JPF Home Page Forums General Messages Mentor Questions Forum Newsweek Interview with Michael Laskow

Harry,

There's no question that people don't want to give up power and will try and find ways to continue control. If people representing stock holders can find investment opportunities that produce the right ROI and get the heat off of them, it's likely they'll go that route. It costs a lot of money to find artists, invest (i.e. gamble) that they will take off and pay all the cost associated with the current music industry system. If a viable alternative solution is available that lessens the risk, and allows labels to avoid those long term investments which may fail, but capitalize on a "known" successes using their marketing savvy/muscle, why wouldn't they want to go that route?

It's sort of like pro sports contracts. Lately, it's becoming more and more dangerous for teams to pay rookies huge contracts. If they don't meet their potential, they could lose an enormous investment that might be tied up for years and years. If they were able to wait and see how well the player performs in the first game or two of the season before paying them a dime, of course that would be what they would want. They can't currently do that because someone else will snap them up first. But in music, there isn't any company that can literally snap up ALL (or even a large %) of the talent out there. There may only be a handful of pro quarterbacks that can perform as well as Peyton Manning or who seem to have the future promise of his little brother who is entering the draft this year. But in music, there ARE a lot of artists that can make music as well as Madonna, Garth Brooks, Celine Dion, NSync, Outkast, The Rolling Stones etc. The music industry artificially limits the number of these artists that get the exposure to find that same type of success however. It would be like the NFL cutting itself down to 4 teams and using marketing power, payola and other nefarious means to make sure no other leagues started new teams. Then we'd know that there were 24 teams worth of pro players getting zero exposure or opportunity. The 4 remaining major labels have essentially done that. A new system that allows an unlimited number of musical "teams" helps artists. A system that allows the "owners" to invest in "players" AFTER they know they are talented and able to appeal to the masses based on merit and NOT just promise helps the "owners" improve ROI and when all is said and done, that's always their #1 concern. The bottom line. Imagine if you could decide what to pay a pro football player after they had a 200 yard rushing game, and only commit to the next game? Even better, what if you could invest in them DURING THE GAME... once you see they are on their way to a big performance? That's what Laskows model seems to be attempting. And that system truly does award merit and performance in ways that the current system simply can't do.

Brian