Phish Friday: An Open Letter to Phish and Red Light Management (from 10/23/09)
marcman
Phish Friday: An Open Letter to Phish and Red Light Management
by whitperson on Oct 23, 09 · 30 comments
in Columns, webcasts
We Need a High-Quality Paid Webcast for Phish Concerts
After witnessing the evolving and ever-expanding online activity
surrounding Phish’s recent reunion tour, I’m now thoroughly convinced
that the Phish fan base is primed and ready for a high-quality and
paid live video stream for the band’s next tour. If done properly and
in innovative Phish fashion, it could create an untapped revenue
stream for the band while allowing more Phish fans to engage with the
band’s music – in particular those fans that can’t make it out to
every show on tour.
Given the band’s recent history of wanting to scale down their in-
house operations, I could see why you might think that a large-scale
paid webcast would not be worth the large investment and effort it
most certainly would require. But it’d be wrong to think so. There are
some very compelling reasons why this should happen now and why Phish
is the band to do it.
Phish, Red Light Management, please hear us out. We’ve really thought
this one through…
Phish Fans Are Primed, Hungry and Creating Their Own Options
The key here is that this new viewing option would serve the fans who
are not at the show, but who are just as engaged in the online
coverage and setlist updates happening around the show.
I really think something special happened with all the online coverage
and activity that emerged this Spring/Summer when he band reunited and
did a full summer tour. From the initial reunion shows at Hampton in
March through to the days/weeks following the band’s final show at
SPAC, we saw numerous new sites spring up that helped feed into the
online scene following the band on each night of the tour. In this day
of Facebook, Twitter and social media mash-ups, Phish fans have really
stepped up their game from the likes of PhantasyTour and Phish.net.
We’ve taken advantage of all the technology and social media tools
available to us and created some new online spaces for fans to
congregate and dig into the band’s activity. Here are just a few of
the new online options that recently sprouted up in honor of Phish’s
reunion:
Phish Social Media Mash-ups:
Jamtopia’s PhishTwit
PhishTube
Hoodstream
PhuTube
JamBase’s Summer Tour site
Phish blogs:
Mr Miner’s Phish Thoughts
YEMblog
Dog Gone Blog
And of course, Phish’s own 3.0 coverage:
Phish on Twitter
Phish on Flickr
Plus with YouTube, Vimeo and a number of other online video sites,
Phish fans have tons of options for online videos from the band’s
summer tour. In fact, the Ustream mash-ups above — Phishtube and
Hoodstream — are prime examples of why the band really needs to
consider offering webcasts…if they don’t fans will continue to figure
out ways to do it themselves (albeit with much lower quality of video
and audio).
Either way, I think it’s clear that Phish fans are very hungry for
more online media to consume. And, while the band’s own online
coverage has been stellar thus far, nothing can really compare to high-
quality live video from the show itself.
The Precedent Has Already Been Set…By Phish!
Some folks out there may have missed or just forgotten the Summer of
2004 (I wouldn’t blame you if you did or if you wanted to). While I
remember some great shows from Alpine Valley, I also vividly remember
heading out to some random Cineplex in the Northern Burbs of Chicago
to attend a Phish Simulcast from the band’s Brooklyn show at Keyspan
Park. If Phish can get a bunch of random heads to congregate into
shitty suburban multiplexes at $15-20/head (price?), you’d think it’d
be pretty easy to amass a much larger audience online.
Also, although the band has already set their own precedent with these
cinematic simulcasts, over the past five years since then, we’ve seen
a much wider expansion of concert and festival webcasts from sites
like iClips.net, AT&T’s Blueroom, and most recently from larger online
video sites like Hulu and YouTube.
