About half of Bandcamp employees have been laid off [not a deal]

[pseudopop]

The article on the Verge is short, so I have quoted it here in its entirety for your convenience:

Thus wrote Ash Parris:

Affected employees are reporting that 50 percent of staff from the indie music platform were not extended offers from Songtradr, the company that purchased Bandcamp from Epic Games.

One of the worst tech labor years ever continues with the news that roughly half of Bandcamp employees have been laid off. Bandcamp employees are reporting the news via social media.

Epic Games bought the indie music platform back in 2022 for an undisclosed amount before selling it barely a year later.

Late last month, Epic Games laid off 16 percent of its workforce, or 830 employees, due to what CEO Tim Sweeney described as overspending. Epic also revealed that it would sell the Bandcamp business to California-based music licensing company Songtradr. In that announcement, Epic disclosed that an additional 250 people would be leaving Epic either through receiving offers from Songtradr or Epic’s divesture from its SuperAwesome ad business. Employees who did not receive offers from Songtradr were notified today and will be eligible for severance.

In an email to The Verge, Songtradr confirmed that 50 percent of Bandcamp employees have been extended offers to join Songtradr and reaffirmed from a previous statement the company’s commitment to keeping the Bandcamp experience the same.

Songtradr’s statement also confirmed that its purchase of Bandcamp had been completed, but it did not confirm if it would voluntarily recognize Bandcamp’s union that employees won earlier this year, despite pressure from employees and the Bandcamp community.

I have to admit that -- excluding some single purchases here and there -- I have never used Bandcamp that much. But now that there is some uncertainty about its future, I somehow feel more inclined to see what it might have to offer.

[pwal³]

surprise!

[El Diablo]

When I visited years ago, Bandcamp was over saturated in the Hip-Hop genre all over the front page.  There was no way my genres would ever see the front page, so I decided not to use them.

 

[Byron Dickens]

 

[pseudopop]

7 minutes ago, El Diablo said:

When I visited years ago, Bandcamp was over saturated in the Hip-Hop genre all over the front page.  There was no way my genres would ever see the front page, so I decided not to use them.

Simply because you wouldn't be seen on the front page, or was there some other reason?

My understanding is that Bandcamp isn't intended to be a platform that does your promotion for you but instead helps you showcase and distribute your music. In that light front page visibility seems trivial, to be honest.

[PavlovsCat]

41 minutes ago, pseudopop said:

Simply because you wouldn't be seen on the front page, or was there some other reason?

My understanding is that Bandcamp isn't intended to be a platform that does your promotion for you but instead helps you showcase and distribute your music. In that light front page visibility seems trivial, to be honest.

Exactly. Being at BandCamp is like having a website. No one knows you exist until you do promotion, such as live shows, appearances, get on playlists, etc. Just being on one of these sites doesn't get your music attention. If you're an unsigned artist, especially in rock, I think BandCamp is a no-brainer. But rock -- which is what I think is your genre, @El Diablo.  isn't it? --  is simply not nearly as popular as hip hop/rap today.  We had a recent post on BandCamp and Peter from IK  brought up a mutual friend, Dave Kerzner who is a prog rocker on an indie label who has done pretty well on BandCamp, but like any artist he is promoting the heck out of his music with touring, online / social media presence, etc. BandCamp, while we all know them, is a small business. They only made about $20 million in net revenue  last year, It's just a fact of life that most consumers aren't buying music the way they used to and the majority that spend money on music online -- in the US it's more than 60% of households -- are paying for a music streaming subscription, not paying for individual songs or albums, the market just doesn't exist in large numbers. Subsquenty, it's really dificult for an indie artist to make a living off of streaming because it takes a massive amount of plays to generate that kind of revenue and there's not a ton of buyers for individual songs and albums. I think Dave is doing a really good job in today's market if you want to study a model that works. But we all need to be realistic about our music and whether there really is commercial viability for it. Realistically, the answer is no for me and most people -- it's simply not viable. But that's okay, because music shouldn't just be about its commercial value. The art you create can still have a value even if it doesn't produce revenue. 

Just my opinion. 

Edited October 17, 2023 by PavlovsCat

[aidan o driscoll]

In a nutshell @PavlovsCat .. the music industry in general got repeatedly destroyed from late 90s on once the MP3 ( Napster etc ) came to the fore. The concept of FREE Music was born. The rot set in further as the years passed and Music as a product lost its value completely. The expectation of Music being FREE is now well and truely embedded. Why should I spend my cash on Music i can get it FREE at xxxxxxxxxx ...

I dont think there is any way to turn this around now

 

[Kirean]

Bandcamp has been my go-to place for music purchases. Then again, I go against the grain nowadays as I don't subscribe to any music streaming service as for some reason, I like to "own" my music collection (even digitized my CD collection, luckily never went too deep into vinyl). The site could use a few improvements, mainly deeper file details. There's plenty of hi-res music on BC that's not marked or otherwise advertised, at better prices than on dedicated 'hi-res' music selling platforms (not that my ears or setup can make out the difference between 16/48 and 24/192). Wish more labels & bands would also use them.

I've also made discoveries through it since often there's related recommendations under a specific album that might tickle similar tastes.

