Okay. You're right, you'reright. Yeah. okay. All one?Denisha Kuhlor: Yes. So my last pick is DMX. One, I think in a lot of ways DMX has a very unique style of music. It has a very unique style of rap. Talking to a lot of, or not talking to, but I guess watching their interviews. A lot of rappers are very inspired by DMX and he still gets credited, for, you know, rap styles or little lines that, artists borrow or throw in their music and he has a bit of a high sample potential.I think we'll see some of his music sampled more and oddly enough, whether it's like a movie, like a Creed or something like that, this sheer like BPM of some of his music, is definitely attractive from like a sync perspective. For, upbeat movies that wanna like, leverage a rap song or leverage hip hop.and I also think, and he's done very well in getting quite a few syncs when it comes to video games, I'm thinking about sings so often this podcast from a movie perspective, but gaming syncs are huge as well. and DMX's music is quite huge in the gaming community. So if anything, from an, optimizing the asset perspective, I would focus on optimizing his syncs for gaming, because of the BPM of his music.And I think I would get it at a favorable rate.Dan Runcie: Yeah, I couldn't imagine there might be some high ROI potential there, I would say and just given how dominant that run was, and I think some people forget. Yeah. Each of those first albums was just like, you know, topping the charts and everything. Especially from like 98 to 03'. it was, on, I mean, there were other rappers who may have had like, you know, bigger commercial success at that time from whether it was someone like Eminem or some others. But in terms of like relevance, that still matters to a lot of people and how that can continue. X is up there. Do you think we'll see an X movie at some point?Denisha Kuhlor: You know, I hope we do. and that's how I reference, how a lot of rappers like, feel about him because musicians appreciating another artist are probably our most likely way. You see obviously 50 cent, 50 cent in TV and film production, Drake with Euphoria, even Childish Gambino, right?So him being revered by other artists I think puts him on the best path for us to see that. which also would be Dan Runcie: Yeah. That's a good pick. So I think so. I actually, but now my seventh pick, because I'm like re-looking at these. I had Taylor, Drake, Eminem, SZA, Bruno Mars, Michael, and then now the seventh pick. this is tough, but, I'm gonna take the Weeknd and I'm gonna take him because Denisha Kuhlor: Oh, amazing. Dan Runcie: I think it's really hard to have a song that's been released like in the pandemic era of music that still tops the charts, but everything from After Hours is still getting so much radio play.He just did a remix with Ariana Grande, Die For You, a song that came out now, what, seven years ago. And that song had topped the charts. He has this ability to just, I think it's him and a handful of other artists that just have this ability to make music that can continue to like pierce through. I mean, we didn't get as much of that from Don FM but I think even he himself, like that album didn't get as much, you know, focus the same way that everything from After Hours did.And he has this way of just kind of capturing, a generation just with like the feel and the vibe, I think sync potential, especially as he's gonna be in more movies now himself and what that could look like. So, yeah definitely.Denisha Kuhlor: That's super strong. He makes hits.Dan Runcie: Another pop artist, so I know, you know, there's a bunch of Max Martin and other producers that'll get their share, but I'll take his, so, Yeah. No, super. Right. So yeah, so let's just round out the lists here. and then let's share. So with the first pick, and then in order you took Mariah Carey, then Bad Bunny, then Burna Boy, then Lizzo, Summer Walker, then Pharrell Williams and DMX. And then I took Taylor Swift, Drake, Eminem, SZA, Bruno Mars, Michael Jackson, and the Weeknd.So, yeah. How are you feeling about your picks? Did you feel like you got the artist that you wanted? Do you feel like you, you know, got the ones that you wanted to like, lighten everything up?Denisha Kuhlor: Yeah, I do. I think that some of those artists are bets that would hopefully, positively surprise me. but there's enough artists, within those picks that I know revenue will be generated and will have a positive upside regardless. If anything, we can continue to crown on Mariah Carey and some of Pharrell's records and even just the dominance Bad Bunny continues to have for a very long time while also seeing, how dominant, for decades to come an artist like a Summer Walker.Dan Runcie: Yeah, I think if we were to look at these catalogs like, or look at both of our portfolios, I think you would have like the Vanguard Growth Fund and I would have like the Vanguard Blue Chip Fund if that makes sense. Right?Denisha Kuhlor: Exactly. Exactly, exactly. Dan Runcie: You know, you may generate some higher returns, but with that, you know, there's more risk that comes with it as well.but yeah, mine, think it's probably assumed that you would generate higher returns because I feel like SZA's probably the, not even like, oh, it's probably the pick of mine that is the least blue chip relative to the rest of them. And yeah. enough, even someone like Bruno Mars is probably more skewed towards less of that certified pick on mine just because of how much of a more, strong base the other artists do have.Denisha Kuhlor: Totally. If I had to, compare thinking about venture, I would say you definitely took like a series C, series D, growth fund, with a few, maybe more Series A, like a series A pick. I think maybe this is to my roots, I took more of a series B potentially with a good opportunity fund and skewed heavily ine and seed, with a few of those artists as well. Dan Runcie: No, that makes sense. That makes sense. What were some of your honorable mentions? Yeah, maybe you can name like three, maybe first I wanna do honorable mentions, and then second, I wanna talk about some rising folks. Maybe some people that you would've picked, but maybe you didn't pick, because it's like, no, it's too early.It's too early, right? But yeah,Denisha Kuhlor: let yeah, no, Dan Runcie: with the honorable mentions like who are one or two that you had considered?Denisha Kuhlor: For sure. So the biggest honorable mention for me is Usher, Dan Runcie: yep. He Denisha Kuhlor: um Dan Runcie: mine too.Denisha Kuhlor: usher, the Vegas residency, the, tiny desk Usher's been having a phenomenal few last years. and I think people don't even realize the residency really brought it back for a lot of people. The breadth of his catalog's so talented, his music is intergenerational or continues to transcend generations. Usher was one that I thought a lot about. I was kind of going back and forth between Usher and Pharrell, and I picked Pharrell because of the exposure to so many other artists that he has. but Usher was a really, really big one.Dan Runcie: Yeah, he was on my list too, because I think similarly, this Vegas residency has created a moment and it's hard to be able to do that. I can't speak to, I haven't looked at his stream numbers and I mean, I really even like back when I feel like Usher's music was at like the top of pop culture and stuff. I don't, I wasn't tracking, oh, how high Confessions on the Billboard 200. That's just not something that I thought or cared about time, but I think that he's won. He was on my list as well. Someone else that was on my list too was, Kendrick Lamar was on my list too, because good kid, m.A.A.d city's been on the charts for a decade plus.People are still listening to that, and that's higher charts now than what the last album is. Mr. Morale, the big step was, I know that album was more controversial but the fact that Damn and, good kid, m.A.A.d city are still on the charts. You have still Pimp A Butterfly. You never know what type of multimedia opportunities that can turn into.I think if you're talking at least in my opinion, like pure like bar for bar, like the best like rapper lyricist of the past decade plus, I think it is him and there's something to be said for what value have. So yeah, he was who I was going back and forth with him and the Weeknd, for that seventh pick.But yeah, he was my honor, audible mention.Denisha Kuhlor: Kendrick pick is strong. my rap honorable mention is actually J. Cole Dan Runcie: Yep. I had him on the list. Denisha Kuhlor: As someone that gets mentioned in, a lot of the conversations with Kendrick and I think for Cole, a few reasons. one, the whispers of retiring are looming and we know that he has the desire to retire sometime in the near future.So I think people will cherish the records that he has even more, the fan base of the Dreamville built is super engaged. super active, and I think we'll be that way for a long time to come. And J. Cole, you know, picked up a lot of good features when he was coming up. Maybe it's the Rock Nation effect or whatever, but he has some amazing features, whether it's, party with Beyonce or just like, he has some really great features that he's gotten as well. So yeah, that's one I would be super excited to have.Dan Runcie: Every time I look at hits, daily double stats, just seeing who's trending. No role models is always on that chart somewhere. and it's now been, eight and a half, nine years since that song came out. So it's a hits game. If I can get one of the biggest rap songs of the decade and one of the more popular rap albums of the decade too, then you take that obviously so many other hits as you mentioned Party, and a lot of the other ones that he's then.But that song, I think itself is worth at least bringing the conversation up. A few people that I didn't mention, but I'm curious if they came up for you. We can just keep these kind of rapid fire before we get to the Rising But did you consider Ed Sheeran?Denisha Kuhlor: You know, I did, I thought a lot about like having UK representation, . and he came up for me there. He's also done a lot of like features with, African artists, whether it's Stormzy, Burna Boy, but I ultimately shied away from him. I don't even know if I have the right things to point to it, but something didn't feel right.Dan Runcie: Okay. He was on the list I had as well. I just preferred the other ones more.Denisha Kuhlor: Yeah. Like it's not even fully like quantitative, like no. Yeah, It just, yeah, like he was compelling, but not compelling enough to make you wanna get excited. Dan Runcie: Yeah, it's like I know that Divide was a huge album. I know that Shape of You is probably one of the biggest hits of the past 15 years if we're going back that far. But yeah, you know, it's just kind of tough cuts. I mean, yeah, I'm sure that al that catalog will probably generate more revenue overall, maybe then like scissors, like someone that I took.But I that Ed Sheeran's catalog isn't gonna come at, you know, a cheap cost, but who knows? So he's at least someone I thought about. Did you consider, this is going back a little bit further, but did you consider Celine Dion?Denisha Kuhlor: Oh, no, I didn't. But Celine Deion makes so much sense for so many reasons, but I didn't, you know, I'm thinking about my picks, probably Mariah Carey and DMX were as far back as went and that's because I was thinking about the streaming optimization as well, with the number you said. And IFPI's latest report streaming is just taking so much of the conversation.I would probably go for a lookalike audience to Celine Dion, so maybe more like an Adele, which also wouldn't come cheap. but audience that is a little more, well, didn't I take Adele? I think that Adele almost, in a way like Ed Sheeran, for all the right reasons. It's like, no, I wouldn't get pushback if I was thinking about my LPs comment saying, I don't get pushback in any way for picking Adele, but in a lot of ways Adele feels safe. And while her music is easily recognizable and does well, her type of music in a lot of ways, doesn't really feel like something that you play and stream over and over almost in the way that Taylor Swift's music does.and so while ballads are great, and I think people really, really love them from a replay value on streaming, I just didn't get as excited as I wanted to.Dan Runcie: I think you're right because I think that the reason that I didn't take her is because I thought that it could have easily been a catalog and rights that you would overpay for because of the name and everything that she's done. But when you look at the pure streaming numbers, yeah, I know that Easy on me had like broken records at the time, but still those records I believe got broken like a week later or a month later by BTS or whoever else, it was Bad Bunny and since then Taylor Swift, right? So yeah, I questioned the replay value and I do think that because, yeah, I thought that it would've been high compared to some of these other artists. Going back to the Celine point, I think you were right, because I also shifted a bit just thinking about how big the streaming error is and how that generates so much cattle revenue for this.And one of the big thesis that I've had overall with music rights sales and acquisition is that a lot of these deals have overvalued the artists from the seventies and eighties and undervalued the from the nineties and two thousands. Because if you thinking about the dominant we're streaming as and who are the dominant generation of those consumers, as great as you know, Celine and others were, the songs that are most likely to resonate are like Taylor Swift and Drake, you know, are gonna be more relevant to this generation than Madonna or Celine Dion or some of the others.And I did consider. Madonna as well, just thinking about it. I know this next tour she's gonna do on is gonna be big, but I held back then for the same Celine thing. It's like, yeah, maybe if this was 20 years ago when we were doing this draft in 2003, then maybe I would've taken Celine Dion or Madonna but I think that decay curve is definitely, you know, flattened a bit where maybe the upside, not just the upside potential, but the consistency just may not be, or not the consistency.Obviously it's consistent, but it just didn't seem to valuable as some of these other picks.Denisha Kuhlor: Yeah. No, I agree. And I think, you know, in like working the music or working the records, so you can optimize your catalog. You have to kind of think about who's making the decisions now or who's coming into power now. and some of those executives are younger. and so, thinking about how they might place value, even though they're familiar, obviously with the brand and the artists, on a premium for that music, I think it would be a much longer conversation much to what you said, which is probably why some of these artists were willing to sell, and kind of let the asset manager deal with the headache of justifying the value while they've extracted the value from the asset manager who's excited to go out and Dan Runcie: Yeah. Did you consider Beyonce?Denisha Kuhlor: I did consider Beyonce. I just, it's expensive very, very, very expensive. it would be, I think, you know, Beyonce is an interesting one. She's actually one of my favorites in the sense that I think uses her catalog really well with all kind of the moments that she's had, whether it's the Super Bowl or, her Coachella performance.She reworks her music in a way that continues to feel new. Like as an artist, almost to the point of where I also had trepidation with Adele, how Adele navigates her artistry. while I respect, and obviously we want artists that set boundaries. I don't know if it's in my best interest as an artist, right?She kind of drops her music and waits long stretches before going back her choice to cancel her tour and do a Las Vegas residency, means there'll be a lot of places untouched unless