An Untapped Market and An Evolving Fan Base
We all know the band has an enormous and insatiable fan following,
with fans willing to travel the ends of the earth to see this band
live. But what about the hordes of fans who DON’T get to every show? I
had friends who hit every show on the West Coast this summer, but for
various (and obvious) reasons, they didn’t hit any of the shows on the
East Coast. Not just that, but what about fans who have kids or
demanding jobs and can’t really pull off going to a show on a random
Tuesday these days? Let’s face it, Phish’s fans have gotten older. And
more and more, there will be fans that can no longer consistently go
on the road for entire tours or even do multi-night runs of shows. Not
only that, but what about the fans who simply aren’t able to afford or
obtain tickets to a sold out show?
Instead of losing these folks out to PhishTube or having them spend
the show watching setlist updates on Twitter, why not give them
another option? All of these extra fans make up an untapped market of
fans for each concert on the bands tour. Some of these fans may not be
so rabid as to completely reorganize their lives around the band’s
tour schedule, but they’re still engaged and they’d certainly be
willing to drop some cash on a high-quality video stream.
Webcasts Could Be Bigger, Better and More Scalable
Simulcasts are so web 1.0…brah. The cinematic simulcasts were cool and
all, but an online stream could potentially be so much better (more on
this below). More importantly, the simulcasts were limited. They were
only available in certain theaters, to a limited number of fans, and
only so many fans were willing to make the trek to the local Cineplex.
And here’s where the webcast option really opens things up….it
provides scale. The only limits are bandwidth and what fans are
willing to pay. Plus, it’s potentially a much more direct source of
revenue for the band than anything involving a few movie theatres
throughout the country.
Watch Phish Live From Your Living Room
If fans are willing to congregate at their local cineplexes to pay for
a concert webcast in a movie theater, putting that stream into their
homes should really be the next logical step. Once you give these fans
an high-quality option to watch a show from the comfort of their own
homes, the possibilities expand dramatically. Just imagine the
potential for “webcast viewing parties!” Hell, the band could play
into it by running a contest to encourage and sponsor viewing parties
throughout the country.
Features, Logistics and Other Considerations:
Of course, if you’re going to do this, you’ve got to do it right. In
order to do this in fine Phish fashion it would need to include
something a bit more innovative. A few thoughts:
How About Multiple Viewing Options?
I have no idea if this has ever been offered in a webcast, but it
certainly should be. Instead of just providing a single view, why not
give fans alternate viewing options? Give fans the ability to select
different vantage points or camera angles, so they can better
customize their viewing experience. Can you imagine it?
A couple quick scenarios:
–”Dude, wow, Mike is laying down a seriously funky groove, switch over
so we can watch him”
–”Wait, which pedal is Trey using to get that weird “whale call”
sound? Oh, it’s that Whammy pedal thing. Cool.”
–”I wonder what the band gets to see while they’re rockin’ out??
Switch to the cam behind them….sweet!”
And on and on.
Include Social Media to Bring the Online and In-Venue Worlds One Step
Closer
Of course, in this day and age of social media this and twitter that,
you’ve got to integrate some social media sites like Twitter and
Facebook, so fans can easily link to their status updates and spread
the streaming links/commentary out to the rest of the web. At this
point, that’s probably a bit of a no-brainer. But how it could play
out during the show makes it a bit more interesting. This is because
it creates two distinct audiences watching the show, with everyone
having the ability to update their social net statuses in real-time,
while watching the concert. While much of this is activity is already
taking place, adding the webcast in the mix exponentially expands the
audience that’s commenting while they’re actually watching the show.
Offer An “All in Pass”
You want to really feed the obsessive fan? Why not offer an “all-in”
pass for the entire tour of webcasts or other related packages? It’s
not like there’s limited space in the Pavilion for the at-home
viewers. Let us subscribe to a high-quality stream at a decent price
and many of us will go all in. Oh, and we’ll probably buy other shit
too (digital downloads, merch, etc…).
Okay, Those Are the Pros, But What Are the Cons?
Given all of the compelling reasons I’ve laid out above, I think the
final question is what are some reasons not to do it? Here are some
possible considerations:
Wouldn’t It Hurt Ticket Sales?
