The Marketing Xfactor
09/13/2007
Issue: September 13 2007
People: Chase Grover

Creating new customer opportunities through unique channel initiatives.

This summer Prince turned the music industry on its ear when he gave away 2.8 million free copies of his new album "Planet Earth" with the purchase of British newspaper The Mail. The paper reportedly paid Prince $500,000 to distribute his new album in this way, resulting in an additional 600,000 newspaper sales that week. He represents the new face of the music business, where musicians buck tradition to reach music fans in unique ways. It's a trend that goes beyond just the music space.

Never a fan of record label control, Prince is helping change the music industry by establishing new distribution channels for music. Among the first to have a website where fans could order "Internet only" released albums, songs, and radio shows, Prince found a way to cut out the middleman and reach fans directly.

New channels represent a huge opportunity to reach customers in new ways, regardless of industry. In the case of music, however, not everyone frequents a record store (especially these days), so musicians have gotten creative in how they connect to fans. Just look at how iTunes and online communities like Imeem, Myspace, YouTube, and artists' websites have leveled the playing field, allowing artists to monetize and distribute their music, and connect with customers without the crutch of a major label.

Diverse channel strategies can also benefit new channel partners as well. For example, Starbucks, Target, and Borders have created special release CDs and locked up unique distribution deals. This helps to create more differentiation in the competitive retail space.

Most important, artists are looking to exploit new channels because it's where the consumers are. For today's artist it's not just about getting signed to a major label, charted on Billboard, or placed on MTV's rotation. Many musicians make most of their money performing, which strengthens the importance of gaining closer relationships with their fan base, wherever they are and want to connect. This means getting creative with distribution, from having visibility on sites like Imeem or Myspace (Imeem is basically the YouTube of music, allowing users to upload mp3s, share them, and post them around the Web), blogging, creating online fan clubs, and making their music available to purchase on iTunes.

More than music
As channels of mass communication and distribution continue to shape, shift, narrow, and merge, think of how your customers engage with media and technology to manage and enhance their lives. How do you develop initiatives that provide a better customer relationship and more value to your customers than the next guy? For starters, pay attention.

According to a recent study done by Frank N. Magid & Associates, 52 percent of the Internet population watches online videos at least once a week, with 20 percent of consumers saying they are just as willing to watch long-form content on a PC as they are on TV. Picking up on the video trend, Warner Bros. is building a new online video portal called Studio 2.0, which will be a home to exclusive shows and games.

Vogue magazine is also embracing video. It made a sizable investment in its newly launched Shopvogue.tv. The site offers products featured in the magazine's print ads for sale, while simultaneously showing videos of runway shows, fashion ad campaigns, and serial shows created by Vogue. The channel will also have a user-generated component, with visitors encouraged to upload photos of their own fashion "looks" in the "Fashion U Share" area.

In the coming months, as music artists and other entities continue to seek new and revamp existing communications and distribution channels, think of how your own business can better leverage these channels to differentiate yourself from your competitors. Some tactics may be risky, and all should be supported with a strategic rationale, but if successful, they can open up a whole new world of revenue and customer relationship opportunities. The potential is enough to make you want to party like it's 1999.

from: http://www.1to1media.com/...ocID=30417

Marketing Genius?

Musical genius? Hell Yes!!!

Marketing genius?

.....clearly this article is outdated and doesnt even showcase the numerous ways Prince has shot himself in the foot when it comes to marketing his image including this Youtube Fiasco....maybe Prince should read this article to see how much of a dumbass he would be if he did go through this lawsuit

*cough cough* bullshit *cough cough*

these people dont know Prince the way we do.
Its all about the $$$

maybe Prince just wanted the money
on second thought, take out the "maybe"
no maybe about it anymore (Matthew 7:15-20)

Prince is making good $$$ well beyond what others his pop age have been doing.

mehogeni said:

-----
The only people that should be worried about P and his lawsuit against Youtube should be Goggle.

P has not shot himself in the foot. How many times have orgers got on this board and made that rant. Yet P is still around doing his thing.