she decides to, venture out. Whereas someone like Beyonce is exciting because her music is always being brought back, right?I did consider, interestingly enough, Destiny's child, because I feel like I, it would get the upside of every time a Beyonce performs or has a big, moment on the world stage, at a price point. And maybe Beyonce's part wouldn't be up for grabs, but other people's would at a price point that would be attractive.Dan Runcie: The other thing about Beyonce too is that she's kind of like Lizzo, but magnified in this sense that very high touring to streaming output, if that makes sense. But I don't get to collect tour revenue. I'm collecting the music rights and a lot of the songs from Renaissance. So if you compare the streaming of SZA's SOS to Beyonce's Renaissance, like it isn't even close. SZA's is much more popular there and the same way that I'm seeing good kid, m.A.A.d city and 2014 Forest Hill drives and Eminem's Greatest hits albums like still at the top of that charts. I'm not seeing the same thing for Lemonade or Beyonce in a way that's almost surprising because you feel like, okay, the generational impact, those records are huge.Everyone revered them, but this is a game and they just aren't at that And I know you'd have to pay a premium because of it's Beyonce.Denisha Kuhlor: Yeah. Beyonce is one of the biggest, and probably most vocal invisible fan bases in the world. but that doesn't also in some ways, show for the parts that we just talked about, right? Some of these younger fan bases or these fan bases for other artists, They care very much about streaming.They were a digital native or streaming first, and they're going to continue to optimize for that. whereas, like you said, I think because Beyonce's fan base is so engaged, so passionate, you see the power of the fan base come out really in touring, whether they listen to Beyonce every day for the past year, I think the conversion and amount probably of minutes listened, for a Beyonce to, in terms of needing to then feeling compelled to buy a ticket is much lower than the minutes needed to be listened for a SZA or some of these other artists to then lead to that conversion of buying, buying tickets and so she has a fan base that's gonna support, like regardless way. and like you said, that's not well great. Not in our best interest.Dan Runcie: Right. Yeah. Because it's like she's been making music for over 25 years now as a high profile public recording artist, and in that way, because of the touring and amount, amount times, you got to see her. It's almost like her touring business is closer to Elton John or Billy Joel than it is SZA in that way.Denisha Kuhlor: Exactly. Beyonce is a touring artist who has the ability to use that fan base to parlay into super financially lucrative deals. But as you mentioned in the beginning of this criteria, unfortunately we'd not be seeing a lot of that. Dan Runcie: Right. And yeah, if you acquire the rights to Alien Superstar, you gotta split that with 24 different writers, soDenisha Kuhlor: Yes. Another great point. Beyonce's been highly collaborative,and very good about giving people opportunities and also giving them credit. but when it comes to the piece of the pie, which I'm sure she could do based off her ability to get extreme amounts of touring revenue, high leverage, brand partnerships, but when it comes to the part that we can control as asset managers, we'd definitely be paying a high premium, and hoping for the best in someone. Dan Runcie: Got it. Yep. I agree. All right, so a few rising stars that I had had and considered, but didn't. So, I look at someone like, so it's funny, neither of us picked any country or rock artists, but I look at the popularity of someone like Luke Combs and even though I don't listen to that genre of music or as much, he's dominated the charts.He has continued to just, you know, put out and, you know, someone that's still pretty young, I wanna say, I don't know, he is like late twenties, early thirties, 10 years from now, could we look back Denisha Kuhlor: and could Dan Runcie: this person have like, you know, impact level of like your, whether it's your Garth Brooks or Blake Shelton or like one of these other artists that like people just come to time and time again and they put up strong numbers both in streaming and in pure album sales.Someone like that could be interesting. I feel like Morgan Wallen is someone else that fits in this category where he is also just high on the charts Denisha Kuhlor: and Dan Runcie: stuff. I mean, obviously his incidents and everything else that he's been notorious for would cast a shadow on that. And I don't know if I'd be willing that necessarily, but he's one that came to mind too.And I think there's other artists too, like whether it's like, you know, Billy Eilish or Olivia Rodrigo it must have been like, okay, I could see them continuing, but we'll see.Denisha Kuhlor: Yeah, I thought like a Rosalia, on my end, for example. the other two that came to mind, and this one I don't know how to feel, but something in me was like considerate. NBA Youngboy, he has a fan base that's passionate right? And is digitally native and they stream and they don't really need, the opinions of the outside world when it comes to music.He was one probably not a category for Verizon stores and more honorable mentions, but I'll mention it. Anyway, Frank Ocean. I feel like there's value there, in Frank Ocean, for sure. And then, Rema, I feel like Rema is the next step, when it comes to music from the continent.The folks at Maven have continued to do an amazing job, and you look at Calm down, it's one of the biggest records in the world. And not only, within Africa or the United States, but also within India, which I thought was just super interesting. So definitely a really, really global artist. He's had records, calm Down, is doing well before this Selena Gomez remix.Dume B has been cited even on present Barack Obama's playlist. So I think he can hold his own, for sure. And feature wise he's very exciting as well. And he's still young enough, but with enough volume where I feel like I could get a competitive rate.Yeah, I think so too. Yeah, those are good picks there. let's see, another group I thought of, or not group, but where were they on this list? Let's see. So I did consider some K-pop in the mix. I was like, okay, what would that BTS catalog look like, right? I mean, because I feel like inthe same rationale that you had about Bad Bunny and Burna boy, I was considering them as well.I think what made me pause, I was. The fact that at least some of the group members now need to join the military, or at least on their like what does that look like? How does that impact the longevity of their music as opposed to them being able to kind of like ride the waves themselves?So it'll be interesting, right? It's because I think especially now, it's like, I feel like, I don't know, in, earlier days when it was more common for popular figures, whether it's in sports or entertainment to be drafted, there was less pop culture. Things saturating their mind. So when they came back, it's like, oh, okay.I don't know, this might be a bad analogy, but like, oh, Muhammad Ali's back still relevant. Okay. him, you know, he's doing opposed to a way where I hope by the time that BTS is like back in full effect again, that they still can command that same power that they once did. So,Dan Runcie: Yeah. So that dynamic is also why I kept them off. I thought a lot about like boy bands, interestingly enough. So when you look at the Jonas Brothers or even One Direction, and it's almost like the, at their peak like level of fandom, that their audience like gives them, I almost feel like it can't be topped again, for so many reasons, right?Like falls off in a way that you're really excited to embrace maybe when you're younger or them having a younger fan. Interestingly enough, the only person in, it's not a boy band, but that I feel like has captured that audience and has truly, really been able to maintain it, is the artist who did end up picking, which is Taylor Swift.Taylor Swift was able to successfully, like, grow with her fan base from this like teen era. to now we see that the upside is there for her because her fans just have more disposable income that they can spend on something that was so important to them for so long in their. Did you consider Harry Styles?Denisha Kuhlor: I did. but interestingly enough, I just go back and forth so much with, it feels still like a moment. I don't, I would like to see more catalog growth or more catalog volume before fully wanting to, before fully wanting to commit. It's one that I'd have on my radar, but I don't think, I'd be ready to start negotiating just yet.Dan Runcie: That's fair. Even if you got the one direction stuff, his chair of the One Direction stuff.Denisha Kuhlor: Now if I did that, that would make it, that would make it more attractive because it gives a bit of both worlds, the nostalgia from one direction as well as the bet on him as a solo artist but one kind of at least makes, whatever amount you spend, it gives a justification for it being stable to some some extent.Dan Runcie: Yeah, I don't know. That might not have been the best hypothetical to pose at you though, because like when Justin Timberlake sold his catalog, that was just him as a solo artist that had nothing to do with NSYNC or Yeah. like that.Denisha Kuhlor: Yeah. Yeah. and I think it's harder than we realize. And looking at a sync perspective, we would still need, even if we brought really valuable syncs sync opportunities, with their music, we would still need the permission of so many other people. So the sheer, operational output that would be required to truly maximize it, or at least that part of it, couldn't be taken lightly as well.Especially when you have so many other artists in your catalog in which the sign off to get a sync could be muchDan Runcie: Yeah, that's a good point. All right, well I know you and I could talk for hours about this topic and could probably draft seven more if we wanted to. I feel like we almost kind of did the, last part of the conversation. Denisha Kuhlor: We might need to have few more maybe pre-seed edition opportunity fund edition. Dan Runcie: Yeah, I feel like there's a few ways we could like set parameters around it where it's like, okay, only, you know, people under 30 years old. And then how does that change the or over 50 or people that longer with us or in a particular genre. I think there's so many others like that we didn't even mention.But yeah. any last words before we wrap this up?Denisha Kuhlor: Yeah, I mean, if anything, I have a lot of respect for the people that are doing this every day. I know, and you've interviewed some of the amazing firms that have really set out to, to do this work. but this is a fun one and I'm curious to hear everyone else's pick. So definitely tweet Dan and I.Dan Runcie: Yeah. Please respond with the ones you like, the ones you didn't like, and let's, let's keep the conversation going. Denisha, it's pleasure as always.Awesome. Thanks for having me. Dan Runcie Outro: If you enjoyed this podcast, go ahead and share it with a friend. Copy the link, text it to a friend, post it in your group chat. Post it in your Slack groups. Wherever you and your people talk, spread the word. That's how capital continues to grow and continues to reach the right people. And while you're at it, if you use Apple Podcast, Go ahead.Rate the podcast, give it a high rating, and leave a review. Tell people why you like the podcast. That helps more people discover the show. Thank you in advance. Talk to you next week.

Short-form video has exploded in popularity the past three years, buoyed by TikTok. Copycat apps and features are now the norm across social media sites — Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, and Instagram. MIDiA analyst Tati Cirisano joins me on this episode to break down the ongoing war between short-form video’s main players. The music industry is certainly keeping a close eye on the battle. Short-form video has been a boon for music discovery. Though, many music execs would also argue music has played a big factor in the rise of these platforms, and the industry wants to better monetize that.Tati and I covered all this and more on the show. Here’s everything we hit on:[02:59] Vine paved the way for short-form video[05:56] TikTok filled void in social media[06:53] Factors behind TikTok’s success[10:19] TikTok is an entertainment platform, not social [13:20] Potential pitfalls for TikTok [23:10] YouTube’s biggest advantages [25:53] Overlap between YouTube’s short-form and long-form audiences[29:37] Facebook and Instagram Reels are picking up steam[35:19] Instagram Reels more natural to the platform than YT Shorts[35:35] Meta’s advertising is both a pro and a con[36:39] Active creator vs. passive watcher user bases[38:35] In what scenario does TikTok lose top spot in short-form video war?[41:50] Best platform for artists?[43:08] Best platform for record labels?[44:05] Best monetized platform?[47:11] Will there be a new form of content consumption in the next five years?Listen: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | SoundCloud | Stitcher | Overcast | Amazon | Google Podcasts | Pocket Casts | RSSHost: Dan Runcie, @RuncieDan, trapital.coGuests: Tati Cirisano, @tatianacirisanoThis episode was brought to you by trac. Learn more about how artists can bring web2 and web3 together for their fans at trac.co Enjoy this podcast? Rate and review the podcast here! ratethispodcast.com/trapitalTrapital is home for the business of music, media and culture. Learn more by reading Trapital’s free memo.TRANSCRIPT[00:00:00] Tatiana Cirisano: One of my pros to talk about something that I've just, I don't know if this is still true, but something that I've heard from marketers, music marketers in the past is that, Instagram just has more trust with brands than TikTok and other platforms that are new because they've been using it for so long.[00:00:13] They know what the deal is like. It just has, better relationships in that respect. but if that's also leading to more ads on the platform, then it's kind of a pro and a con. [00:00:42] Dan Runcie: All right, today we have a jam packed episode that is about the short form video wars, which platform will come out on top. And I'm joined by none other than Tati Cirisano from Video Research. Welcome.[00:00:55] Tatiana Cirisano: Thanks Dan. Good to be back. Thanks for entertaining another rant of mine, [00:01:00] Dan Runcie: No, this is good. And with what you write about what you cover, you're the perfect person to have this conversation with. There has been so much focus as anyone listening to this podcast, who knows about the influence of short form video, what it does for discovery, for music, for artists, how record labels and all these companies are tackling it.[00:01:19] Now we have several companies that are vying for that spot with similar but different products. But before we jump into TikTok, YouTube, and Instagram, I feel like we gotta give props where it is and give a shout out to Vine because I don't know if we were to be here if it weren't for Vine paving the way, so, oh, gone too soon. [00:01:41] Tatiana Cirisano: you're giving me flashbacks to the Water Malone guy. I don't know if anyone else is gonna remember that, but the specific things that went viral on that platform. Oh God,yeah. We have to give the shout out to Vine.[00:01:53] Dan Runcie: It was the perfect example of constraints, breeding, creativity, six, seven, second videos, and people had whole narratives of storytelling there. It was so unique to see what people were able to do. I feel like at its peak I saw it was 200 million monthly active users, which obviously is a drop in the bucket compared to the services we're about to talk about.