AMBC Part 2: “I'll Answer That, ‘No’”

At day two of the AustralAsian Music Business Conference, a still-delirious A.H. CAYLEY finds herself party to a section of the Australian music industry that is (for the most part) open to change and progress – even if it takes a Swiss guest to show them how.

Part Two: Friday, August 21

Shivering in a corner of the conference room at this morning's schmooze-session “Power Breakfast” (BYO breakfast), I'm amazed at the speed and ease at which some of the AMBC attendees are able to mingle. Like that of a magician on a cruise ship, their cards are flung from their palms in a blur before they disappear and reappear at the other side of the room, with a new audience upon which to practice their illusions. Pick a card, any card (as long as it's mine and you make me famous). Jesus. I'm glad I'm not the only one looking bewildered.

First keynote speaker today is Switzerland's Gerd Leonhard, “media futurist”, author, blogger, professional keynote speaker, strategist, and author of books such as Music 2.0 and The Future of Music (co-authored with David Kusek). Emphatically, with great conviction and obviously with a great deal of thought, he outlines his model for the future of music sales and content supply – mostly, that we should simply license the internet just like we do radio. It remains free for the consumer, but the artists still get paid. How refreshing. He begins quite simply with an example of The New York Times as a mirror for the current structure of music sales, and it’s from this simple analogy onwards that he has an entire conference room in the palm of his hand.

“The New York Times spends about 20 percent of their money on actual content creation,” he declares in a charming Swiss accent. “The rest of the money they spend on … the building, the trucks, the machines, the printing, the ink and so on. Rupert Murdoch says that ‘an industry that gives away its content is cannibalising its ability to [produce good reporting].’ I think that an industry that gives away its content is [just] giving away its ability to pay for the buildings and the trucks. Therein lies the difference. What is the internet doing? It is not doing away with us, the creators, it is doing away with all the stuff around it that we didn't need in the first place.

“So, guess where 90 percent of the money from music sales went: the corporate perks, the bonuses, the buildings, the trucks. Not the content. People are saying people aren't willing to spend money on the internet … for content. Not true. Around the world, content spending is increasing everywhere: dating services, research, data reports, games, ring tones, ring-back tones. How come they're not paying us for downloads? What's wrong with those people? Well, there's nothing wrong with those people – there's something wrong with us! We're not doing this the right way. We have to think of this differently ... We have to remove the chain of control that we had in the past for the music, so that we can make those sales.”

It’s this statement that resounds the clearest. That in an industry so keen on looking to the past and apparently so resistant to the inevitable change that technological advancement brings, we need to actively evolve to stay alive. It's pretty simple – so why aren't those in charge listening? It seems the issue of control is one to which the major labels are still desperately trying to cling.

“There was a record company executive in 1925,” he continues, “who said the public will not buy songs that it can hear almost at will by a brief manipulation of the radio dials. In other words, radio is bad because it's free music ... What are we hearing today? That the internet is bad because at a brief manipulation of the mouse you can hear music? Ridiculous! Radio was the biggest invention for music, the biggest pushing factor for 50 years! It made most of the money for artists, it put us out into the world. So here's a solution: why don't we just license [online music]? That's what happened with radio ... We need a license for the music on the internet that's built-in, that anyone can use, that basically gets everyone paid in the process.

“And here's, of course, a theme of the record industry: protecting intellectual property is key to the business. Frankly, that puts me to sleep. It's true, of course, [that] it's crucial to protect what we have created. But does it make money, if all we talk about is protection? It doesn't make money – it makes money for the lawyers. Congratulations. Please forget about this idea of domination. We need to devise a new social contract ... We create music, music goes on the network and payment is part of the process, like radio. We can put up a meter – what else is radio than the meter? You get more airplay, you get more money.

“So there's this issue of controlling how people share the music, or copyright protection – it isn't working! You can have control, or you can have the money. So far for the record industry, it has been the control [that's] more important than the money, and that’s simply because it’s about their business, not ours as the creators. It's time we get in there and take control of what's ours [as] the user and the creator.

“We need to fix the structural problem. We need to get to those people that make the decisions [and say], ‘License the music like you license radio. Make it available to everyone.’ I think we should impeach the people that don't like this idea. Because it's killing us! It's making our children into criminals. Not only is it morally wrong, it's ethically and socially wrong.”

Leonhard receives the loudest applause this crowd has given. If I had the energy, I would have given him a standing ovation. Instead, I sit and clap meekly while those around me already begin to chatter excitedly about what they just heard. I only wish such a presentation were open to more. This is something that should be available for everyone to witness and discuss, not just those with hundreds of dollars to spare. That said, it was certainly worth the entry fee.

“If it were in any way comparable to a fucking Walkman, it certainly wouldn't be a topic of discussion at a $700 conference, now would it?”

The following panel focuses on how a musician may aim to rise above the “chatter and chat” with the use of new publicity and marketing tools, such as Twitter, Facebook, blogs, etc. It features Keith Welsh, AMPAL chairman, former Music Network co-publisher and Icehouse bassist; MySpace business development manager Nick Love; Clayton Doughty from Gibson Guitars; Shae Constantine, director of domestic music for Warner; Georgia Hull, former senior director of new media and digital business development for Roadrunner Australia; Jade Harley, managing editor of The Music Network; and Leonhard again. Sadly, what could have been an interesting discussion gives few insights, and seems even more insipid in light of Leonhard's preceding presentation. Perhaps it's just that there are few in this audience unaware of Twitter and its ilk, and few again who are not already employing such “marketing strategies”. There's very little to be said on this panel discussion. So I just won't.