If Prince really wanted to the free the music, 3121.com would offer ad-supported downloads. "Planet Earth" flopped on the domestic charts and his albums traditionally generate poor sales in the U.K. "3121" sold less than 90K copies in England. It's no surprise he inked a deal with the Daily Mail to distribute the disc with a newspaper. He knows it would've been a poor seller. Money is always the deciding factor in his decisions.
[Edited 9/19/07 10:00am]
[Edited 9/19/07 10:02am]

This is getting insanely ridiculous, all this blah and bitching about Prince making money, distorting his "free the music" (I think you'll find that Prince was talking more about music not being in corporate clutches and being artisticly free, not given away!) quote etc etc - PRINCE IS A MUSICIAN - HE MAKES HIS LIVING FROM MUSIC!!! Is that so fucking wrong?

I'm assuming most of you have jobs (some of you are maybe even in the creative field, trying to make money from something you make, rather than lining someone else's pockets) and none of you would turn down making more money!! We live in a world where you need money in order to live, so why the hell are you all complaining about Prince making money? We all have to make a living, yes?.

And, YES, he found a new way to make money from his latest album - it is a marketing coup and full respect to the man for doing it. So many of you calling him out and accusing him of "constantly shooting himself in the foot" - grow up! That's lunacy on your part. The man has had a 30-year career in a medium that's not known for its longevity. There are only a handful of artists who have managed this, so this view is bigoted to say the least!

He's getting loads of coverage at the moment and, through sheer genius and a brave marketing ploy, has re-ignited his exposure and guaranteed a decent pay-out on his album. You have to take your hat-off to the man. You all talk about this control freak (well, if wanting to control your OWN output and quality of your OWN creations is control freakism, then I'm all for it - unless you're so sold down the capitalist, consumerism gravy train that you'll accept any old shit (which is EXACTLY the greed represented in those moaning about the YouTube move - it is your selfishness and avarice that means you feel you are entitled to see Prince fart that is wrong there) and what does he give back to his fans - well, he just gave us an album for free, 2.8million of us in fact in a reciprocal move that meant he also gained. He's just given us in the UK 30-odd shows at ridiculously cheap prices and yet there's people here who STILL moan about him!!!

Only Christos on the other thread (from what I read, it was difficult to get past the first 4 pages) seemed to show any understanding of Prince's situation as a working, independent musician, in a very difficult industry (I know, I work in it myself) and a majority of you aimlessly vent your spleens about subjects you clearly have no grasp of!

To put it plainly, his albums don't sell so he has to devise a way to get the music heard. Is that better?

Mindflux said:

I can't speak for everyone else. I'll let them respond if they choose to. Speaking for myself, I've never asked for or expected Prince to give me his music for free! I've opened my wallet for that man in the 29 years I've been a fan, damn near as much as I've opened it for my children, which is a whole freaking lot, let me tell you!

If he was willing to put his stuff up on his site and charged a fee for downloads, I'd buy a new hard drive just for the stuff of his that I'd happily purchase!

My beef isn't about the money, I've got enough receipts to prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt!

My beef is that he won't put up on his site what I'll gladly pay for yet he's whining about crap that no one would pay for in the first place on YouTube.

He isn't losing a cent on what gets put up there! Mostly it's just stuff that people who appreciate him put up as a way of showing him and the rest of the world that appreciation! By repeatedly snatching that stuff down and now suing YouTube over it, he's showing his fans and the rest of the world that he doesn't appreciate THEM and THAT'S what bothers me!

Mindflux said:

Nice to see someone speaking sense. Having worked for a major record company I understand where hes coming from. To make the vids and music he needs money, hows he going to have that if everything is given away for free...(not talking about PE but older tunes and the You Tube issue)
[Edited 9/19/07 11:45am]

aymiderham said:

I AGREE with you both Mindflux and Aymiderham!!!!!

How in the world is PRINCE "showing his fans and the rest of the world that he doesn't appreciate THEM" by the dispute with YOU TUBE?????

I TRIP on how people make statements and comments about PRINCE as if they "know" without a doubt what is in his head...as if they know his every thought...as if they are him!?!?!?!?

I am on the side of PRINCE. It's HIS ART...his work. I personally have sooooo much of his "commercially" released material (music, video etc.) that I am "good"! Sure!! I always want more...I want what's in the vault. I was happy beyond belief when "Crystal Ball" was released! People complained but I was thankful and ecstatic just to have clean, mastered sounding and official music on cd from the vault.

So yeah, I am always wanting a new album or video or live performance form Prince...I get frustrated with the fact that there is no real "NICE" DVD set containing ALL, not just a few BUT ALL of his videos from day one to present. I want more live DVD’s than just "Rave Un2 The Year 2000", "Live at the Aladdin", "Prince and Revolution Live", "Sign of the Times" and Movies...I WANT MORE!!!!!

