You’re so right … a band is not a brand … because of the core difference between bands and brands … consistency.

A brand must be consistent. The expectation is that Coke will always taste like Coke, that all iPods work the same way.

By definition, a band is INconsistent … especially when they are starting out… the Beatles made some great stuff and some not great stuff. Same for U2, Pink Floyd etc.

I think a lot of these music folks misunderstand this. In the advertising world (which is where brands matter), a band becomes a "brand" when it has enough "hits" that people focus on the best of the best. That’s AFTER they have been around for a long while. Usually after they have stopped making any more really great music.

These tin-eared MBAs think you can brand a the band while it is young - before it has consistently created at least 20 great songs (very hard to do).

Every night, I watch my daughter IM her friends with music files attached to see if her friends like the latest thing she’s discovered. And, her friends send their files too. She plays them and comments on them. If she likes them, she forwards them to other friends. By MORNING, the kids at her school have decided if they like a song or not.

This is the future of breaking pop and alternative music. But it freaks the old dogs out - because they can’t CONTROL it. And the old model only worked because of control.

John

John Parikhal
Joint Communications
1720 Post Road East, Suite 214
Westport, CT 06880