[00:02:17] But at that moment, that felt huge. It really was the platform. And obviously I know that Twitter had other objectives and things there, but. It's almost like a little too early as well. I just don't know if culture was like right there. And even music itself with artists, I feel like there was a lot of influencers, but there's a few artists, but not as many that really tapped in where it was really a huge discovery platform.[00:02:41] Tatiana Cirisano: Yeah, and I think also like people weren't so comfortable with creating content at that time, or it wasn't something that was like so readily available. Like now I feel like every teenager just kind of create, thinks of creating content as, you know, just part of the social toolbox. Or maybe they want to be a content creator and that's, you know, that's like a sort of a new aspiration.[00:03:02] But I think at the time of Vine, maybe that's another reason it didn't pop off, is it wasn't like the consumer behavior wasn't there. There were some people that loved to make videos, but I think most people were just watching.[00:03:11] Dan Runcie: Right, and I feel like too, the people that really popped off on that platform, They never quite got as big as some of the people that are on the platforms. We're gonna talk about, thinking about whether, you know, you mentioned someone where thinking about Alphacat or like King Bach, some of the others that were big there, and I know they had moments, but again, it was almost a little bit ahead of its time in terms of them being able to really take off the way things did in the late 2010s and ever.[00:03:39] Tatiana Cirisano: Mm. I'm also trying to remember now because one of the major things that usually comes up for me talking about like why TikTok was so impactful is how it's such, it was such a big deal that it opened to the for you page instead of like a feed of people, content from people you already know. But in my mind, it was kind of like the first major social media platform to do that.[00:03:59] But was Vine actually the first, I don't remember how the feed worked. Was it people you followed or was it just random?[00:04:05] Dan Runcie: I forget. That's a good point. I forget someone listening probably will ping back and say that, oh, it was this way. But yeah, I completely forget. I feel like I remember there are videos I knew from people that I would go back and follow cause they easily wanted to go watch it. But yeah, I completely forget. And even if it was there, I don't think the algorithm had quite enough content to be able to make that happen.[00:04:27] Tatiana Cirisano: Yeah, that's true. But yeah, the history is really interesting cuz you had Vine and then Twitter shut it down and there was kind of this void for people that loved the platform not having something similar. And then musically came around, but it wasn't really the same. It was kind of all focused on lip syncing.[00:04:44] It wasn't, you know, people just making random videos. and I feel like it also had kind of a younger audience, like it was more like middle schoolers than high schoolers. And it just kind of didn't have that same, it didn't reach like the critical mass of, no offense to middle schoolers, but like it didn't have that cool factor[00:05:02] so it's interesting like that happened. And then the timing is so important because I feel like we can't ignore the fact that TikTok launched in the US a few years before the pandemic and kind of reached that critical mass of users right when Lockdowns began. so yeah, I'm glad that you started with Vine cause I think the history is really important to look at.[00:05:24] Dan Runcie: Yeah, and I think the TikTok piece is unique because before TikTok ends up launching in the US, Instagram and Snapchat have stories, which obviously isn't the same as what we're gonna talk about with Instagram having reels. But that vertical video, and I believe that when Instagram first came out, it was 15 seconds, I believe was the limit.[00:05:44] So there was a bit of that trying to copy what Vine was doing to that extent. But then TikTok comes up with, you know, an entirely new platform. And I feel like the concept of a TikTok post is what then brings you to it's, For You page, and just [00:06:00] having that endless content role. Which a reel is, but a Instagram story or even a Snapchat story I tried to do at points, but never quite got there, which is why Instagram and Facebook more broadly has tried to make a pivot into that.[00:06:15] Tatiana Cirisano: Yeah. And it was more about like from music's perspective, it was about users engaging with the music that they're fans of like when TikTok first started to blow up in 2020, it was all dance challenges. It was all people kind of putting their own spin on the songs that they loved, and I feel like that's also different from stories and like the other sort of video, sort of short form video, tools that we had before where it was maybe about[00:06:40] sharing music, but it wasn't about actually engaging with it and putting your own spin on it. And I think that was the other thing that TikTok did that was really powerful from the music discovery standpoint, is inviting people to actually put their own spin on the things that they love.[00:06:54] Dan Runcie: Right. There was a culture that was created around the music and around the content [00:07:00] generation that did not exist in those platforms, right? Like to your point, yeah, you could have had music playing while you're sharing some video that you naturally wouldn't have wanted to share on your Instagram feed, but that wasn't the same as trying to do your own rendition of Old Town Road, right?[00:07:17] Tatiana Cirisano: And there weren't trends like TikTok is so trends focused, which is a key reason why songs tend to go viral on the platform. So, yeah.[00:07:26] Dan Runcie: Yeah. And on that note, we should dive into it. So for everyone listening, there's three companies that will do our breakdown on, so TikTok Meta. and YouTube and what they're doing respectively in short form video. And on that note, let's start with TikTok and just highlight some of the pros and cons there.[00:07:43] And I think we talked about a few of them, the cultureyou also talked about just the likelihood of users themselves wanting to engage and create in a way that they wouldn't on others before that, what are some other things that stand out about, like why TikTok has been able to have a strong position here.[00:08:00] [00:08:00] Tatiana Cirisano: I mean, definitely their algorithm, their algorithm is scary good.I know a lot of people will say like, oh, TikTok knows me better than I know myself. And it's true, I get recommendations that are so hyper-specific. and if, you know, it's such a major tool for discovery for that reason.[00:08:16] It's not just showing you things, it's showing you things that you will probably like. So I think, TikTok's algorithm is a huge pro for them. but I also think. at this point, aside from the algorithms, all of these platforms pretty much look the same or have the same user experience. I don't know as much from the creation standpoint in terms of like video editing tools, but from the consumer standpoint, they're all pretty similar.[00:08:40] So I think at that point, the thing that will differentiate you is the culture, and I think TikTok just has a lot more cultural capital than shorts and reels do, maybe because it was first, like so many trends tend to start on TikTok and then trickle down to the other platforms, to the point where I remember like a year ago [00:09:00] or months ago, there were so many reels, users posting TikTok videos that still had the TikTok watermark that reels actually deprioritize them in the algorithm to like try to get people to not do that.[00:09:11] So I think it's something that's hard to measure and can change very quickly, but right now I think the cultural capital is with TikTok and that's a huge pro for them.[00:09:22] Dan Runcie: Right when you're the dominant player, when people are watching videos on other platforms and they're repurposed for yours, that's when you know, we rarely see the opposite of that happen with TikTok and that speaks to it, right? I feel like the other part of where TikTok, I think just stands strong and further proof of that cultural piece is, I think back to the analogy I know that I've said, and others have said about how TikTok is the new MTV and just in terms of its cultural influence on where people find things, and even though it's not the only place that is that artists or, [00:10:00] creators can post short from videos, it's similar in that even back in the MTV days, MTV wasn't the only place that posted and released music videos. You could watch them on VH1, you could watch them on BET.[00:10:13] There were other channels that had it. And while I do think that, at least with BET specifically, there was a culture around there specifically for the black audience and a lot of the people that were interested in those artists themselves. The MTV itself was able to have a bit of this more like mainstream pop rock aspect that also they were able to reach into.[00:10:35] And I think even if you look at VH1, I think that trended a bit older. So even though I think there was still success to be had with some of those other areas, you still saw that MTV ended up still being seen as the dominant player, clearly not to everyone. I think that, as I mentioned, you know, BET still was more relevant to some audiences than others, and I feel like.[00:10:55] There may be some of that. could be true with the short form video aspect too, where I feel [00:11:00] like TikTok is still the dominant player, but are there certain types of users that may be more likely to find success on YouTube shorts or Instagram reels? I don't know if that's necessarily true yet, just because and we can talk about this.[00:11:13] I don't know if we see the same breakdowns there, but that's one thing that I was thinking about as well. Even if you are the main cultural place, are the other areas finding their own folks.[00:11:23] Tatiana Cirisano: Totally. No, and I wanna, think about that question of what platforms benefit, which artists. But you also just reminded me of something else cuz of your comparison to MTV, which is that TikTok considers itself an entertainment platform, not a social platform. And that's so key to me.[00:11:39] And so interesting, like you'll see even in, in news articles and interviews, people will call it social platform and you know, the CEO or whoever's being interviewed will say, no, no, no, no, no, back up because we are an entertainment platform. And that's really different. I think, you know, YouTube shorts is a bit similar because most people don't go to YouTube or social.[00:11:58] They go there to again, like be [00:12:00] entertained. But that's something that pits it sort of, or puts it in a different playing field, I guess, than something like reels because people have usually gone to Instagram to see content from people that they know, to the point where when Instagram like introduced a, you know, a TikTok like feed, a lot of people are like, I don't want this.[00:12:15] I wanna see what my friends are doing. and I think that's changed over time with like influencer culture like I definitely follow a lot of people that I don't know at all. But in general, you know, these other spaces that might try and launch short formm video like Instagram are social platforms that people use for social reasons, and TikTok kind of puts itself in a different playing field by labeling itself as an entertainment platform, which also kind of, I think one of the benefits to that for them is, you know, I think it's part of the reason that people spend so much time on TikTok like there are stats for the average amount of time people spend on the app is ridiculous. It's something like an hour, like nobody does that in one sitting on Instagram, and it's probably because you run out of content.[00:12:57] If you're following a certain number of people, [00:13:00] I run out of, you know, stories to watch or people's content to view. There's only so much you can get out of a social platform like that. But with TikTok, if you're there for entertainment, you can scroll forever. I've done it . So, you know, I think that's a key distinction.[00:13:13] Dan Runcie: Yeah, that's a great pro and I think we can talk a little bit more about that when we talk about like who wins out, whether it's, you know, platform versus artist versus company. But, cause I feel like there's a tie in with that too. But that's a great point. What do you think some of the cons are about TikTok?[00:13:28] Tatiana Cirisano: Yeah. I mean, I think the kind of obvious one is the threat of it being banned. but I don't know that's an interesting one because I feel like it's not talked about that much. It's always kind of an aside, and a potential, but it's unclear whether that could actually happen. what might end up being a bigger inhibitor is just the attitudes that that inspires like if parents are like, oh, the government might is trying to ban TikTok, it must be bad, let me tell my kid they're not allowed to [00:14:00] use it like I think the perceptions that people have about the app and their safety on it, they might be influenced enough by the threat of a band to be scared of using it.[00:14:08] Like I know some people that kind of feel freaked out by it. so I think that could be a real threat or it could be an imagined one, but it could have impact either way.[00:14:17] Dan Runcie: I thought a lot about the threat piece. I think the most likely scenario would be that it's similar to the discussions that we saw three years ago, where is there a US company that would potentially take over TikTok us and could that be the outcome? I know that a lot of that had pretty much died down with the US presidency transfer of power, and those discussions stopped.[00:14:40] But I do feel like if anything I could see that, likely happening as opposed to a full on ban. We'll see though. I mean, because I feel like that could address some of the concerns. Hopefully if that happens, we'll see how whatever company that runs it would go about managing it. But that's how I see that piece of it, particularly playing out.[00:15:00] [00:15:00] The other con that I've thought a lot about is, it's something Lyor Cohen, who runs YouTube, or at least he runs YouTube music, has talked about, he did an interview in, music business worldwide a couple months back, and he has, and I quote, he says, "Short form video that doesn't lead anywhere is the most dangerous thing I've seen in the music business in a long time."[00:15:23] A lot of people are very familiar because it was one of those quotes where he didn't say the company, but everyone knew he was talking about TikTok. And the thing is, many of us know that TikTok is avidly trying to build up has its distribution service, but it's trying to build up its own streaming service so that traffic can go somewhere and that it can do that.[00:15:42] It already has RESO in other countries, but it's actively trying to do that in the us but it still hasn't been able to do that. We know it. These are very cost intensive things to be able to do and do, right? I think it's worth talking about whether or not we think that is as big of a threat as positioned, but I do know that [00:16:00] that is one of the conceptions out there that you have this top of funnel that doesn't directly lead anywhere.[00:16:05] So if you are obviously, record labels and others are tracking the pipeline of TikTok data that then leads to streams and things like that. But is the fact that that is a non-connected platform, at least the way it lives today, is that a risk in your eyes or a con?[00:16:24] Tatiana Cirisano: I think it is a risk. I mean, I think that issue is getting worse. I feel like I brought this up maybe on another podcast we did too, but the fact that the same things that made TikTok so powerful, like having this for you page and having such a good algorithm also means that it's a completely lean back experience.