But that's part of being a PRINCE FAN..We are spoiled. I have never felt "let down" by Prince...EVER! As longs as he uses his gifts...his talent and keeps making music and performing than I am good, I am happy! The day he dies or retires into seclusion is the day I will be sad from missing him and his music...

Keep going PRINCE!

TikiColadas said:

Since you indirectly quoted my comment, I'm guessing you're indirectly addressing me with your statements. So I'll directly respond because hey, that's just the kind of girl I am!



Since his fans and not YouTube were the ones that were putting the stuff on YouTube that's the grounds for his "dispute with YouTube" it's pretty clear for anyone not caught in Prince fandemonium and damn sure will be clear to the Judge that his problem is NOT with YouTube but with his fans that put his stuff on YouTube to begin with! Especially considering that videos that were put up by the company that he has distributing his stuff are STILL on Youtube as I type this!

The ones he has the problem with and are constantly snatched off are the ones put up by HIS fans so you tell me...that says WHAT?

aymiderham said:

AND i have worked for a record label and am currently working for a music video website now and have to disagree with your point of view...I don't know what label you worked for but I saw artists got money mainly through their concerts anyways and the label itself got tons of money from CD sales even now when CD sales are down yet they were not distributing the profits from these CDs evenly...Mr. President of John Doe Records and all the major execs got majority of profits but the artist itself got a miserable 5-10% of sales IF lucky....If he or any OTHER artist is so concerned with not getting enough money from their work then they should talk with the greedy labels who make these contracts and not sue the same people who provide a service where others can experience your work in a time where they dont have avenues to see/hear it

Youtube and Myspace is a great thing for artists that gives them a chance to showcase their music when these mainstream networks and radio stations dont give a damn about them. To sue Youtube and the rest of these sites is basically like i said before "shooting yourself in the foot" and basically trying to take down a thing that could be AND IS a great marketing and promotional tool for him and future artists. If he is so concerned about his image then why doesnt he provide ways for us to see him how he wants to be seen besides 1 or 2 corny music videos a year?? Yes Prince fans are spoiled but *NEWSFLASH* ALL MUSIC FANS ACROSS THE GLOBE ARE spoiled whether they like Prince or Metallica or Garth Brooks...this is the information age and in this day and age music fans are no longer satisfied with just cds but wants to see concert footage, behind the scenes footage, etc...they WANT to feel a connection with the artist and since we have the means to do it, instead of artists acting like superior jackasses why not embrace this movement for what it is, take advantage of this trend, and provide new and innovative ways to provide information to your fans...if he think he's doing it by that sad dysfucntional site named 3121.com then that's crazy

Ive worked in the music industry and for me to hear artists or anyone else boohoo about them not getting enough money is A JOKE...in this day and age there are soooo many unique ways for an artist to make money it's ridiculous..if his job is to make music then just as he changes his music or switches up his bands to get a new sound he can change his marketing strategies to reach out to different sets of audiences without suing anyone...it's really not that hard to do and he could use the money he spends on lawyers to REALLY think up some innovative mktg ideas or else finally hire a good mktg/promotional/PR team
[Edited 9/19/07 17:14pm]
[Edited 9/19/07 17:21pm]

Definately a genius. As the "Industry" changes musicians must also change. Consider the careers of other artists and even , to stay relevant they have to "tweak" the music and even their own personal styles-a little bit to stay current. If they don't they get stale and boring and eventually get lost in oblivion.

There are musicians who keep playing to the same old tune, which defines them--no innovation; and they get stuck, sort of like a character actor who always plays the same types of roles. There's nothing sadder than going to a concert to see a great performer whose best days are behind them.

Prince is not like that and that is why we love him. It seems Prince is part of the future wave, that's all. (This should not be surprising. Apparently, he not the only one.) Sounds like they're all trying to find ways of keeping the "Industry" competitive.

Don't die, multiply!

