Friday, August 14, 2009

WOODSTOCK THEN AND NOW...


For most rockers and aging hippies, the 40th anniversary of Woodstock this weekend will be a happy occasion. They may recall love freely given, heads sporting muddy but flowing locks of hair and the electric notes of Jimi Hendrix’s “Star-Spangled Banner.” But for the rock ’n’ roll industry itself, the anniversary elicits more mixed sentiments.
That’s because the music business finds itself in an Alice in Wonderland version of reality that emerged long after the 1969 music festival.
The three-day concert, which attracted more than 350,000 people, was initially a financial disaster for its producers. Yet through the subsequent release of a live album and an Oscar-winning documentary, Woodstock’s architects were eventually able to make a profit.
Today, the economics of rock music are inverted. Yes, major labels like Warner Music, EMI, Sony and others still ply their trade by signing aspiring artists, persuading radio stations to play their tunes and then selling the music in stores or on the Web. But the spoils are increasingly accruing to those who handle the mechanics of concert tours and festivals.
Consider the arithmetic of Woodstock. The event was organized by Woodstock Ventures, whose principals were Michael Lang, John Roberts, Joel Rosenman and Artie Kornfeld. For a ticket to all three days of the festival held on a farm in Bethel, N.Y., the promoters charged $18 in advance. When adjusted for inflation, that would be about $106 in today’s dollars.
Now compare that with the price of admission to Bonnaroo, the jam-band festival held every June in Tennessee; or Coachella, the alternative music extravaganza that takes place in April near Palm Springs. Three-day passes cost $250 and $269 respectively. Moreover, both festivals attract rich sponsors like Budweiser, Heineken, AT&T, Whole Foods and others looking to reach a young and hip clientele.
Famously, few who attended Woodstock actually paid to get in — a tenth of them, according to the event’s promoters. And as many as 18,000 of those who did buy advance tickets later received refunds because they had been unable to reach the concert grounds on Max Yasgur’s farm after the roads leading there were closed to traffic. With festival costs of $3.4 million — including Mr. Hendrix’s relatively modest $18,000 fee — Woodstock Ventures was in debt to the tune of $1.6 million after all the litter was removed from the farm.
And here’s where the entertainment industry, then entering its heyday, swooped in for the kill. Warner Brothers received exclusive distribution rights to the documentary Michael Wadleigh shot for about $100,000. In exchange for the rights, the concert’s promoters took a $1 million flat fee, plus a small percentage of the back end. Within a decade, the film took in more than $50 million in box office receipts, of which Warner Brothers earned $16.4 million.
And then there was Woodstock, the album. A year after the festival, Atlantic Records, now a subsidiary of Warner Music, released a $14.98 three-record compilation, which sold more than two million copies that year and topped Billboard’s pop album chart. A sequel released the next year instantly went platinum.
Concertgoers no longer clamor for slickly produced documentations of their musical experiences. Why would they, when they can record concerts on their phones or their hand-held Flip video cameras? They’re all bootleggers now.
And even those who would rather enjoy a concert outside the lens of their cellphone can view free versions of many events on YouTube.
All of this has conspired to push more of the financial pie to the concert itself, a fact not lost on the recorded music industry. That helps explain why Warner Music, for example, has been acquiring stakes in companies like Peppermintblue Entertainment of Australia, which offer a wider array of services to artists than those traditionally provided by record labels.
It is also the reason Ticketmaster and Live Nation are trying to merge and create a vertically integrated concert promoter, ticketing service and artist management group. Of course, with economics gravitating to these parts of the music business, it is also why legislators, music industry rivals and even artists like Bruce Springsteen oppose the deal.
So much for peace, love and rock ’n’ roll.

No comments:

Post a Comment