[00:16:42] I don't have to follow anyone on the app. I don't have to take any actions at all. All I have to do is open it and keep scrolling. So there's very little motivation to follow anyone. So that goes for content creators, but it also goes for artists who are trying to, you know, actually build and retain long-term fans, rather [00:17:00] than just having a hit go viral on the platform, maybe it translates to a streaming bump and that's the end of it.[00:17:05] so I think that that is a bit of a threat. there's something else I was gonna say about that too. oh, that I think another point in all of this is, these platforms are no longer just competing for users. They're competing for creators because that's who's actually supplying the content, especially if you're an entertainment platform.[00:17:22] TikTok is kind of like, if Netflix was like, we're not gonna actually create any movies, we're just gonna have users upload their own, you know, like the users are supplying the content, the creators are who they need, and they need to appeal to them. So I think if enough creators get frustrated with feeling like they can't build a following on TikTok, musicians include, they might try migrating to a different service, and maybe if other services can do that better, they'll stay there.[00:17:46] So I think for that reason, it is a risk yeah, it's clear. I think it is something that TikTok is thinking about.[00:17:52] Dan Runcie: Yeah, It does need to be acknowledged. I think as I've thought about this a few ways, I think that the challenge that was presented by [00:18:00] Lyor would imply that there is a higher conversion rate from YouTube shorts to YouTube, and that they have the data to be able to prove that. Theoretically, I do think that that makes sense in terms of absolute numbers though, it would be very interesting to see how many streams absolute it actually leads to, just given how much more massive TikTok is relative to YouTube shorts in terms of just the amount of people actually watching videos on that platform on a regular basis.[00:18:29] And I think the other cod with YouTube, just to underscore something you had said was that, if artists themselves, or whether it's more broadly creators do start to feel like they're being more marginalized on the entertainment platform, where their name gets smaller and smaller and it's less important about who they are, and it's more important that they are just someone that is providing content on this platform, then they may be more likely to go some.[00:18:56] Like a YouTube, which we could transition into now, but go more sort like a [00:19:00] YouTube, which has tried a position itself as more friendly to its business partners as opposed to primarily itself.[00:19:07] Tatiana Cirisano: Yeah. And I mean, TikTok is, presumably trying to prove right now that it doesn't need music as much, the music industry believes with the kind of experiment they're doing in Australia. So I think that, relationship aspect is really important to all of this.[00:19:22] Dan Runcie: Yeah. And then one last thought on TikTok too that this just made me think of. I know a couple weeks ago, Snoop Dogg had re-released the Death Row Records catalog, at least the album he owns. Exclusively on TikTok. it was a window wink thing one week before he released it more broadly elsewhere.[00:19:40] While I do think that's probably more likely to be a one-off thing, just because it's a unique scenario where he is an artist, non-major record label that owns his content exclusively, he can choose to do with it what he wants. I'd be interested to see if that changes things and if TikTok does get more involved with exclusivity, especially if it builds out its [00:20:00] own music streaming service.[00:20:03] Tatiana Cirisano: Yeah, a hundred percent. [00:20:04] Dan Runcie: So we'll see how that one goes. But let's transition over to YouTube now, and I think we talked a little bit about this, but I think some of the pros that it has is that it clearly is YouTube short specifically is clearly a top of the funnel for YouTube. And YouTube already has this algorithm and everything built in there that makes it very easy for creators to be able.[00:20:28] Actually monetize and we've seen many artists be sustainable success stories with how they've tailored their music releases to working on YouTube and be a young boy is one artist that comes to mind there, there are several others and the fact that this can essentially be a way for them to just spread more awareness to others on the platform to then capture more eyeballs and at least of what we've seen, it feels like there is growth, at least of what YouTube has publicly shared.[00:20:54] I believe I saw the most recent number was 30 billion views per day for videos that were being [00:21:00] posted there. So there are a few things that seem to be working in its favor on.[00:21:05] Tatiana Cirisano: Yeah, and I think the sort of, what Lyor Cohen was talking about, like that ecosystem play that YouTube shorts has, is, it's a major pro for them whereas on TikTok, an artist is kind of posting an isolation on YouTube, maybe their shorts.[00:21:21] It's all on the same platform, and shorts can lead to their music videos or their vlogs on YouTube. And that could, in turn, you know, lead to their music on YouTube music. And I think that ecosystem is really powerful and that's what TikTok would be going after if and when they do launch a Western streaming service.[00:21:39] So for right now, I think that's probably YouTube Short's biggest advantage. And it's biggest sort of, way to like convince creators of its value, convince artists of its value and get them on board. and I think they're clearly trying to do that.[00:21:53] Dan Runcie: Great point. Another one too that that made me think of is another of YouTube's strengths is [00:22:00] they clearly are as I mentioned before, they are artist friendly in that it is a place where you can grow, monetize, you have the people that you're trying to reach there. But I do think that the fact that they're just stronger relationships that they have with the industry overall.[00:22:18] Does tend to play in, I mean, YouTube is very vocal about how much, or YouTube music specifically is very vocal about how much money it pays out to the music industry. It's made it a clear goal that it wants to surpass Spotify to be the platform that generates the most for that. And I think a lot of that transfers as well to on the artist side, whereas you mentioned a platform like TikTok, trying to be less reliant on music.[00:22:40] YouTube is actually trying to double down more than that, and the fact that there's just more stability in general. Obviously TikTok is the opposite of this, where we're still not sure will there be a band, will there be another company owning it? But with YouTube, it's the rare platform that 18 years into its [00:23:00] existence, people are still discovered it, people are still finding ways to be able to tap in. It competes with so many other entertainment platforms in so many ways that whether it's for attention, for content, for revenue, at least from a revenue perspective, it's not too far behind Netflix, if not in the same category, and it's all free content and the international reach, there's a lot there, and I feel like that's stability and that longevity, there's something to be said there. [00:23:29] Tatiana Cirisano: Yeah, that is something that I was gonna bring up too, is just how massive and far reaching YouTube's audiences. it's, you know, one of the most global platforms and one of the top like, the platforms that have the most penetration, I guess is how we put it in the data terms of, you know, weekly active users, globally.[00:23:48] And a question that kind of comes out of that for me though is like, how much overlap there is, I guess between the YouTube audience and the YouTube shorts audience. and I don't really know the answer to that. I mean, you would think that [00:24:00] a lot of habitual YouTube users trickle down to using shorts, but I'm not sure.[00:24:06] I think YouTube is, a lot of people use, YouTube on a desktop or on a smart tv, not necessarily on the app, on their phones, which is kind of the main place for using shorts. I think Shorts has, I know actually that Shorts has, a younger user base than YouTube as a whole, which also makes sense cuz YouTube just has more users in general.[00:24:24] But that's like an open question that I have too is how much overlap there is there, because that would impact this ecosystem strategy that they have.[00:24:31] Dan Runcie: Yeah, that's a good con to highlight and I feel like. ties into with just user behavior on the platform too. TikTok, there already is this mind thought of this is the place where I can just scroll and get lost for hours. And on YouTube, if you're using the app on the phone, it's a separate tab that you have to click into to get to shorts because they're all at the bottom, whether it's shorts or regular videos.[00:24:55] You click into shorts and then you hope that it's a similar type of experience. The [00:25:00] difference though, is that YouTube's algorithm is very YouTube overall, that algorithm is very much based, a bit more on YouTube itself is now the second largest search engine we have, and at least from a YouTube itself standpoint, there's a bit more of a likelihood of it giving you repetitive content and repetitive information of, if you've seen one thing, you've probably seen all the things from this type of niche that you're interested in. Almost in the same way that Spotify can do that, because I know that's a very streaming thing to give you so much of what you already know to keep you sticky. But sure, from video it's different especially if you're trying to optimize from an entertainment perspective. You're trying to keep up with the new trends. You're trying to see what's there. This is your opportunity to just scroll and do that. So can YouTube shorts optimized for that as well, because optimizing for that type of algorithm is different than optimizing for the destination music streaming service, especially from a consumer [00:26:00] behavior perspective.[00:26:01] Tatiana Cirisano: No, and, as you mentioned before with Vine, if you have a smaller user base, you also just don't have as much content to continue serving so that the user can scroll forever. You don't have as many niches to go into like, I think part of the reason TikTok works so well is because since it has.[00:26:16] like what does it have? Like a billion users more. since it has so many users, every possible niche is on there. So whatever hyper-specific thing you're into, TikTok can serve you the content for that. But I don't know if that's something that these other platforms maybe reels more than shorts, but I don't know if these other platforms really have access to that level of niche.[00:26:36] Dan Runcie: That's a good point. And on that note, let's talk about Facebook and Meta and everything that they're doing, both with reels on the Instagram side and reels on the Facebook side. I feel like one of the pros there that works out for them is that, it is so well monetized just from an overall business perspective, what they're able to do from ads and how they're able to generate that a bit more so on Facebook than [00:27:00] Instagram, but still they're able to monetize that quite well, and I think that that does work into their favor because at the end of the date, this is obviously less about the artist and the industry perspective, but more from the company perspective.[00:27:14] Your ability to make that have a high ROI is strong. And at least from recent reports we've heard from Mark Zuckerberg, whether it's at earnings calls or some of the Meta town Hall meetings, it does seem like reels both on Facebook and Instagram are a growing source of eyeballs. And even though that is less money now relative to the more established streams that would only naturally grow over.[00:27:37] Tatiana Cirisano: Yeah. you know, you're reminding me too that Facebook did roll out that ad revenue sharing program for creators. and for the music industry for rights holders, which I don't think that that's available on reels yet. I've seen some reports that it could be in the future, but, you know, that is what it seems like the music industry is trying to get TikTok to agree to.[00:27:58] so, you know, I would imagine that's a better [00:28:00] deal, you know, from the music side of things, and that's definitely important to all of us.[00:28:03] Dan Runcie: For sure. Any other pros from Instagram or Facebook?[00:28:08] Tatiana Cirisano: Yeah, I think, they already have huge built-in user bases, which is, useful. They're kind of, they don't have to ask users to download a new app or like open a new tab the way, or I guess it's the same as YouTube shorts, but it feels a bit more built into what users already doing on the platform.[00:28:28] But that kind of also leads me to another point that I've been thinking about with this is, it's so interesting how like TikTok is an app, but on these other platforms it's a feature. Like TikTok is a standalone app for short form video, but when you go on Instagram reels, it's just another feature in the toolbox.[00:28:43] Kind of similar to how, you know, when Snapchat had stories, originally had stories, Instagram just added that as a feature and kind of stole the concept away. And it was, it worked because it was just another tool in the toolbox for its users. I don't know if that's a pro or a con, but it's an interesting [00:29:00] differentiator to me.[00:29:00] they're positioning this as just another tool. I don't know.[00:29:03] Dan Runcie: Yeah, I think you maybe think of two things there, so I think that new features like that do work best when there is a audience that is either searching for this answer or searching for this type of solution that's already tapped in with how they consume and how they naturally engage with the platform. And I think that's been one of the differentiating factors between the copycat attempts from Facebook that work and the ones that don't work.[00:29:31] Like why I think that Instagram stories took off in a ways is because, In a way, even more so than it did for a Snapchat, is that you had this core group of people, influencers, who were already using Instagram, but there's just so much pressure to post these perfect photos on the main feed. So stories helped, co helped solve that, and it helped solve that in a way that.[00:29:54] even more so for that target audience on Instagram, because Snapchat didn't really have as many [00:30:00] influencers, at least to the same extent. Instagram still had a much larger group. So it's like that group that our, the group stole the feature bin, that feature was even more relevant cuz they had more of the target audience than you ever did.[00:30:11] That was already relevant to like, how they were going about it in a way where I feel like some of Facebook's other things like facebook dating for instance, that they've like started and I don't even know if it's still going on. But sure, you have all the active users that naturally would want to, like most of the people using Match or Tinder probably already have Facebook accounts, but that isn't like tapped into like how they naturally use the platform.[00:30:34] And I bring that up in this case because I think that reels is a behavior that is more closely aligned to the Instagram experience than shorts is to the YouTube experience because there was already a mindless nature to some extent of how Instagram was being used. Sure, I know there's differences based on to the point you mentioned earlier of people saying, Hey, I wanna see [00:31:00] my friends.