Edited October 17, 2023 by Kirean

[PavlovsCat]

51 minutes ago, aidan o driscoll said:

In a nutshell @PavlovsCat .. the music industry in general got repeatedly destroyed from late 90s on once the MP3 ( Napster etc ) came to the fore. The concept of FREE Music was born. The rot set in further as the years passed and Music as a product lost its value completely. The expectation of Music being FREE is now well and truely embedded. Why should I spend my cash on Music i can get it FREE at xxxxxxxxxx ...

I dont think there is any way to turn this around now

 

I realize this may sound like a name dropper, but I recall having a conversation with the CMO of Napster when we were hanging out at some event we both spoke at and that was in the 00s when things just started to radically change (there was another big dot com CMO involved in the conversation, but I can't recall who -- and I don't even think I mentioned that I used to be a musician who had a big opportunity with a major band ten years prior, they just knew me as a digital marketing  exec). But at that point the transition to free was happening in a big way and that was maybe 2006, around the time rock started a huge decline in popularity -- which also had an impact on what was going on. 

Again, I think Peter from IK -- who went to a top music college himself (he's a guitarist and a super cool person, BTW; I knew him long before he joined IK) -- nailed it when he talked about how Dave Kerzner does things. I think the live show model -- or developing a big following on platforms like YouTube are your best shot, but you need to have a compelling product people really want to hear. We need to be honest with ourselves about market potential for what we're doing as much as that sounds like a downer.   But for those who are super talented and create music that there is an appetite for -- people will pay to hear live and online -- you can find some success. I don't think you're going to make millions, but I think, if you really are super talented for a genre people really want to hear, you can still find a way to make a living, but it's going to take a ton of work and savvy with stuff like live touring—appearances, live shows, YouTube shows, TikTok, Instagram, BandCamp, etc. 

Edited October 17, 2023 by PavlovsCat

[John Vere]

Read this it’s a lot of info but they did a great job of covering the topic

https://aristake.com/digital-distribution-comparison/

I just posted 14 songs as an album on Distro kid just to get them off my mind. Most of the songs were older and I kept redoing them. Now they are safe from me doing that again.
I will now finish another batch this winter.  

I have no hopes of ever making money with them But it’s great to play live gigs and tell people that they can find me on all the music sites now. 
Same goes for friends and family.  
Im also slowly making videos for each song. 

Edited October 17, 2023 by John Vere

[kitekrazy]

1 hour ago, aidan o driscoll said:

In a nutshell @PavlovsCat .. the music industry in general got repeatedly destroyed from late 90s on once the MP3 ( Napster etc ) came to the fore. The concept of FREE Music was born. The rot set in further as the years passed and Music as a product lost its value completely. The expectation of Music being FREE is now well and truely embedded. Why should I spend my cash on Music i can get it FREE at xxxxxxxxxx ...

I dont think there is any way to turn this around now

 

Over-saturation and mass production.   There are also genres that do not lend itself to live performances.   It's a long list of reasons.  Streaming of often free and some don't care to own a download or even a CD. There's also affordable streaming services.

Technology seems to devalue the human.

I've learned to value even very amateur live performances because it's real. 

There's so many variables.   Interesting that the well known bands are going concerts in their 60's.   I think their attitude is music sucks and we need to do something about it.   

Plus the covid era created a higher demand for tech. 

Edited October 17, 2023 by kitekrazy

[PavlovsCat]

1 hour ago, kitekrazy said:

Over-saturation and mass production.   There are also genres that do not lend itself to live performances.   It's a long list of reasons.  Streaming of often free and some don't care to own a download or even a CD. There's also affordable streaming services.

Technology seems to devalue the human.

I've learned to value even very amateur live performances because it's real. 

There's so many variables.   Interesting that the well known bands are going concerts in their 60's.   I think their attitude is music sucks and we need to do something about it.   

Plus the covid era created a higher demand for tech. 

It's been a lot of technology plus attitudinal shifts that correlated with that. Most households in the US do pay for a music streaming service. But people are largely no longer purchasing albums or singles.  Record companies used to schmooze and bribe radio program directors and djs and now most of the focus goes on stuff like major Spotify Playlist curators.  And there really isn't much hope there if you're not Drake,  Travis Scott, Taylor Swift,  etc. and I don't see anything changing that soon. I think that's really too bad. Although again, rock is resurging at the moment. But I don't see how the next Radiohead or Jeff Buckley could make it in the current age. It doesn't work for artists with very limited appeal / plays. 

Edited October 17, 2023 by PavlovsCat

[Kirean]

1 hour ago, kitekrazy said:

Over-saturation and mass production.

I used to write reviews for an (underground) magazine years ago. Back in the early 2000s it was still doable and I had plenty of energy to seek out new music outside of the writing gig on my own. But with the point of entry getting easier and easier as years progressed, it really didn't take too long for the amount of stuff to be impossible to check out (let alone write about) in our lifetime. And that was well before social media/streaming was a thing (in the form it is today).

Before, the labels curated some of that flow but when they were taken out of the equation and self-released material was cheap enough to do, produce and release... even the bands began to forgot to ask themselves if the material was good enough for consumption...

Anyway. There's still plenty of great new material being put out every day. Just gotta hope you randomly/accidentally stumble on it. 

Edited October 17, 2023 by Kirean

[John Vere]

2 minutes ago, Kirean said:

Anyway. There's still plenty of great new material being put out every day. Just gotta hope you randomly/accidentally stumble on it. 

This. And with that in mind we should still post our music. Even if only 100 people stumble on my music that's 90 more people than I would have had in the 90's with my CD's sitting in stores for $20.