In the coffee break preceding the next panel, while we sip our beverages and nibble on delicious and free Byron Bay Cookies, whispers abound about who the next keynote speakers will be (they’re announced as “TBA” in the program). I'm not so enfeebled that I don't think to stuff quite a few cookies in the pockets of my trench coat and again in my bag, as do many others. The life of a musician or a writer is not a romantic one.

Back in the conference room, I'm as eager to see who will take the stage. An email two weeks before the event declared that there will be a “two man tussle ... with a couple of surprise speakers”. Apparently the organisers came very close to getting both Pink and her manager, and also Alice Cooper and his manager, but both fell through. And so, to give the second keynote address of day two: Phil Tripp and Keith Welsh. Well, they sure ain't Pink. They discuss the industry in general, and though there's again little to report, the main theme of the address is that it’s important for us to reconnect with the music. That it’s time to change the language of the industry, to finally view it as a service sector. It’s also the main thrust of the conference. We're trying to look forward, while too many are still looking back.

The next panel is a discussion of “mobile music”, how mobile phones and wireless music transmission “may be at a tipping point”. It features Richard Mallett, APRA's director of recorded music services; CEO of Mercury Mobility Paul Paoliello; Sharon Ashworth, music marketing manager of Vodafone; Karen Farrugia, market manager of Nokia Music Service; and Paul Buchanan, general manager of Soundbuzz Australia. Some interesting points are raised, such as the possibility for an artist to make lots of money in creating their own ringtones, a trend Eskimo Joe apparently started back in the polyphonic days, but it eventually descends into what feels like an advert.

Farrugia outlines a new Nokia service, a “music offering with a handset experience”, whereby consumers get unlimited downloads for 12 months and then get to keep everything they've downloaded at the end of that term. Although she only offers this information when asked, I still can't shake the feeling I'm having something sold to me. Ashworth describes this new technological sensation as “momentary, on-the-go ... a different way of experiencing music … [regardless of] sound quality.” The word “disposable” is used a lot. I can't help but wonder whether this gradual acceptance of low sound quality will come to lower the expectations of recorded music. And if the people creating and promoting these systems see themselves as having any responsibility in preserving music as a personal, qualitative value, rather than just a disposable, monetary one. There's a pause, before Mallett states, “I'll answer that, ‘No.’” Another pause, before he continues. “Dodgy music has been available forever.” He offers the shitty quality of Walkman headphones as an example. What a moron. Firstly, that's not the quality of the music format but the quality of the player, and secondly, how idiotic and willfully short-sighted to suggest that something like Walkmans are as prolific and far-reaching as mobile technology, the spread of which can be seen all around the world and is abundantly more successful than any other technological advancement of the 20th century. If it were in any way comparable to a fucking Walkman, it certainly wouldn't be a topic of discussion at a $700 conference, now would it?

Here I find another issue with the AMBC. While its speakers are well-informed in their fields, and seem genuinely passionate speaking on their areas of expertise, they are not only hesitant to be questioned with any negativity, but are completely unwilling to listen to and consider opposing views or concerns. It's hardly a discussion if everyone agrees.

The next panel is again a bit of a disappointment, though perhaps this is a just a generational issue. It features founder and CEO of TuneCore Jeff Price (also tomorrow's star keynote speaker), MySpace's Nick Love (again), Roadrunner's Georiga Hull (again), Nokia's Karen Faruggia (again) and Gerd Leonhard (again, again) in a discussion about “music recommendation agents” such as Facebook's iLike, MySpace Music, Last.fm, Spotify (a new iPhone application), Twitter, Blip.fm, Muxtape, Price's TuneCore, etc. Pitchfork gets a mention. Mess+Noise does not. Oh, well. Though relevant, it's nothing new. Almost everyone in this audience – mostly Gen X and Y – are not only aware of, but already using these sites. Sadly, this panel again seems as unnecessary as the first today. The only real highlight is Price's response to an audience question regarding whether online discovery will minimise the necessity of gigging. “Music is universal. It's not food, it's not shelter. Nobody needs it but everybody wants it. It's what binds us together; it's a social glue. It defines you. Live music is like nothing else in the world.” Just when I was beginning to think too many here today had come to forget all of that…

Another day is done, and there's only one to go. Though disappointed with the first and third panels, I feel that Leonhard's keynote was exciting enough to make up for today's low-points. Conversely, the second panel, on mobile music, was infuriating enough to be worthwhile. I certainly had a strong reaction to it, even if I was denied interaction. This I think would take the AMBC to another level, and it's a shame that this is its final year and it won't ever see that improvement. These discussions are, on the whole, interesting and thought-provoking, and though perhaps logistically tricky, to allow greater attendee involvement over the current “we're the speakers, you're the audience” model would be so exciting and worthwhile. The keen discussions and friendly arguments that surround me on the train to Central are proof of this. If my voice were working and my cheeks weren't burning quite so much, I'd certainly be joining in.

Bring on the final day.

+

Part three: As the AustralAsian Music Business conference winds down to a close, A.H. CAYLEY finds herself surrounded by desperate last-chance self-promoters and cons.