[00:31:00] Not necessarily all this to other stuff, but there's still a mindlessness to seeing your friends or just scrolling through the[00:31:07] feed and. [00:31:08] Tatiana Cirisano: that's a really point.[00:31:09] Dan Runcie: And YouTube didn't really have that scrolling through the feed dynamic. Sure, the algorithm could suggest things, but the algorithm suggested things in a way that was almost closer to Spotify's algorithm suggesting things than it was to Instagram.[00:31:21] suggest you the next thing.[00:31:23] Tatiana Cirisano: That's such a good point. And it reminds me about how I was saying before, like people on Instagram will run out of stuff from their friends to look at. So maybe reels is the solution, maybe it's like going back to what you're saying about like solving a user need. Maybe it's you run out of things from your friends.[00:31:40] Here's reels where you can scroll mindlessly forever and see content from people you don't know. I don't know. That's a great point.[00:31:48] Dan Runcie: Yeah, no, thank you. It's something I've thought about too, because I feel like, yeah, running outta content is clearly a thing, cuz I feel like we've all had those moments on Instagram where, we're taping this now, it's almost March. You'll see posts [00:32:00] from the end of December that come through on something and you're like, wait, what?[00:32:03] Why am I getting this now? Like this isn't even timely anymore, but it's something that went viral then. And that obviously isn't something that happens on TikTok in that same way.[00:32:11] Tatiana Cirisano: Yeah, you you don't get a thing on TikTok that says you're up to date. When I get that on Instagram, like , when I get that on Instagram, I'm like, that's how I know I've spent too much time on this app. It's the equivalent of Netflix going, are you still[00:32:23] Dan Runcie: Right. You still there?[00:32:25] Tatiana Cirisano: you don't get that on TikTok if you got that on TikTok, like I need, someone needs to help you.[00:32:32] That's such a good point. That's such a good point. So yeah,[00:32:35] Dan Runcie: Some of the cons, I will say just with reels, both from Facebook and with Instagram, though a lot of ads and a lot of ads, and this is part of the double-edged sword about how well it's monetized, right? But a lot of ads that I don't hear people complaining as much about ads on the other platforms.[00:32:53] Tatiana Cirisano: Mm-hmm. , that's something, I hadn't even thought about here, and you're totally right. many more ads on those platforms for sure.[00:33:00] [00:33:00] Dan Runcie: Yeah, and I think too, just given that point I mentioned about influencers being a core demographic for Instagram overall because that's been the core audience there. How does that translate necessarily as much to artists? And I know that there's some overlap there with some artists who very much position themselves as influencers.[00:33:18] But if you're an artist who really isn't about influencing in that way, is ls going to be as effective, relatively speaking, compared to some of the other short form video platforms.[00:33:29] Tatiana Cirisano: Yeah, and I think that also gets to the, cultures that are different on these platforms like I think similar to what you were saying about how Instagram influencers like stories because they could be more off the cuff. I think reels still has a feeling of being a bit more professional and less casual than TikTok.[00:33:47] TikTok feels a bit more casual, off the cuff weird. You don't get as much weird content on Instagram reels. It's a lot more curated and, professionalized. and it's interesting because I actually had, as one of my [00:34:00] pros to talk about something that I've just, I don't know if this is still true, but something that I've heard from marketers, music marketers in the past is that, Instagram just has more trust with brands than TikTok and other platforms that are new because they've been using it for so long.[00:34:12] they know what the deal is like. It just has, better relationships in that respect. but if that's also leading to more ads on the platform, then it's kind of a pro and a con.[00:34:21] Dan Runcie: Yeah, definitely. That's a great point. The brand piece too, and I know that TikTok is clearly trying to do it with some of the reports they've put out some of the positioning trying to get itself to be seen as a home for brands to be able to tap in. But Instagram has owned that space for quite some time.[00:34:37] Tatiana Cirisano: Exactly.[00:34:38] Dan Runcie: Yeah, any other pros and cons on reels before we move?[00:34:42] Tatiana Cirisano: Well, I guess one other thing I'll say, this kind of applies to everything, but you've made me think during this conversation. I would love to know what percentage of people on each of these platforms are lurking versus also posting content. cuz I think that would impact our idea of like how deep the trove of content can go and how that impacts the [00:35:00] algorithm and the niches you can get into likeI sort of have a theory that because TikTok is a bit more casual and off the cuff, it might have more of a, percentage of its users are posting content. Like I've never, I don't think I would ever make a reel. It feels very influencer to me, but I would post a TikTok cuz whatever, like, it just feels a little bit more casual.[00:35:17] So I think that's an interesting question to me is what percentage are creators and what percentage are just like passive users?[00:35:25] Dan Runcie: That is a really good question. Yeah, it would be good to see that, right? Because I feel like TikTok kind of has two things going forward one, it does seem less formal from a content release perspective of just being able to share it. But on the other hand too, anytime you get into the absolute numbers of over 1 billion, approaching 2 billion monthly active users specifically on this feature of the short form, you know, For You page, it does lend itself to likelihood.[00:35:56] Each time you go outside of that like concentric circle, I feel like it's a higher [00:36:00] likelihood of attracting more lurkers than hardcore users. But it'll be great data to be able to see. That's a really good point.[00:36:06] Tatiana Cirisano: Yeah. We'll have to put that in a survey.[00:36:09] Dan Runcie: I know, I know. We'll have to get those answers somewhere, but so now that we've talked about each of these, TikTok is the company that is clearly in the lead, both from a reach perspective, how long it's been established with this particular platform itself, and outside of the potential government sanctions or anything there, is there anything that you could see that could change the likelihood of that continuing relative to these other two services?[00:36:34] YouTube shorts and Instagram and Facebook reels. [00:36:37] Tatiana Cirisano: Yeah, it's a good question. I mean, the thing that immediate. Comes to mind for me is it's licenses with music and its relationships with music knowing that those are negotiations that are happening as we speak. I think if TikTok were to suddenly, I guess this is the thing that they're kind of trying to test in Australia, but if TikTok were to suddenly lose a lot of popular music, what would that do to the platform?[00:36:59] [00:37:00] so I think that's the first question that comes to mind for me, just from, you know, music industry stand [00:37:06] Dan Runcie: Yeah, I hear that. I could see that I thought about this too, and I had a tough time thinking about something that could really shift things. I do wonder about, If monetization itself and revenue generation does become an issue for TikTok moving forward, how that can shape the nature of the experience of the platform, right? Because meta and Google being YouTube's parent company are both so much more established. They've been around for years generating revenue at a pretty steady clip. And while at least the way TikTok is right now, it does have the advantage of being under bite dance, which has several, you know, has a lot of money coming in as well.[00:37:49] I do wonder how profitable that will be. And obviously we saw how meta adapted to try to make money, where we're complaining about how [00:38:00] many ads there would be on the platform, could any potential changes there from the need to get more money, change that user experience in a way that could decline the user experience for this core demographic.[00:38:12] So that's definitely a risk for TikTok.[00:38:14] Tatiana Cirisano: Yeah. And also kind of going off that, if any of these platforms were to provide a much better way somehow for the creators on the platform to earn money from it, and then the creators were to go to that platform, that's where the audiences would be. So I think that creators actually have a lot of leverage right now, with that, because I think you can tell that all of these platforms are kind of competing to be the most sort of creator friendly, TikTok is updating, its fund, its creator fund. after getting a lot of complaints about how it was working, YouTube shorts, I think announced an ad revenue share program. So I think that could shake things up is I, I don't know what it would be, but if one of these platforms had ways superior monetization tools for the [00:39:00] creators, I could see the creators migrating there and their audience is following.[00:39:03] Dan Runcie: Right. Yep. Good point. They all have funds to some extent, but you clearly need more than money if everyone else has it too, right? Like how is it gonna be used in an effective way? So it'll be interesting to see how that plays out. [00:39:16] Tatiana Cirisano: Yeah. But at the same time, it's like, even if another, say that another platform say that YouTube Shorts had way better monetization for creators, but it still has a smaller audience. Will creators migrate there and hope that their audiences follow them? Or do they feel like they, it's better to have the larger audience for, you know, leveraging brand deals and things that are outside of the app like.[00:39:36] Dan Runcie: True. Yeah.[00:39:37] Tatiana Cirisano: I don't know what would be the better deal.[00:39:41] Dan Runcie: Yeah, no, that's a good point because I think as we saw in the Spotify era, it was very easy for artists that didn't care about streaming and Spotify to ignore it and be very proud about them ignoring streaming back[00:39:52] Tatiana Cirisano: Exactly. Yeah.[00:39:53] Dan Runcie: 16. But all those artists are now on Spotify because they were like, can't beat 'em join them pretty much.[00:39:59] Tatiana Cirisano: [00:40:00] Right. Like will TikTok always be the place where you can't afford not to be? [00:40:04] Dan Runcie: Yep, exactly. [00:40:06] Tatiana Cirisano: I mean, not forever. that's the thing about social media. nothing stays. It's popular, I don't think forever, but you know, how long can it last? I don't know.[00:40:14] Dan Runcie: Yeah. No, we'll see. We'll see. All right, so a few, quicker questions here as we're getting to the tail line butwanna break this down for which of these platform do you think is in the strongest position for each of these groups? Artists, record labels, and, the parent company, the company itself overall.[00:40:30] So let's start with artists. Which of these companies do you think creates the most value for artists? And let me not just say companies be clear. Let me talk which short form video platform.[00:40:41] Tatiana Cirisano: Yeah. Well, it depends how you define value, I guess. Because if you were saying for having a hit or influencing streaming numbers? I would say TikTok getting discovered, I would say TikTok, but if you're saying for developing a [00:41:00] sustaining long-term fan base, no matter what the size is, I might say YouTube shorts because of that ecosystem that it has.[00:41:07] Dan Runcie: Yeah.[00:41:09] Tatiana Cirisano: yeah.[00:41:09] Dan Runcie: I think that's a good way to frame it cuz I TikTok down as well, just because of the absolute numbers part of the algorithm, how many people you could reach. But I think that your per user approach or even the ability to do conversion of actual fandom. YouTube probably has a bit more tight in there.[00:41:27] It's kind of like a short term versus long term [00:41:29] Yeah, definitely. And it's like, okay, do you want this absolute number or do you want who you're most actually able to have as a real super fan down the road?[00:41:39] Yeah.What about record labels?[00:41:40] Tatiana Cirisano: That's a good one. Because I mean, we know that by far, YouTube as a whole is generating more for the music industry for record labels than any of these platforms. But when it comes to shorts, I'm not so sure it might be TikTok[00:41:56] Dan Runcie: Yeah,[00:41:56] Tatiana Cirisano: in terms of the bottom, [00:41:58] Dan Runcie: Yeah, it's tough. I was stuck [00:42:00] on that one too. I think my answer still leaned YouTube, but that's probably thinking about, A the overall tie in and the clear[00:42:07] connection to have it feed into the broader video platform, but then also what it seems like Leo's goals to make that be a clear thing.[00:42:16] So that was the thought there. And then most value it created for its parent company. Which one would I be saying.[00:42:24] Tatiana Cirisano: okay, so we have TikTok bite Dance, YouTube, Google, Instagram, Facebook. that's a really good, that's a tough one.[00:42:32] Dan Runcie: I went with meta for this one because I[00:42:34] Tatiana Cirisano: That's where I was leaning. That's where I was[00:42:36] Dan Runcie: it's. , I think it's the most well monetized, at least from what a social media user is able to do and what they're able to generate from a sole Facebook user on average is so much higher than any of these other platforms. And the fact that this could potentially be a funnel into that is strong.[00:42:55] And I know a lot of people may roll their eyes, if you're a certain generation the thought of a [00:43:00] Facebook reel even as opposed to an Instagram reel. But there's an audience for it and there's a reason why it's there. And that may not line up with contemporary artists, but that may line up with some, you know, other established artists that are clearly trying to reach that base.[00:43:12] So I feel like there's something there.[00:43:14] Tatiana Cirisano: Yeah, I think that makes sense. That's where I was leaning to. These are good questions.[00:43:18] Dan Runcie: And then I just to close things out, we talked a little bit about this earlier. Well, you touched on this a little bit earlier, but will there be a new form of consumption, content consumption that could take over as the place for music discovery and its top of funnel in the next five years?[00:43:35] Tatiana Cirisano: Yeah, that's a great question. What did I touch on earlier that related to.[00:43:39] Dan Runcie: You were mentioning that there's a new social media platform like every few years that like comes through. So even though TikTok is in like a[00:43:46] Tatiana Cirisano: yeah.[00:43:46] Dan Runcie: today, we don't know what it's gonna look like in the future.[00:43:49] Tatiana Cirisano: So I have a couple answers to this. One thing that I've been really, it's so funny, every time we do this, I always have a timely report coming out on the topic. I don't know how you have like [00:44:00] this somehow, this telepathy to know this, but I was wor I'm working on this report right now that's very related, which is about how potentially the next step for all of this, for music and social media could be, not only are you opening TikTok and adding, you know, a Taylor Swift song to your post, but you're also remixing the song, or you're adding your own vocals or you're actually changing it. So going a step further in what I was saying about, users engaging, creating their own spin on the music that they're fans of, they would be actually changing the song as well.