Good points but with YouTube's (and others') huge market value it's only natural for artist-business to start seeing it as a revenue stream which can make up for decreased flow in other streams.
Again, this is about business sense not ideological fervour.
Those who see Web 2.0 as some kind of 'Robin Hood' of the media will, of course, see any 'interference' as an attack on it's 'holy mission'. Those who see Web 2.0 as a rebranding exercise will unsmoke the freeloading that Web 2.0 is 'allowing' users in order to delay pay-day for the content-providers. As the BBC did, Prince and others are now re-negotiating the deal for artists and producers of content (this will trickle down to users who, for submissions of their material to other media such as television count as being producers but not so on the 'free to use' new-media)

YouTube/MySpace et al are laughing all the way to their stockholder meetings in the meantime but when will WE get paid for the work WE'VE done?

mehogeni said:

[Edited 9/20/07 2:40am]

mehogeni said:

So many contradictions and a lack of logic in your post. aymiderham said she worked for a "major", which narrows it down somewhat, but its irrelevant anyway - most artists on majors are getting screwed and the label takes the cream. You know this yourself, as you surprisingly admit, because you know that artists have to take the financial risk and burden of touring in order to make money (touring, of course, being NOTHING to do with the label) - with all this in mind (the unfair contracts (which, by the way, you're feeble suggestion of artists "talking to the greedy labels" to sort it out is naieve in the extreme - you don't think people have tried that already? And, its not a new thing, Frank Zappa was making entire albums about the corruptness and un-fairness of the music industry 30 years ago! But still, the majors have such a stronghold over the business, that only something really radicle, like what Prince is doing, is going to change anything), the artists having to invent their own new ways to distribute their music (er, isn't this what a label is supposed to be doing for them?) you MUST support what Prince is doing in bypassing the labels and being an indpendent artist, surely?

YouTube is not "a great marketing and promotional tool", as anyone in marketing will tell you that a great marketing tool is one which drives profitable revenue growth - artists don't make a cent from what is put on YouTube. It is a great consumer tool, but that's another story. Your argument will be that it allows them to reach a wider audience, but this is not proven. There are no statistics or evidence to support that and I very much doubt that people discover a new artist by randomly searching on YouTube. It is much more likely that you come across someone new to you by listening to the radio, watching TV, reading magazines, word-of-mouth, or perhaps ensuring 3 million people get a new copy of your cd for free??!!! Hey, there's a great idea The majority of people searching for Prince content on YouTube will be fans already and particularly the obsessive completists and those that think they're entitled to ANYTHING for free.

YouTube is only a great profit-making tool for Google (why do you think they snapped it up at a cost of millions of dollars? To provide a service to everyone? Or because its such a great money-spinner?) And, why is it such a great money-spinner? Because they have relatively low overheads because THEY DON'T PRODUCE THEIR OWN CONTENT! Perfect. Now, that's fine if they have the rights to the content, but the material we are talking about here is copyrighted and is not YouTube's to show. Nor is it the fan's to upload for that matter. However, YouTube is the service provider and they should not be a conduit for people to just put up whatever they feel like. Would you be so quick to defend YouTube's right to put up anything if, say, a "mate" put up some personal video of you, perhaps in a compromising position, something you would rather not be aired to the public? I doubt it very much. Furthermore, after 30-years in the business, Prince does not need something like YouTube (a new starter in the business would find their "service" more useful) and there cannot be many people on the planet who do not already know who Prince is.

You espouse again that fans demands should be met - why? Should a fan get everything they want? Is that the way the world works? Do you just stamp your feet and anything and everything you want comes to you? Of course not - why should Prince not do anything but whatever HE feels like with HIS creations? (and all this bullshit about the "information age" - have you seen stats on what most people use the net and YouTube for - its not exactly educational and culturally enriching stuff now, is it? ) And as for dissmissing the 3121 site - Prince was one of the pioneers of internet channel distribution and marketing, well-ahead of the game 10 years ago, its old hat, just another channel - and that is why he has now created and expoited a whole new channel of distribution, one that has been entirely successful, far more lucrative and goes beyond just getting his music out, but giving him massive media interest, whilst also shaking the roots of the music industry itself (an industry that, when Prince started, had more musicians running it then businessmen, unlike today) and music retailers to boot. Its a genius stroke, but most here seem too blind to see it. Ultimately, what does it matter to you anyhow, as to how he goes about distributing his product? He could go around on a bike throwing cds on your lawn like a paperboy, does it make ANY difference to you, the consumer? No - because, all that should matter to you is whether the product is enjoyable or not!

