

Earbits Online Radio and "Promoted Spins" - yotamros
http://www.musicthinktank.com/mtt-open/earbits-online-radio-and-promoted-spins.html

======
Futurebot
I'm really liking Earbits so far. I signed up after seeing them talked about
here on HN, and so far have gotten around 1000 spins there, more than half off
which have been "more than 30 second listens", which, based on my use of a ton
of these services, serves as a decent proxy for "I liked it, but not enough to
make a comment/social media like." I would easily recommend them to any artist
looking for more exposure.

Management interface: Simple, quick, straightforward. They encourage high-
quality files (192Kbps recommended), which a couple of their competitors still
don't do.

Listening interface: newer style, full screen, big-everything interface. I
like it, but I know some can't stand this style. They took the "Sixty-one"
style and did it better (and unlike 61, they having working genre channels,
which 61 has not gotten around to fixing after a couple of years of waiting.)

Price: Currently unbeatable. Bang for the buck is really excellent.

Reporting: Quick, but still scant. No one beats Jango at this at the moment.
See below.

Listener targeting: a weak point. Targeting by similar artists and the ability
to self-categorize/tag would be a nice addition. For eclectic artists, single
subgenres don't work too well. Allowing multiple genre choices would be best
(everyone from King Crimson to Radiohead to Candiria to my project all have a
tough time with single genres.)

Customer service: Like many new, hungry startups. They jump all over every
email. Very good.

Now, their competitors:

last.fm - So-so interface. Terrible analytics. Reports constantly out of date.
Unbelievably, shockingly, mind-blowingly, pricey for what they give you. Does
have the ability to add "similar artists" when creating a campaign rather than
in advance, which is nice. Slow to update the management interface. Poor
customer service. They are still considered a big dog, but they've fallen way
behind their newer competitors.

MadeLoud - Straightforward, no-frills, and delivers exactly as advertised, but
options are limited due to the format (they give you "promoted downloads" - no
streaming.) Very cheap. Good customer service.

Grooveshark - So-so management interface, analytics/reporting system, and
demographic targeting. No longer truly self-serve, which is a downer. They are
quick to respond when you want to create a new campaign, but the self-serve
system was much better. Pricing is decent. Ability to target similiar artists
is present.

Jango - the best out there at the moment, aside from their prices (which are
still good, but Earbits wins hands down on this front.) Thorough analytics.
Very customizable promotions - their listener targeting system is unmatched
(supports "similar artists", has auto-complete suggestions, the works.) Has
never been down, can't ever recall having a system feature not work. Email
collection capabilities, artist homepages, real-time listener feed,
notifications for many relevant conversion and feedback events, comments
central to the experience. Everything is self-serve. Good customer service.

Overall, Jango is still the best, but I've got high hopes for Earbits.

~~~
earbitscom
This is outstanding feedback. Thank you for taking the time. Feel free to
email me with any other thoughts. joey@earbits.com

------
brandnewlow
"Promotion #1

Cost: $29

Promoted plays: 1,800

New Facebook Likes: 31

Mailing List Signups: 24

Sales from Facebook Fans: $24

Sales From Email Signup: $65

Profit: $60

Promotion #2

Cost: $29

Promoted plays: 1,800

New Facebook Likes: 28

Mailing List Signups: 3

Sales from Facebook Fans: $20

Sales From Email Signup: $38

Profit: $29"

That's pretty terrific ROI I'd say. User spent $58 and got 59 FB likes (let's
say those would cost $1 each to get via FB), 27 mailing list signups (let's
say those would cost $2 each to get through other means), plus an actual $147
in music sales.

So the user spent $58 and got back about $260 in value.

Earbits should be pretty darn happy with that sort of ROI.

~~~
earbitscom
Edit: Earbits IS really happy with that sort of ROI.

If it stayed like that at just 10 times the scale, an artist could make $890
in net monthly profit, which is nothing short of a miracle for most musicians.
At 100 times, a very attainable goal, it's a complete game changer.

~~~
brandnewlow
Right. Curiously, the article doesn't say whether the musician intends to try
a campaign at a larger scale. I posted a comment over on the article asking
this. I assume your folks are talking to him, too.

------
evertonfuller
Had a listen to some channels. The pop ones. Is there any quality control?
Half the tracks were horribly produced, mixes were completely off, vocals
bleh. Who exactly is Earbits aimed at? There must be a pretty specific niche
of people who actually like this stuff. Not the general mainstream fan for
sure.

------
wickedchicken
Reminds me of <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payola>, although it looks by
disclosing it they avoid it

~~~
rhizome
pay to play: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pay_to_play>