[00:44:33] Dan Runcie: you wrote about this recently, right? About like[00:44:35] Tatiana Cirisano: yeah.[00:44:36] Dan Runcie: and like, and music having its Instagram moment.[00:44:38] Tatiana Cirisano: Yes, exactly. So the same way that Instagram brought kind of mainstream photography tools to the average consumer, and TikTok did the same thing with videography. when will music be part of that? When will music making and recreation tools actually be part of these platforms? And when I've talked to people who know way more about this than I do, and said, you know, why hasn't [00:45:00] this happened?[00:45:00] A lot of it is about how hard it is to simplify music making into a mobile screen, let alone like, put it on top of a social app. and that's why, you know, I had the AI tie into my blog post is because, there are companies that are using AI to simplify that process and make this possible. So like Snapchat is a company that is like semi-related to short form video that we haven't talked about, and they have an integration right now with a company called Mini Beats, where you can remix the song that you're putting on your post. so I think that's not necessarily like, it's not a new platform, but it's a new way of consuming like I think creation as a form of consumption is like probably the next step.[00:45:44] Dan Runcie: And that ends up being the catalyst for how so many of these platforms grow. We talked about TikTok and just how it was able to attract this group of music in some way was the backbone for user generated content. And then it just attracted so much, and everyone's talked about what AI looks [00:46:00] like, I was watching some video the other day about some guy that looked and sounded nothing like Kendrick Lamar had this voice alteration thing that made him sound just like him.[00:46:09] And while it's not quite AI, I think there's a lot of elements there. So whoever taps that and then that can then be the launchpad for the next thing. Something like that could easily overtake and become the next dominant social media player. But we'll see. It'll take a couple years to get to 1.5 billion[00:46:26] Tatiana Cirisano: Probably more than five.[00:46:28] Dan Runcie: probably five.[00:46:29] Tatiana Cirisano: probably more than five just because of licensing really. But, I mean, I think the interesting thing to note there is this type of behavior is kind of already happening like I notice a lot of with sped up songs and how the music industry actually adopted that after sped up clips were going viral on TikTok, like users are already modifying the songs and then uploading those modified versions.[00:46:49] So imagine if that capability was actually part of the platform itself.[00:46:52] Dan Runcie: Right, right. It's like everyone saw DJ Screw make a, you know, huge influence with this for this chopped and screwed music. [00:47:00] So it's only about time that you make it easy to make that accessible for users.[00:47:04] Tatiana Cirisano: Yeah. So we'll see.[00:47:05] Dan Runcie: Yeah. So we'll see. But Tati, pleasure as always. Thanks for coming on and yeah, we'll definitely have to stay tapped in with what you have coming up next on this topic.[00:47:14] So relevant to this discussion.[00:47:15] Tatiana Cirisano: Yeah, thanks for having me again. Always a pleasure.[00:47:18]

The artist-entrepreneur-investor Mr Eazi has no on-off switch. Who he is in the recording studio, on stage, and on the boardroom are the same. With business and music, Mr Eazi has found parallel industries that allow him to be the same person.He’s founded both emPawa Africa and Zagadat Capital to feed his business appetite. The former invests into African artists and helps them scale. Meanwhile, Zagadat Capital invests into tech startups, most of which are inside the continent. Then there’s Mr Eazi, the Afrobeats artist. He’s collaborated with the likes of Beyonce and J Balvin, and also taken center stage at Coachella. After taking time away from music amid the pandemic, Mr Eazi is back in album mode now. Holed up in Cape Town currently, Mr Eazi has plans for two new albums this year.I caught up with Mr Eazi to cover his never-ending pursuits in music and business. Here’s everything we chatted about:[0:22] How Mr Eazi is balancing artistry and entrepreneurship[1:40] Similarities between music and startups[6:19] Taking equity stakes in artists and what an “exit” looks like[10:50] How Eazi measures success for Empawa artists [13:00] Eazi’s investment thesis for startups[18:10] Startup success trends in Africa [21:30] Lack of capital is biggest challenge to Africa’s startup scene [29:45] Raising awareness within the continent[32:20] Biggest obstacle that African artists face [36:52] Uncleared sample on a Bad Bunny song[40:45] Impact of Western companies investing into Africa[47:35] Mr Eazi is in album modeListen: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | SoundCloud | Stitcher | Overcast | Amazon | Google Podcasts | Pocket Casts | RSSHost: Dan Runcie, @RuncieDan, trapital.coGuests: Mr Eazi, @mreaziThis episode's sponsor is Symphony. Put your fanbase growth on autopilot with the first AI-powered platform that brings all your artist marketing workflows in one place. Learn more at symphony.to/trapitalEnjoy this podcast? Rate and review the podcast here! ratethispodcast.com/trapitalTrapital is home for the business of music, media and culture. Learn more by reading Trapital’s free memo.TRANSCRIPT[00:00:00] Mr. Eazi: part of me deciding to be an artist was reading the book, the Jay-Z book, Empire State of Mind. And that was when I saw it clearly and I was like, oh, wait a minute like this music is a business and the music gives you access, it gives you access to capital, access to the network it puts you, gives you a seat at the table[00:00:20] Dan Runcie Intro: Hey, welcome to the Trapital Podcast. I'm your host and the founder of Trapital Dan Runcie, this podcast is your place to gain insights from the executives in music, media, entertainment, and more. Who are taking hip hop culture to the next level.[00:00:48] Dan Runcie: All right. Today we have the one and only Mr. Eazi, the artist, entrepreneur. How you doing man? Welcome to the pod.[00:00:56] Mr. Eazi: I'm good. I'm good. I'm chilling. What's, going on[00:00:59] Dan Runcie: Me. I'm good, man. Trying to keep up with you. Trying to keep up with you, man.[00:01:03] Mr. Eazi: I'm trying to keep up with me, bro.[00:01:06] Dan Runcie: Well, let's talk about that because you are someone who sits at this intersection of artist, investor, entrepreneur, and you are doing all of those three jobs and more. And it's also happening at this moment where the entire continent of Africa is booming from an entrepreneurship perspective, booming from a music perspective.[00:01:29] How does it feel right now? How are you operating being at the center of that?[00:01:34] Mr. Eazi: To be honest, I just feel like it's a blessing to be born or to be existing in this time. where like you said, everything is just like taking shape and, you know, yeah, it's exciting and it is for me. It's like every day I'm seeing opportunity left and right and just figuring out what is fun and what is doable and just, you know, going from thinking, oh, I'm an entrepreneur, to oh, I make music. And, it's similar cause it's products at the end of the day, on the bottom line, it's like you're selling music or you're selling some other product. And I thought they were two different things, but you know, I'm seeing how it's one and the same.[00:02:17] It's just exciting to realize that I don't need to be two different people like I still be the same me and operating both walls.[00:02:27] Dan Runcie: So how are they similar for you approaching both music and startups?[00:02:32] Mr. Eazi: So I feel like every artist is like a. because the artist has a brand, has a feel, it's like a service product, it's an emotional product, right? And every artist, you know, that IP, there's an IP with every artist, and the artist usually needs investment to scale. And like coming from, like when I went outta school straight into an incubator program called 440NG and I kind of, there I learned how, you know your idea and your business, you know, you have the idea, you put it together, you iterate as the business keeps on going. So what you thought was the business at the beginning, you know, your customers could give you feedback and then you realize it evolves, it accelerate and you are trying to be as lean as possible and grow to the point where you have that critical volume to sort of like ask, what's the word as, proof that this is a valid idea either via customers or via revenue. And then you try and get to, you know, you try and scale, and you figure out what's your, unique value proposition is, and that's like where the startup, what's your unique value proposition?[00:03:46] Who are your customers? What's the idea? You take it to market, you test it, you go get investment. And it's the same thing with every artist so at the time where I decided to do music full-time, I was in an incubator program, and so I just started to see the similarities with the music. I'm like, okay, let me test it, put it out, people listen to it, you know, gimme the feedback, you know, and the point where I decided I was gonna take the music as a business was when like I got the first person reach out to me and say, Hey, I want to pay you for a verse. So that was the first signifier to let me know that, okay, maybe I'm onto something.[00:04:22] Then I started to have my early fans then Lauryn Hill reached out and said she wanted me to come play at her show. And I thought it was a fluke until I found myself in America performing in Lauryn Hill, coming out to say, I love you, thank you so much for coming. And like all of that is like with a business, with a traditional startup, it could be different things, but for me, the revenue, the number of users, aka the fans, all of that were signifiers.[00:04:51] And then I just needed, you know, the capital to take it to the next level, right? So I think those are the similarities, and I've tried it when I started emPawa it was at the beginning, it was to test if they were one and the same. So I was like, okay, Y Combinator send, you know, picks a few, start a couple of startups, you know, does incubator program put funding and whatnot to them?[00:05:18] And then maybe 20% of them you know, end up working on, and I did that with 100 artists across 11 African countries, over 30,000 entries then picked 100, then gave them the same amount of money, created the emPawa YouTube channel to host their videos, service it the same way, and in the end, start to see the ones that organically started picking up.[00:05:41] And we had success with that. So for me it was like, oh, wait a minute it's one and the same. I've proved this. And that's when emPawa then turn from, you know, the, program I was doing to actually full service music company, because I had proved that it was the same and in the same way you invest in a song.[00:06:01] I remember the first Joeboy song, the visualizer cost me $500, and then the song ended up having like 30 million views in like a year. And you know, Joeboy just went boom, boom, boom, boom, boom. So, I start to say, okay, there is a process here and perhaps we could do it with other artists, you know? So to answer your question, that's how I see both as, you know, one and the same in a way.[00:06:28] Dan Runcie: That makes sense. And I wanna talk about emPawa specifically because this is you bringing so many of those startup concepts to music like you said, you saw Y Combinator is doing. How could you apply that here? The difference though is that with Y Combinator, the promises of course, an exit, so they're hoping this companies get acquired.[00:06:47] They're hoping that they go public in music though. What does that look like for you as someone that is taking equity stakes in the artist? What does your return look like? What does your exit look like?[00:06:59] Mr. Eazi: So, I mean, first off, the return is like when you invest, you know, you invest to create the content, you put it out, put some marketing, and you start to see, you know, the streams coming, the revenue coming, the artist is now doing live shows, getting endorsement deals, you know, you could get four, 5x, 10x multiples, you know, and time.[00:07:24] so that's, one. But secondly, like on a developmental standpoint, you could develop the artist and then a big label comes and says, oh, we wanna upstream. So upstreaming is like a sale. It's like an exit, and you could still have passive rights to get passive income, on the artist. So those are like the kind of like returns and the kind of like exits.[00:07:48] Plus you could just invest in the IP, buy it up, and next thing somebody wants to sample it and then they have to write you a big check. And it could happen now, it could happen in like 10 years, in 15 years time, you know, you could have a record just lined. I'll give you an example, recently the Joeboy record that didn't make it to the Joeboy is one of my artists.[00:08:09] The song didn't make it to his album, and so we then licensed the song to a guy called Lakizon, you know, he puts out the record, you know, there's not so much thought to that. I wake up one day, Bad Bunny has put out, an album and I'm just listening to the album cause I'm a fan and I hear a record there and I'm like, basically what I was trying to say is, so you have that record that didn't make it to the album, Right? And it's just there and we license it to this guy and the next thing the record appears on a Bad Bunny album.[00:08:43] And that's like the biggest artist in the world last year by a lot of metrics. And so that's like an example, you know, an exit because you make this record and then boom, and the upsides are like, you know, so high. And right now on the market, even if you wanted, you are seeing, you know, my mentor, one of my mentors, Merck Mekadalas, you see how many multiples from 10 to 23, 24xlast year's revenue on, you know, buying rights for music. So I think there's multiple exits and even just the music and music IP as an asset class has been proven to be a valid asset class by Merck and the likes. For instance, I was, I was part of the deal, the KKR deal that bought, I don't know if you saw that some time ago, that bought a law of the rights, including the Weeknd et cetera.[00:09:36] I was part of that deal, via one of the companies, and you could see how you could see what an exit looks like. So there's multiple exits for music, whether it's an upstreaming deal from the label or it's a straight up acquisition of the catalog, or it's just multiples of revenue, the artist is now beginning to earn or if your label, you could get your entire label could become upstreams or you could go into a JV type situation.[00:10:06] Dan Runcie: So that speaks more to the flexibility that's offered with being able to invest in music. It isn't just this one time event that you're hoping for as a startup investor.[00:10:17] Mr. Eazi: Yeah. 100 percent.[00:10:19] Dan Runcie: Yeah. Yeah And with that too, you mentioned that you have a hundred artists that at least came through the first cohort, over 30,000 had applied and when you are measuring your success for them, I'm sure that each of the things you mentioned are the things that you hope for, but along the way, what are some of those key performance indicators or what are some of those things that you're looking for to hope that traction can be gained to hopefully get to the point where you do have, positive financial event that comes.[00:10:51] Mr. Eazi: I mean, it starts with like hyper local recognition. So, you know, I give example, there was this like I think she was 18 or 17 at the time, Nik, her name is Nikita and she's from Kenya. She had joined the program, she didn't make it to the top 10, but we put out the video and you know, that song started to gain local traction in Kenya even though she didn't make it to the Final 10.