Back in March we highlighted a very interesting post on Kevin Kelly’s blog entitled 1,000 True Fans. It started out with the observation that while the long tail is great for consumers and certain aggregators, it’s “a decidedly mixed blessing for creators.” The idea here is that the long tail creates massive competition and relentless downward pressure on prices - and is something that artists would do best to “escape.” The escape route covered in the article is to find the 1,000 true fans.
Setting aside the fact that I have a slightly more positive view of the long tail, it’s an interesting idea - any “creator” simply needs to find their niche that will buy any and everything that they make. It appears that 1,000 was chosen just to make the numbers simple - i.e. make the point that at $100 a pop that grosses to $100,000 a year, which most people would consider a great living.
The post then goes on to put in a number of caveats and distinctions - groups will obviously need more fans than singles, it will be different by media, etc. It’s a great post from start to finish, and what makes it even better is the two follow-ups that have recently been posted on the site: The reality of depending on true fans and The case against 1,000 true fans.
In the first, Kevin opens by noting that the “1,000 true fans” idea was basically just a hypothesis - there was no hard data/findings behind it. In turn, he started digging around to see if is hypothesis played out in the real world - and this post is primarily a thoughtful response from musician Robert Rich, who agrees with Kevin’s thesis but tosses a little more “realism” on the topic. My favorite quote:
I remember telling myself when I was about 15, “If I can move one person deeply, that’s better than entertaining thousands of people but leaving nothing meaningful behind.” That’s the long tail talking. I suppose when you multiply this idea by a thousand, you have your thesis.
The most interesting quote in relation to the hypothesis:
Thanks to the internet, I am making more money now, selling directly to 1000 True Fans, than I was during the days on Hearts of Space selling 20,000 - 50,000 copies. But had I not benefitted from the immense promotional effort that it took for HOS to sell those albums, I probably wouldn’t be surviving today as a full time artist.
In truth, I could have copied about 7 or 8 different quotes above from Rich - his thoughts are well worth the read for anyone interested in this subject. Search for “Catch 22″ in the text to find a very interesting paragraph on the “True Fans Trap.”
The second post is the case against true fans - and here Kevin notes that while the hypothesis sounds good, and is similar to what people like Brian Austin Whitney postulated a few years back, he can’t find much evidence of anyone actually supporting themselves with 1,ooo (or 5,000, to match Whitney) true fans. In turn, he concludes:
What my research tells me: there are very few artists making their entire living selling directly to True Fans. The few that are, are selling high-priced goods, like paintings, rather than low-priced goods like CDs. But there are many that partially fund their livelihood with direct True Fans.
He then goes on to discuss a challenge from Jaron Lanier, a musician doing research in a similar space. What they are looking for is a new musician (i.e. not one leveraging popularity developed in the “old” model) that’s making a decent living (more or less sufficient to raise a child) from sources friendly to a world of open, massive, unregulated file sharing (thinks concerts, ad sales, merchandise - any thing that doesn’t rely on “old, declining media.” So far, they haven’t found anyone yet - if you know of one drop them a note.
It’s quite an interesting discussion, and one that I hope KK continues on his ever thought provoking blog. Do wikinomics readers have any thoughts on the 1,000 true fans debate, or perhaps the very notion that the long tail is something that creators must try to “escape”?
Comments RSS
| TrackBack URI
Maybe I didn’t read Kevin’s post closely enough, but what I took away from it (perhaps thought it up afterwards) was that if you had 1000 true fans, you could support yourself b/c
1. not only would they buy your stuff
2. they would promote you to their friends in a “raving fan” scenario and turn some of those folks into occasional purchasers.
So, let’s say you are a musician who makes 5 albums.
Your 1000 true fans, in theory, buy each of the albums (or maybe 80% of them do), but each of the true fans recruits 2 other folks who buy a given album (but not the same people.
So, you have 800 of your true fans and 1600 “one hit wonder” fans. Over the five albums, you’d ‘touch’ 9,000 people. Your 1000 true and a the sum of 1600 people done 5 times (8,000)
Don’t know if it works or not, but that was my extrapolation.
Comment by jer979 - May 4, 2008 10:31 pm
[...] Wikinomics » Blog Archive » The 1,000 True Fans Debate Make sure to click through and read the original “1000 True Fans” post in addition to this one. (tags: long_tail wikinomics entertainment) Daily Links [...]
Pingback by links for 2008-05-06 - May 5, 2008 11:51 pm
Hi Jer,
That’s kind of the evangelist theory of marketing - get enough people who love you to promote you to their friends, some of whom buy, etc.
But I think the argument here (and perhaps throughout the music industry right now) is that only “true fans” will spend money - the rest will get their music by other means. In turn, you have to live off of the 1,000 alone (at least for the bulk of income)
Comment by Denis Hancock - May 8, 2008 4:31 pm