Polyphonic Case
If I was Mike McCready of Polyphonic, I would pursue the record companies first. The following are the reasons:
1. Polyphonic can provide more demonstrable value to the record Labels. Since the record companies, because of their hefty investments, have the most to lose if an album or a song does not catches the public’s fancy, they are more focused on economic returns than artists and producers. Also, record companies have the financial resources to invest in Hit Song Science (HSS). 2. Record companies can use the HSS to decide which single to release first. The marketing expense for releasing a single for an unknown artist is a huge $30,000. So record companies can use HSS to identify which song out of an album has the best chance to become a hit.
3. Most of the record companies use “gut instinct” or expensive internet polling, call-out research, focus-group research to forecast sales. Still, the success rate is just 10% because this method is not sure-shot. Using HSS will allow labels to eliminate such costs and have a “more-definitive” method for identifying hits.
1b. Since Polyphonic has limited budget ($150,000) but is catering to record labels, much smaller in number in comparison to unsigned artists and producers, it can do a lot more in promotion. It can look to give information in a simpler manner, through websites, to simplify science’ utility in music to convince skeptics. It can offer free trials for the first 6 months to a few record labels and if its claim of 80% accuracy is true, that record label will benefit drastically and the word of HSS’ utility will spread. Also, it should initially price HSS much lower than $3000 of of internet polling price but increase as it gains mileage
Ans 2. Record companies stand to gain more from this technology
Ans 3. The success rate of a single becoming a hit without HSS is 10%. The medium estimate of expected values (taking the conservative, safe approach) of a single reaching top 40 is: $200,000 and a
1. Polyphonic can provide more demonstrable value to the record Labels. Since the record companies, because of their hefty investments, have the most to lose if an album or a song does not catches the public’s fancy, they are more focused on economic returns than artists and producers. Also, record companies have the financial resources to invest in Hit Song Science (HSS). 2. Record companies can use the HSS to decide which single to release first. The marketing expense for releasing a single for an unknown artist is a huge $30,000. So record companies can use HSS to identify which song out of an album has the best chance to become a hit.
3. Most of the record companies use “gut instinct” or expensive internet polling, call-out research, focus-group research to forecast sales. Still, the success rate is just 10% because this method is not sure-shot. Using HSS will allow labels to eliminate such costs and have a “more-definitive” method for identifying hits.
1b. Since Polyphonic has limited budget ($150,000) but is catering to record labels, much smaller in number in comparison to unsigned artists and producers, it can do a lot more in promotion. It can look to give information in a simpler manner, through websites, to simplify science’ utility in music to convince skeptics. It can offer free trials for the first 6 months to a few record labels and if its claim of 80% accuracy is true, that record label will benefit drastically and the word of HSS’ utility will spread. Also, it should initially price HSS much lower than $3000 of of internet polling price but increase as it gains mileage
Ans 2. Record companies stand to gain more from this technology
Ans 3. The success rate of a single becoming a hit without HSS is 10%. The medium estimate of expected values (taking the conservative, safe approach) of a single reaching top 40 is: $200,000 and a