[00:11:17] And by local traction, I mean like number of downloads, it made it to radio, you know, it made it to press picking it up. And even though she wasn't part of the software and I didn't give her full on funding, she got signed to Universal. So for me that's a testament of like the success and those are like KPIs like, okay, does it get to radio in your local country?[00:11:40] Does it get, you know, that local, you know, appreciation from the fans in your country? And then when does it start to transcend, and there's nothing wrong with you having a popular song in Kenya or in Tanzania, but by the time it starts to go from Tanzania, you know, to rest of East Africa and then comes to the west, you know, those are the things you look out for and, you know, next level is by the time you start getting booked for shows based on the 1, 2, 3 singles you put out,[00:12:11] Dan Runcie: That makes sense. That makes sense. Let's shift gears a bit to startups, because I know that's the other space that you're actively in. What is your thesis for investing in startups?[00:12:22] Mr. Eazi: Right now, what I do is like, you know, I can bring some form of value to. So when I look at like the idea, or like when my team, you know, sends me some deal flow and we kind of walk through it, it's like, okay, aside the money, what else can we bring to this business? You know? And if I'm able to spot some extra form of value I can bring to help the business kill.[00:12:53] Then I want to invest, you know, it could be marketing. Can I add some marketing? Can I add some of my experience here? Can I leverage on my network in this other side? Aside the money, and most of the investments I've been making haven't been personal. They've been via my collectives, Zagadat Capital, and Zagadat Capital is basically, for now, it's 12 people like myself, young, successful African boys or girls who usually, you know, find it boring to speak to the financial guys and you know, have some form of liquidity. And so when we get the deal flow, and I just look at who's in the collective and who can add value, then we bring it to, the collective and then we invest.[00:13:45] So it's majorly been, it's like 90% being Africa focused because I feel like there's so much opportunity, on the continent and also on the sentimental level. The amount of impact the investment does when it's, on the continent makes, is something that's bigger than just the money.[00:14:07] And the money is great like, you know, we've seen a lot of African companies hit and cross a billion dollar evaluations to become unicorns. so you know that, can happen. But at the same time, the impact, and it's always fun when I go to an office that I'm an investor in of the like employees, they're excited that Mr. Eazi is in our office and Mr. Eazi is a shareholder like, you can't buy that. And I think that's what I always wanted because like part of me deciding to be an artist was reading the book, the Jay-Z book, Empire State of Mind. And that was when I saw it clearly and I was like, oh, wait a minute like this music is a business and the music gives you access, it gives you access to capital, access to the network it puts you, gives you a seat at the table and you know your merch, merchandising could be like the three cap that chance the rapper does, or it could be Uber or it could be, you know, Power Pay, which I've invested in that, you know, is the number one mobile money focused payments aggregate on Africa doing over 1 million transactions a day, you know, and so it's, different things and I know how I can bring value beyond my, cash it and just watch it grow. And it's exciting[00:15:28] Dan Runcie: That makes sense. So that collective, that operates a lot like a syndicate. You all are sharing deal soon where you can add value. What stage do you normally invest in and how much money are you normally putting into startups?[00:15:41] Mr. Eazi: You know, it's different like we've done like some seed stage. we did a company that was looking at listing last year on the LSE. We've done growth stage as well, so it really depends, it depends on where it comes to us, and it could be as low as, you know, 25K check, which just gets maybe if it's a 25 K check, I might just take 50% of it and just say, Hey guys, do the rest, and I just put it on the platform we use and boom, boom, boom, everybody just clicks and it's, done. Once it's done, it's done like I just invested in a platform called Ruka Hair, and it is a startup that, you know, provides hair for, people of African descent based out of London.[00:16:30] And that was a small check for, and it is growth stage, you know, so it really varies. and there's no rule. Yeah.[00:16:41] Dan Runcie: That makes sense. Yeah, keeping it flexible and gives you the opportunity to see everything that's coming through. What are some common trends that you're seeing? What are some things that you're seeing from the founders or from the startups that are coming through, especially the ones that are getting markups and getting closer to exits?[00:16:59] Mr. Eazi: I'm seeing like, you know, companies that solve fundamental, problems. You know, and I know there's so much bars on FinTech, it's like everybody just gets a hardon for African FinTech. But like, for instance is, if this products are solving specific, like there's a company called Eden Life, which I invested in.[00:17:26] And what this company does is like, you know, there are a lot of people like myself who, we don't in town enough, like enough for us to like have a chef and all of that. And we have very busy schedules, so we want like meal preps delivered to us and we want like our laundry picked up, you know, that's a very middle class, sort of like early into the job market, like pre family kind of types. And so that kind of product is a product that's like valid because like you're solving a particular need, you know, or PISA for instance, that are invested in. So PISA gives remittance based lending.[00:18:13] to, people in Mexico. So you know, the love Mexicans in the US sending money back to, Mexico to their family and their loved ones. And PISA uses that data of how much you get your current every month like my mom and dad, I put them on allowance. Like I pay them an allowance every month, Right? So we use like, by the way, for clarity they don't need it like they're good, but it's just something I do. And the other people in cultures like African culture, like in Africa, it's a pride for you, even if your dad is a billionaire, like being able to do something for your dad is like, it's like a pride.[00:18:53] It's like you've achieved, right? So you have people sending money back home, you know, either to Mexico or to different parts of Africa to either family that need it or to do stuff with it, like build a house back home or to help the family school fees or whatever, or just out of sentiment, like, it's like paying your tithes.[00:19:15] I don't know if you're Christian, it's like when you pay 10% of your income to the church. It's something like that. and then there's all that data, all that data because it's like salary, right? it comes every month, usually on a certain day. So PISA uses that information to provide loans to people.[00:19:34] And that's like a need, that's a specific need. So that's what we are seeing, Yeah.[00:19:40] Dan Runcie: What are some of the bigger challenges right now for startups in Africa?[00:19:45] Mr. Eazi: I think one of the biggest challenges is, you know, getting funding and you see a lot of, like African startups, YC has been doing a great job, but there are, you know, and like, future Africa, which I'm part of and I'm an advisor, you know, investing in these projects. But raising fund is like so hard.[00:20:07] There's still a hesitance when it comes to African startup raising funds, especially at seed stage. And usually this is not a lot of money. It's like from 20K checks to like even hundred is a lot of money, you know, but that 50 k to, get you into flight mode. So I think that's the biggest issue is not lack of ideas, it's, you know, getting funding, especially local funding that's not a lot of local funding sources. There's few options like the YC's and it's hard to get in generating that local funding is still a problem as a lot of the, you know, organizations and a lot of investors are still trying to understand this whole tech investment and valuation.[00:20:55] I have my uncles ask me, you said this company is, is what, $20 million? Do they have 20 million cash in their account or do they have, buildings? Where's the building? Where's the physical asset, you know, it's that culture going from brick and mortar to technology and understanding evaluation and all of that.[00:21:15] And, then you have sectors that are now like so hot that valuations are going crazy you know, And you have, like, depending on what sector you are, a lot of the countries are just catching up to technology. And in some places there are no laws written for the kind of products you are creating.[00:21:38] So if you're not in sync with the regulators, the regulators might pass a law that is detrimental to your business and all of a sudden you wake up one morning and your successful business is now killed just like the motorbike railing company. I forgotten the name in Lagos. That was really growing and then with one day regulations like no motorbike, transportation in Lagos, boom, dead.[00:22:04] So, I think it's not just in Africa-peculiar problem. It's like, for instance, with crypto and, you know, a lot of, you know, countries trying to understand what is going on. So you're having innovation outpacing regulation and you know, if there's no proper interaction you are having like regulations could just like be the end of use.[00:22:28] So I think access to capital, and in some sectors, depending on your sector, regulation as well could be a major setback.[00:22:38] Dan Runcie: The access to capital piece, I could see that, especially since the friends and family round is such a key piece, or having the angels outta there, such a key piece to help make that happen. But if the people that have the financial means are fewer and far between, you know, whether it's folks like you or others that are in your syndicate or maybe some of the other co-investors you have, that means that the deal flow that you all get is heightened even more so because there's just so fewer other places, which makes you all needing to be even more selective, I can imagine, than you maybe otherwise prefer to be. I mean, how do you feel in that perspective as someone that wants to see the space grow, but you know that you can't back everybody even though you know, I'm sure inherently you wish you would, but you still have your own rubrics. You still have your way that you evaluate things, and that likely has to be even heightened given the number of deals that you're seeing.[00:23:32] Mr. Eazi: Yeah, I mean like, well one of the things I pray, I have some days, fuck you money. Do you understand? To just like, because like 1.2 billion people in Africa on the continent. And it's like, if you think of the amount of money that comes back to Africa from the African Diaspora, it's like, I think it's like over a trillion dollars a year.[00:23:54] So there's so much opportunity. And, but like you said, what this does is it makes things a little bit harder for people, you know, entrepreneurs who need the money and the proof is in the pudding. Like I always say, like although it takes time and things are changing, don't get me wrong, things are changing.[00:24:15] They are more local, VCs, funding, but like I probably know like five people with networks over a hundred million, right? But now, for me to get to the point where, and these are people who've, amass all this wealth with brick and mortar businesses. So now you know, there's a job to do to sort of like show proof, show validity that, hey, I invested at this point, it's not for Gen Z it's not a pyramid scheme.[00:24:50] And like show people and then you get more people, coming in. And I have seen like some of my friends who are like billionaires now start to set up separate funds to say, okay, you know what? I don't really know what this tech thing is about for, but you know, put the money in future Africa or put it in some other fund and try to learn.[00:25:11] So it's more sort of like publicity and sometimes the drop, the setbacks are when there's a big startup out of the continent that then runs into all sorts of scandals and then, you know, it causes five steps backward. And that's not peculiar to Africa like, I mean, you seen what happened to ftx, right? So that happens everywhere.[00:25:35] The only differences, you know, because it's still kind of new. It causes more negative effects, you know, so I think there needs to be more education, more pr to the successes of these companies. Every success is a success and should be, you know, communicated and things would get better because there is capital on the continent.[00:26:00] There is like lose capital on, the continent looking for where to invest, you know? So I mean, things are changing like Future Africa. I always keep mentioning Future Africa, like they've been able to show that, you know, they know what they're doing. There is a method to the madness. They could deliver results in terms of like revenue, you know, they invested in Move, which is a company that provides, you know, the cars for Uber drivers and it's, you know, I think it's now a unicorn and that's like a very particular need because, you know, drivers need cars, but they don't have the capital to purchase the cars, right? And going through the banking routes, you are gonna have to bring collateral, your mom's name, your grandmother's house, plus the high interest, you know, so they've identified, and this has been a problem, it's still a problem to today that they've been able to solve.[00:26:54] So I think the more people know about this, the more education, the more things will open up.[00:27:01] Dan Runcie: The PR piece you mentioned is interesting because from my side, living in the states, I'll see the articles about a company like Carry1st, which I do think has had a fair amount of PR, I feel like one of their announcements got an got an article in the Hollywood Reporter, so I remember seeing things like that, but I feel like it does become fewer and farther between, at least from what you are seeing, from the awareness of some of these[00:27:27] Mr. Eazi: Yeah, you're correct and it's not so much I understand why like there's a lot of PR outside looking PR like you said, you know, New York Times, you know, LA blah, blah, blah, because that's where the money's coming from, right? But like, I'm talking more intra-Africa PR like for the money on the continent, you know, because that's like easily, like it's right there in your face, you know, there's enough money in Lagos for them not to be any need to raise capital from outside . You get what I'm saying? There's so much capital in Lagos, like from Lagos, you feel me? Or from Rwanda, you know, and, Rwanda is trying to position itself as startup, you know, pro-startup investing, you know, so there's money on the continent and it's like[00:28:22] that's what I mean by PR and publicity and awareness. if I wasn't friends with, like, I met in, was co-founder of, Flutterwave with and then Andela, you know, and then Move. So three unicorns, right? And, you know, we've been friends and we've been investing together. if there was not that proximity to him or to Shola the founder of Paystack that got bought by Stripe, I wouldn't know that this was going on.[00:28:50] You feel me? Maybe, you know, I wouldn't have known. So that's what I mean, you know, because like every A-list, Afro-B artist can be you know, can be invested, you know, so that's exactly what I mean.