I could definitely see some promoters and managers throwing this one
out there: “Won’t it cannibalize ticket sales?” For some other band,
this could potentially happen. But for Phish, this is nonsense. For
Phish fans, nothing compares to being at the live show. Although a
high-quality webcast might be the next best thing, it would never
replace the show as the one true way to enjoy this band in its
element. As such, I firmly believe the fan base is ready and willing
to pay for this, and that offering it will not affect concert ticket
sales in the slightest.
It’s Already in the Works
Of course, one possibility is that you guys already have a webcast in
the works and nobody outside of Phish and Red Light knows about it.
We’ve heard a rumor of a webcast for Festival 8, but we’ve not seen
anything official just yet. Until we do, I’m going to keep pushing on
this.
It’s Too Big an Operation for the Smaller Phish Organization of 2009
As many of us know, one of the reasons that led to the band’s downfall
in ‘04 was the sheer weight and largess of the overall Phish
organization. Thus, it’s very possible the band just simply does not
want to create another large line of business requiring more overhead,
effort, and attention. But it doesn’t have to be handled that way.
Logistics and Possible Partners
The costs and logistics for a concert webcast are no small
consideration. Although I know Phish could pull off a solid in-house
operation, it might make sense to consider a partner for the
technology and logistical issues. Luckily there are some good options:
iClips.net is already successfully running concert and festival
streams. Although the site is still building up its audience and its
technical capabilities, it had a big summer, covering a number of
major U.S. music festivals, including All Points West, Lollapalooza,
Mile High, Rothbury and Virgin Fest, among others.
YouTube
With its very recent forays into live webcasts, YouTube might serve as
a larger, more substantial option for partnership.
Hulu
Hulu is another major partner that could take on a band like Phish for
webcasts. Although their most recent webcast was actually a
syndication of the iClips stream, they could definitely provide a much
larger broadcast platform for the band and its fans.
Sponsor It
Given the potential size of this online audience, the opportunities to
include online sponsors are also good. Potential sponsors might
include companies like Netflix or Amazon (with their new Boxee app),
that are trying to connect streaming web video to the living room TV
set. They could promote and educate consumers on connecting their HD
TV to their computer’s live stream, while sponsoring the contest
above. Of course, although Phish wouldn’t necessarily need a sponsor.
It just might be a good partnership to help spread out the costs and
generate a bit more of a promotional push.
Ultimately, whether or not there’s a partner involved wouldn’t make
that much of a difference to fans. We just want more Phish. And that
really should be the bottom line for the band and management.
To re-cap:
It’s a win win, creating a new stream of revenue and expanding the
possible market for the band’s music.
It feeds the obsession, giving fans yet another way to connect to the
band’s live show.
If created in innovative fashion, it could push the envelope and
redefine the live concert experience.
If there is any band that can pull this off, it is Phish.
So…Mr. Capshaw, Mr. Coulton, Trey, Mike, Page, Fish, and everyone else
in the current Phish organization, what do you think? Can we make this
happen?
Warmest Regards,
Sir Marcus Whitperson, Esq.
Lead Webcast Evangelationist
Halden
broadcast the NYE Run. I think Webcast (be it Video or Audio Only)
would be awesome.
H
Z
Z
DaManfred Mann
> Signed.
>
> Z
I couldn't agree more. I was considering a similar proposal. It's time
and Phish is indeed the band to pioneer it. As we've seen recently, if
the band and it's management don't do it, fans will and they can't (or
haven't yet) approach the quality level that an official version would
no doubt have.
Another great example of the simulcast is Coventry. I had my tickets,
but ended up in the hospital and had to sell them. I got home in time
for the concerts, but not in time to make the trip, so the simulcast was
the next best option for me and I will be forever grateful for that
option. I wish there was a similar option for the upcoming Miami shows,
even if it's only an internet simulcast (heck, even if it's delayed it
would be great).