Its your last paragraph that really takes the biscuit - MOST musicians actually struggle to make a living out of this industry and some can only do it for a time, then find themselves working in a shoe-shop again, or something! Most artists find themselves at the mercy of massive corporate systems designed to benefit themselves and not the artists who create the product in the first place. And just what the hell are you talking about, this hiring of a marketing agency etc?? Have you been asleep for the past few months? Prince has just pulled off one of the most amazing marketing moves by a musician (with, no doubt, an expert team of lawyers to ensure fair practice and contracts), with multiple simultaneous effects, as already discussed, yet you suggest now that this is something he ought to be doing? You missed the party mate!

Prince ought to be (and is, by many sectors, including marketing publications like the one above, marketing think-tanks and music industry analysts) applauded for this most recent move and, in the same vein, for his brave move to take on some of the biggest internet moguls there is, to protect content that is not THEIRS or the "fans" that post it, but HIS.
[Edited 9/20/07 3:55am]

excessex said:

Well said and succintly put - and you may well have marketing experience, as you certainly have the marketing lingo

muirdo said:

R U SERIOUS, "the way we do"???!!!
Fanatix like u r nucking futs. How much AUDACITY is really floating around here??? How many ppl have had dinner with Prince, or @ the very least shared a cup of coffee or tea with the brother??? I SWEAR, i try n respect every1s opinion, but DAMN, when some1 says "(they) dont know Prince the way we do"... what can i say, other than i hope u get some kind of therapy REALLY soon so u can start living UR life, UR REAL life. As far as marketing genius, all things considered (little or no support from radio stations (4 YEARS), no video, no major tour in the US 2 support Planet Earth CD), i think if nothing else he gambled, & WON: Planet Earth debuted @ #3 on Billboard the first week out in the US where NO FREE COPIES were provided. But i'm sure all the GENIUSES on this site could've done better (conscious sarcasm is better than blind audacity).
Peace & Chicken Grease,
B Wild & B Safe
Love,
Me!!!

Eye thank u

"Eye tear shit up y'all. That's m'style. THESE are the days of wild. Hit Me!"

Mindflux said:

[Edited 9/20/07 10:03am]

TikiColadas said:

agree

SexyBeautifulOne said:[quote]

TikiColadas said:

Hey, no harm or disrespect to you.

Question?....If I created my own website called..."purpleprincevideos.com" and uploaded videos and live performances from my personal collection that includes commercially released DVD’s, television appearances, bootleg concerts etc., would I be "doing the legal right thing? What if I charged for advertisement on my site because now I have an enormous amount of traffic?? NOW, what if I still charge for advertisement and also let fans upload their own videos, live performance, etc from their own collection?? I am now making money directly or "indirectly" off of PRINCE, his music and image based on my traffic and advertisement charges REGARDLES of what PRINCE thinks, feels OR permission.

IS this legal? Let me know.

In reality PRINCE is protecting his music and art. I still do not see how this is a negative thing he is doing to his fans. I don't get it???

This is from YOU TUBE's Site...

6. Your User Submissions and Conduct

A. As a YouTube account holder you may submit video content ("User Videos") and textual content ("User Comments"). User Videos and User Comments are collectively referred to as "User Submissions." You understand that whether or not such User Submissions are published, YouTube does not guarantee any confidentiality with respect to any User Submissions.

B. You shall be solely responsible for your own User Submissions and the consequences of posting or publishing them. In connection with User Submissions, you affirm, represent, and/or warrant that: you own or have the necessary licenses, rights, consents, and permissions to use and authorize YouTube to use all patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright or other proprietary rights in and to any and all User Submissions to enable inclusion and use of the User Submissions in the manner contemplated by the Website and these Terms of Service.

C. For clarity, you retain all of your ownership rights in your User Submissions. However, by submitting User Submissions to YouTube, you hereby grant YouTube a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, and perform the User Submissions in connection with the YouTube Website and YouTube's (and its successors' and affiliates') business, including without limitation for promoting and redistributing part or all of the YouTube Website (and derivative works thereof) in any media formats and through any media channels. You also hereby grant each user of the YouTube Website a non-exclusive license to access your User Submissions through the Website, and to use, reproduce, distribute, display and perform such User Submissions as permitted through the functionality of the Website and under these Terms of Service. The above licenses granted by you in User Videos terminate within a commercially reasonable time after you remove or delete your User Videos from the YouTube Service. You understand and agree, however, that YouTube may retain, but not display, distribute, or perform, server copies of User Submissions that have been removed or deleted. The above licenses granted by you in User Comments are perpetual and irrevocable.