[00:29:08] Dan Runcie: It is interesting you bring up the music piece because I'd be curious to hear how you feel some of these challenges that African startups may face. How do the African artists themselves fare in that regard? Do you think that they have similar challenges with funding or with regulations in that way?[00:29:26] Mr. Eazi: There's regulation issues, like for instance, collecting, publishing revenue on the continent. It's a joke, right?[00:29:34] Dan Runcie: Why is that?[00:29:34] Mr. Eazi: Or collecting streaming revenue because like for you to be able to collect publishing revenue, you need the government to enforce the laws for the radio stations to pay you, you know, publishing royalties on the music they place for the bars to be able to pay for what they play, like for the use of your music. So you need strong in a lot of African countries, these laws are there, but there's no enforcement because I would say it's worse for creatives because people still look at the creative sector as a joke.[00:30:08] The orange economy is like, ah, that's not really business like that's just young people with dreadlocks, just singing and dancing and jumping across the world. Yes, they hear the music everywhere. Yes, now things are getting better because they're seeing teams at the Grammys, they're seeing Burna Boy, you know, and whiskey doing Madison Square Garden, but there's not a lot of education for them to really understand the business of music or creativity.[00:30:36] So even, I remember like two years ago I spoke to almost all the bank MDs, or three years ago, almost all the bank MDs in Nigeria trying to convince them on why music is a business is a valid business, but I couldn't get funding. And that's me being a successful African artist showing the revenue, showing all of that, like I once got on a panel with, you know, a financial institution that was meant that. they have a fund, they have like a 500 million dollar fund for investing in creatives. And I was on a panel with somebody there and the person said, oh, it is impossible to protect music IP, it is difficult to protect music IP, and I was like, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, What? And like, are you kidding me? Like, there's Shazam technology, there's like, every song has an ISRC code and like if you upload the song in Kenya or in in Afghanistan, like on YouTube, like it will pick it up instantly. So when you have a situation where you have an institution that has up to a billion to invest in creatives. But you are having the key stakeholders who decide who gets what telling you or speaking out confidently and saying is hard to protect the IP, you know, then that just shows you where it sucks. So there's still a lot, but I feel like that's why there needs to be more education, you know, just like for startups to music, to let people realize that this is a business, like there's revenue to be earned. Not just live revenue, like streaming revenue, publishing revenue, especially now that the world is looking to Africa. Like you're seeing early starters jumping on Afro Beats records, like, what's that song?[00:32:31] Essence, Essence was a hit song before Justin Bieber jumped on it. It was already a global smash. Peru was a, global smash before, Ed Sheeran jumped on it. So you are having like pure Afro Beats records in our local language produced locally in some hotel room in Lagos, you know, going on to be big songs globally without any major support from without necessarily, you know, I know A and R like support, like his producers locally. And you're seeing this, so you do know that this is the time, or you know, like the example I gave, you know, Bad Bunny, you know, sampling a Joeboy record and putting it on his album, putting an Afro Beats record on his album, you know, that's an ex example.[00:33:18] Dan Runcie: And by the way, that was declared properly and like I'm about to go, you know, go crazy with the lawyers to make sure I get my bread. And more importantly, the writers and the producers get, their due credit and revenue and, you know, Did Bad Bunny's team reach out before this?[00:33:39] Mr. Eazi: No, no, no, I literally just listened to Bad Bunny's album and I just heard Joe Boy's voice at the end of the record, and I was like, I've heard this record before. And then I realized is a record, I didn't make it to his album. And I'm like, wait a minute. And then my team start speaking to them since May of, last year.[00:33:55] And it's just back and forth to the point where I'm like, okay, you know what, you guys have had fun with this. Like, I'm just going brazen on this, let's get lawyers. Let's make it like a proper lawsuit. But what I'm trying to, or you have, you know, Beyonce, you know, doing the Lion King, the gift and having created from all of Africa put it so like, you know, you are having Drake, you know, with Whiskey on one dance you're having Ed Sheeran, Justin Bieber jump on multiple Afro Beats records that are Afro Beats records. You're having people more and more people sampling Afro Beats records, you know, and maybe not giving proper credit or do, or you are having, like I once produce. and was on co-produced and wrote and featured on a record involving Bad Bunny on the Joint album and Afro Beats record.[00:34:45] So you're seeing is becoming more global and global. So we need to be able to tell these stories to the funding sources back home to establish that this is indeed a business. So it's education the same way education for the startups, but even more for music because music was never, and creatives, you know, was never looked at as a valid business.[00:35:09] It was looked at as things, people who don't graduate from school or people who just wanna be jokers do. But right now people are sitting, wait a minute, wow, that artist bought car that artist's bought a house. that artist did this, did that or Grammys or this, that, that. So, but there still needs to be more information back home to the business side of the music to know that behind that sold out.[00:35:36] MSG is a check, and behind that billboard is a check, you know, and even the TikTokers, like I was speaking to someone at the bank and explaining to my bank MD friend that, you know, I showed him a lot of payments, like TikTokers in Nigeria are getting paid as much as $10,000 to put up a post on their TikTok.[00:35:59] 17 year old, 18 year old, you know, and I had to show this and he was like, what? Are you serious? And then he went back to ask his kids. And find out that, oh wow, this is a thing, you know? So it's that education, I mean, because there is the capital on the continent, it's just like, how do you get it?[00:36:17] And it is a lot of work to do to basically explain and explain and explain. And one needs to have the patience. And it's hard to do that while still running my label, doing everything I'm doing, putting out music for myself, you know, so, you know, but thankfully I'm not the only one doing it, Don Jazzy is doing it.[00:36:39] Olamide is doing it. They're more examples. So one way or the other people are saying it.[00:36:44] Dan Runcie: How do you feel about the investment in African music that has come from the West? So thinking about Universal Music group opening up record label in Africa and some of the other majors having different concentration in Nigeria or elsewhere, how has that been and what type of impact has that had, if any, on your end?[00:37:07] Mr. Eazi: I mean, I think it's good. It's a good signifier because all these labels were in Africa from the years before Fella, right? You had all these labels in Nigeria before, you know, the nationalization where, you know, the government had passed that all the companies should be nationalized and the labels got sold to local owners.[00:37:26] So you are just having, you have Majek Fashek that was on the late, late show, the late night show in 1991, bro. So when people say, oh, African music is then becoming popular. It's been popular. And it's coming back again with technology and everything. So I think it's good. I think the more, you know, major labels coming to Africa, but not just as, or let's test to see what happens.[00:37:52] But the more investment that comes, the more structure there will be for the business and the more signifiers, you know, to show people who wanna invest, you know, so yeah, I welcome it. And I think there should be more funding and there should be more, like the local companies should be autonomous, you know, I think that's been the only drawback with the majors, pardon of me, I might be wrong. Don't quote me where you are seeing the local, you know, Universal Nigeria or Sony or whatever, you know, that lookout team not having a lot of, autonomy in the checks they're writing to the artists or taking those risks they have to get approval from maybe South Africa or, you know, London or LA.[00:38:43] Meanwhile, everything is happening on the ground in Lagos, so you are having distributors. So I think a lot of the most recent successes have been by more distributors than record label in breaking artists. So more like Empire or ONErpm or the Orchid or emPawa or, you know, Believe, because these distributors are more flexible and have been able to give a lot more autonomy to the local guys who are running, these local companies to write those checks because like, what is somebody in London like with all due respect, like I always say this as a joke. There's no songwriter in the world that would've written, I don't care how many Grammys you've, gotten, you cannot write Soco, Soco, Soco, Soco, Soco, baby.[00:39:42] You. That's the Wizkid song, you can't write that song or, one of my favorite artists Wande Coal, there's a part of his song where he just spits jibberish, like he don't mean anything, like it's a vibe. So like without due respect to your A and R ears, you don't know the music like even me, I'm from Nigeria, but I always have to be updated.[00:40:09] So there needs to be more investment and more autonomy. But I love it like the more labels come in and the more distribution companies come in and there's this competition, the more money is invest invested. And when you invest money, then you start to structure it then you start to say, Hey, why are we not making as much money locally?[00:40:29] Okay, let's invest in touring, you know, in Nigeria, in on the continent. let's go lobby for enforcement of collection of royalties. So, yeah.[00:40:40] Dan Runcie: Have you seen any success stories from the major record label side in Africa yet?[00:40:48] Mr. Eazi: There's none that comes to mind in terms of breaking an artist. So you have Wizkid signed, you have Diplo signed, you have Burna Boy signed. you know, and this is like A-list, A-list, right? But if you look at all the artists that have broken Buju for instance, initially signed to Burna Boy and then Empire, broke him, you know, that's Buju, Fire Boy via Empire and Olamide's YBNteams, you know, independently broke with, her record. I think she's been upstreamed now. So in terms of sort of like carrying that conversation, you know, outside to the rest of the world, yes, I'm sure there's been a lot of success like the Wizkid record, you know, Burna Boy, entire Renaissance.[00:41:44] And you could go on and on, but in terms of actually finding an artist and breaking the artist, there's not a lot of successes. And I think that's down to autonomy because, you know, you have some executives moves from the label to the distributors and do well, you know, we just understanding you know, how to a and r and how to put our music, on the continent, and you can't just bring like somebody who's of Nigerian descent and just expect that they don't understand. Like, I am Nigerian, but every time I go back to Lagos, I'm like, whoa, the sound has changed, you know? So that underground on the ground, you know, and there's a lot of work.[00:42:31] Dan Runcie: Definitely, and yeah, I know that there's so much interest, but like you said, if they don't have the control or the ability to really make decisions on their own, I can easily see why an Empire or some of the other distributors have been able to have success there. But Mr. Eazi, man, this was great. I feel like you gave us a snapshot of where everything is right now on music and investing side.[00:42:53] But before we let you go, for you, what's big on the road for you still beginning of the year? What's big on the deck for you? What do you got coming up?[00:43:02] Mr. Eazi: I mean, I kind of like needed a break from putting out music and touring and when COVID happened I was like, oh, thank God, like because I was battling with, oh, if I should, I pause, like it was just routine doing the same thing and it was like too much for me. So I was able to have that pause, and put some of the attention towards like growing emPawa with my co-founder.[00:43:27] And then leaving it to him to sort of like, you know, and come back to iterate, iterate change the model, blah, blah, blah, build the team. And I just went off and started doing like investment and putting more time in the startups I was investing in. And now, I'm in Cape Town recording. I'm putting out two albums this year, one in September and one in, I think April or May.[00:43:55] So I'm just recording that now and I feel like, and now I want to go back on the road, but not first as my usual live band touring, but first as sort of like a curator, where I bring like, you know, the way Major Lazer tour where they have the sound system with Walshy and Diplo and Ape Drums. But instead of Diplo and Ape Drums, I select like the DJs, maybe one playing Afro Pop, one playing Ama one playing something else.[00:44:27] And I am the Walshy Fire, sort of like putting it together, hype man MC. So that's what I want to tour. The first part of the year once I put out the Chop Life album, so that's called Chop Life. To chop life means to enjoy life. So I'm making an sort of Afro dance album that I'll put out first and then I will talk as Chop Life sound system with doing these parties.[00:44:53] you know, of majorly Afro Beat parties, sound system across the world. And then I dropped the album, the second album, and I taught as, okay, this is my album tour. So that's the plan. Hopefully I'm able to complete the first album. The second album is done, it is just in mixing a mastering, that's the September one.[00:45:13] It's done just in mix. And my string phase and then this first one, I'm recording. That's what I'm recording right now. Recording downstairs.[00:45:21] Dan Runcie: Nice. Nice. Well, looking forward to all of that, man, and thank you. No, this has been a pleasure. And yeah, so people that wanna follow along and keep up with all that, where should they go to follow you?[00:45:30] Mr. Eazi: Follow me everywhere on social media @mreazi, M R E A Z I, Mr. Eazi. Yeah, everywhere, everywhere on social media.[00:45:44] And I wanna see you at one of my shows. You have to come maybe when I do the parties, where are you right now?[00:45:49] Dan Runcie: Me, I'm in San Francisco[00:45:51] Mr. Eazi: Cool. I'm, sure I'll be coming around LA, San Fran, at some point[00:45:55] Dan Runcie: Yeah, come through.[00:45:57] Mr. Eazi: I'd send you an invite,[00:45:58] Dan Runcie: Definitely, definitely. All right, man. We'll talk soon.[00:46:01] Mr. Eazi: All right. Have a good one. Thank you.[00:46:03] Dan Runcie Outro: If you enjoyed this podcast, go ahead and share it with a friend. Copy the link, text it to a friend, post it in your group chat. Post it in your Slack groups. Wherever you and your people talk, spread the word. That's how capital continues to grow and continues to reach the right people. And while you're at it, if you use Apple Podcast, go ahead.[00:46:24] Rate the podcast, give it a high rating, and leave a review. Tell people why you like the podcast. That helps more people. Discover the show. Thank you in advance. Talk to you next week.