I would happily pay a nominal fee to listen to the audio for those
shows, let alone see HQ video. This makes sense for a variety of
reasons, not the least of which is tough economic times. Imagine the
number of fans who would've paid to see/hear Festival 8, but couldn't
swing making the trip. Another option would generate a substantial
revenue stream for the band too...if you can't sell enough tickets (and
it was shocking to see how low the turnout was for F8), why not sell
another option for those that can't be there.
Think of the worldwide potential for fans that can't make a trip to
another continent, but would gladly pay to see/hear the shows on their
computers. I've always been intrigued with the potential for a video
version of Live Phish too and I hope it's on the way. For non-festival
shows, there are a limited number of seats, but the potential market for
those without tickets is virtually unlimited. This might be especially
appropriate for the band now, as they seem dedicated to planning shorter
tours and playing fewer shows.
So Phish and Red Light, what say you? Let's take the next step in the
evolution of the concert experience. Marcman and I will offer to help,
if so desired.
Dave
OneOhEight
it, but a paid high quality simulcast is a very interesting idea. I
would certainly put some money down to at least check it out, but I
can't say that i would do that every show. It's at least $10 to
download the audio for each show on LP.com, how much could it be to
watch a live video of the broadcast? Would it be one camera guy, or
multiple?
marcman
> I went to the theater to see Phish on Coney Island in '04 and I loved
> it,
I caught the GD in a movie theater when they played Radio City I wanna
say Halloween 1980. It was a pretty cool option. That Radio City run,
where they played an accoustic set each night, and for the uninitiated
resulted in the official release of 2 double albums, Reckoning
(acoustic) and Dead Set (electric), were some very hard tickets to
come by.
> but a paid high quality simulcast is a very interesting idea. I
> would certainly put some money down to at least check it out, but I
> can't say that i would do that every show. It's at least $10 to
> download the audio for each show on LP.com,
That $10 grants you the license though to keep it, it becomes yoru
property.
> how much could it be to
> watch a live video of the broadcast?
The Allman Brothers did something similar earlier this year where they
broadcast each of their Beacon shows live on the web in HiDef
(moogis.com). I think it was $75 for the year, which included the
whole run live, and then each night the show would be archived so you
could re-watch them at anytime for a year. You couldn;t "save" the
audio or the video, but of course it's able to be done if somebody
wants to badly enough, there's all sorts of screen capture and audio
capture software out there, but I digress.
> Would it be one camera guy, or
> multiple?
A one camera set up could be a nice streamlined model with a lower
cost of production therefor a lower cost to the consumer. The A Bros
had all the goodies available, hence the somewhat hefty price. Also, I
don't know that the A Bros would draw as well for this sort of thing
as Phish would, so of course the higher the volume of webcast
purchasers, the cheaper the band could make the price, if they chose
to treat it that way.
Lets say they charged 100-200 for an entire years worth of shows on
the web including archive access for the year . . . seems like a
pretty good deal to me! That's cheaper than the NFL Season Ticket on
DirecTv and that's only 17 total days of football!
And this is so doable, as the blogger noted, Phish wouldn't even have
to increase their crew in a major way if they partner with a provider.
marcman
> Another option would generate a substantial
> revenue stream for the band too...if you can't sell enough tickets (and
> it was shocking to see how low the turnout was for F8), why not sell
> another option for those that can't be there.
>
So what did the official number turn out to be anyway? I haven't seen
anything official. The general rumblings from the random people that I
conversed with on site seemed to have the attendance at roughly 25k,
although after the fest I remember reading unofficial estimates of 40k
+ mentioning though that the "official" numbers will be released by
the band's management in the near future. I must have missed the memo
because a search on Google doesn't bring back any official F8
numbers.
>
> Dave
Jeph
> Signed.
>
> Z
Here Here...Not all of the phanbase is in prime position to drive to
any given show...I live in Lake Tahoe and a close show is a rarity at
best...
DaManfred Mann
In the spirit of spreading the word and getting some momentum behind
this, I posted that letter on the Phish.net/discuss forum.
Dave