10. The Converse recording studio
And, of course, as covered by the New York Times, Converse sneakers are getting into the music game with plans to open a recording studio called Rubber Tracks in Williamsburg. Generously, Converse will underwrite the cost of recording for bands tapped by the sneaker company as a good brand match and offer no creative input into the music, no requirement to use them in Converse ads, and allowing the bands to retain complete ownership over the recordings. It is basically a nirvana of label obsolescence.
While record companies have started to expect 360 deals from bands to get a cut of everything, brands seem to be able to offer a lot more money and freedom. The trade-off is that your iPod will soon be sponsored by corporations. Which option do you prefer?
Comments (13)
[...] Read this article: Flavorwire » 10 Pivotal Moments in Band/Brand Relationships [...]
The recent Levi’s Pioneer Sessions! Wonderful concept, by an otherwise dubious multi-national label, trying very hard to win indie fans over.
No mention of Kiss? How’s that possible?
Sting and Jaguar?
“The trade-off is that your iPod will soon be sponsored by corporations.”
Isn’t the iPod already made by a gigantic corporation that likes to try to censor and control as much content that goes on their products as possible?
I love this article. Great moments, and a fascinating/sometimes-depressing look into how the power of a corporate brand can work for and against an artist. We should also look at the artists themselves and how they’re fashioning their brands before a corporation ever gets involved. The following piece on Nine Inch Nails and How To Destroy Angels looks at how Trent Reznor has managed his brand through multiple evolutions (not to mention his well-publicized involvement in The Social Network).
http://www.sparrowhall.com/blog/fashioning-your-own-brand-of-art-when-publicity-goes-awry/
There should be some mention of the mid-late 80s when graying rockers like Clapton and Steve Winwood handed over their songs to Michelob one after the other. That seemed to be some kind of tipping point at the time, when the elder statesmen either decided selling out was cool or just said “F**k it, they’re going to buy my stuff anyway.”
“What’s really amazing is that Moby didn’t say yes to every single licensing request he got.”
Why is this basic display of integrity so “amazing”?
@Marcus: I think she meant that there were more than 18 sponsors who lined up asking for a piece of the record’s songs.
Also, if there were room for other things on this list, I’d include Scion’s Mixtapes and A/V Club (partnerships w/ DFA, iheartcomix, etc), and even though it’s more behind the scenes-y, Justin Timberlake writing the McDonald’s “I’m Lovin’ It” jingle.
This is stupendously dull.
[...] Siegel and Joe Schuster, sold full ownership and rights to the character for $130. The Beatles sold off 90% ownership of the rights to their likenesses. For years, Dale Earnhardt Jr. didn’t own the rights to his [...]
[...] Siegel and Joe Schuster, sold full ownership and rights to the character for $ 130. The Beatles sold off 90% ownership of the rights to their likenesses. For years, Dale Earnhardt Jr. didn’t own the rights to his [...]
[...] assault. The company, who had originally agreed to sponsor Bowie’s Glass Spider World Tour, immediately dropped the ads. To be fair, this era of Bowie’s career is probably attributed to coke moreso than Pepsi, IF [...]
Post a new comment