D. In connection with User Submissions, you further agree that you will not submit material that is copyrighted, protected by trade secret or otherwise subject to third party proprietary rights, including privacy and publicity rights, unless you are the owner of such rights or have permission from their rightful owner to post the material and to grant YouTube all of the license rights granted herein.

8. Digital Millennium Copyright Act

A. If you are a copyright owner or an agent thereof and believe that any User Submission or other content infringes upon your copyrights, you may submit a notification pursuant to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA") by providing our Copyright Agent with the following information in writing (see 17 U.S.C 512(c)(3) for further detail):

A physical or electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed;
Identification of the copyrighted work claimed to have been infringed, or, if multiple copyrighted works at a single online site are covered by a single notification, a representative list of such works at that site;
Identification of the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity and that is to be removed or access to which is to be disabled and information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to locate the material;
Information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to contact you, such as an address, telephone number, and, if available, an electronic mail;
A statement that you have a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law; and
A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that you are authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
YouTube's designated Copyright Agent to receive notifications of claimed infringement is: Heather Gillette, 1000 Cherry Ave., Second Floor, San Bruno, CA 94066, email: copyright@youtube.com, fax: 650-872-8513. For clarity, only DMCA notices should go to the Copyright Agent; any other feedback, comments, requests for technical support, and other communications should be directed to YouTube customer service through http://www.google.com/support/youtube. You acknowledge that if you fail to comply with all of the requirements of this Section 5(D), your DMCA notice may not be valid.

B. Counter-Notice. If you believe that your User Submission that was removed (or to which access was disabled) is not infringing, or that you have the authorization from the copyright owner, the copyright owner's agent, or pursuant to the law, to post and use the content in your User Submission, you may send a counter-notice containing the following information to the Copyright Agent:

Your physical or electronic signature;
Identification of the content that has been removed or to which access has been disabled and the location at which the content appeared before it was removed or disabled;
A statement that you have a good faith belief that the content was removed or disabled as a result of mistake or a misidentification of the content; and
Your name, address, telephone number, and e-mail address, a statement that you consent to the jurisdiction of the federal court in San Francisco, California, and a statement that you will accept service of process from the person who provided notification of the alleged infringement.
If a counter-notice is received by the Copyright Agent, YouTube may send a copy of the counter-notice to the original complaining party informing that person that it may replace the removed content or cease disabling it in 10 business days. Unless the copyright owner files an action seeking a court order against the content provider, member or user, the removed content may be replaced, or access to it restored, in 10 to 14 business days or more after receipt of the counter-notice, at YouTube's sole discretion.


The matter at hand....

He questioned why YouTube was able to filter porn from the site, but not copyrighted material.

A spokeswoman for YouTube said the site "had no way of knowing" whether content had been uploaded legitimately or not.

Many artists upload their own material to YouTube, and on some occasions, she added, one part of a company had requested the takedown of material uploaded by another division.

The spokeswoman said the company will be introducing video fingerprinting technology that will scan videos for copyrighted material as they are uploaded, and will work with rights owners to build a database of such footage.
Prince joins a queue of media entities planning to sue YouTube. In March, MTV owner Viacom announced a $1bn copyright infringement suit against the site, and in May the English Premier League said it would also sue.

TikiColadas said:

You can see why Prince is so pissed off about people exploiting his name. This idiot writes a crappy article on Marketing 101 and sandwiches Prince's name on either end of the article as if that'll give the "writer" credibility. What a bunch of crap. Like P says: "a room full of nickels looking for a dime". LOL!My 9 nine year old son has more awareness than this "Drive Thru" poseur. Good for you Prince. Keep doing what you do. And I don't care who knows it.

Jay

Mindflux said:

So why ain't he selling?

I'm sure Isaac Sharon would gladly give him a million bucks for another Black Album if he'd hand over his principles, virgin Mary. Boost the hype, create the demand, and haul in the ducats! Now that's sacrifice. ??

© river of blood

Think about this... the "job" of a preacher is to preach, right? Now, should that preacher get paid for preaching? Should he be selling His message? Why AND why not?? Think about it. Check my siggy below for the answer.

© virgin gives birth

by the Spirit
came the greatest "gift" of all
not by might nor by power
salvation for all
...now that's sacrifice. !!
take up your stauros
it's getting late
[Edited 9/21/07 3:02am]

Mindflux said:

DAMN!!!!! Well said MindFlux!!