Polyphonic HMI: Mixing Music and Math

Polyphonic HMI: Mixing Music and Math

If you were Mike McCready, the CEO of Polyphonic, which target market—unsigned artists, producers, or record companies—would you pursue? How would you serve this target market? We will start with the three steps of “Segmentation, Targeting, and Positioning.” The market have been categorized into three subsets, and in deciding market coverage, we have been limited to only one market due to company’s resources according to the case. In view of Product Life Cycle, because Polyphonic is in its early stage where the company would need to find some pioneers who are willing to give the product a shot before adopted in a major market. Few would accept it with the relatively high expense Polyphonic charges to justify the R&D cost, so the market size and the ability to pay should be taken into consideration: Five major record companies in US can be broken down into several labels. Their main revenues come from the hit songs and album sold; Several hundred of artists can be named, who are more likely to need the service than unsigned ones, and they would tend to seek help from producers instead of an expense software; Producers, with tens of thousands of them around the States, are more often to be highly trained in the field of music and thus be more likely to rely on their own judgments. Therefore, we think that “Record Company” would be the most ideal target market we serve. Another benefit is that once they adopted the technique, more accuracy in determining the hit and less effort be wrongly put in expensive promoting which would significantly reduce the marketing cost. We suggest the ecosystem between these three roles could be like this: Artists sharpen their skill and provide their best composition to producers; he judges it with his experience and talent ears before sending it to record companies, who then use Polyphonic to decide if the album has any potential song. If not, they send it back, and if producer