Sinister: Re: sinister-digest V2 #568

[david kitchen - jeepster]

sinister-digest wrote:

> From: duke of harringay <tangent at xxx.net>
> Subject: Re: Sinister: oh deary me

> jake, do you have connections with Jeepster? business or otherwise???
> i'm just intrigued, i just wondered why the 'me with my fan hat on'
> thing... but whatever. Here's me with my very foolish looking (ab)normal
> person's chapeau on:

jake's dad is one of the directors at 3MV, 3MV handle the distribution and
shops and stuff, he's also been a saviour in helping us when we do our mail-outs,
4,500 envelopes are a lot to pack :)

> From: Sandra Duric <SANDRAD at xxx.com>
> Subject: Sinister: ruling the school

> So Jeepster's bloody cunning when it comes to marketing or =
> just damn lucky.

i think luck comes a lot into it, i don't think we're clever enough to be cunning
:), has anyone read any pratchett? jeepster would be rincewind.

> From: "jake" <kenny at xxx.uk>
> Subject: Sinister: Taking off those indie blinkers
> 
> Hi there list,

sorry jake, but when it comes down to it, anything against jeepster should be
answered for by jeepster regardless of how much yourself or anyone else
appreciates or cares for the label. we're grown up and need to fight our own
squabbles now.

the whole major label indie thing is silly. full stop. there are no differences in
that we all need to make money to be able to make the next record, that simple.
even sarah records understood that principle.

so why the debate?

well it seems that what you're all arguing over is the way in which record labels
make the money and how they treat their artists. and the hate against majors isn't
that they make money from the bands (every label does, indie or not) but that the
bands, the music is all treated as 'product' and without much care for the music
or the people. majors plan everything, you wouldn't believe what the marketing
departments actually control. so what about the indies? well, we're amatuer, the
lot of us :) we still make money from the bands, if we never did the labels
wouldn't exist and b&s wouldn't be able to fund recording costs, let alone
production. but we don't have a marketing department, and we don't treat the music
as 'product'. we care for the band and the music, katrina still cries at slow
graffiti and i still have my breath taken from me at modern rock song. and the
underlying thing is simple, it's not about who makes money, or who sells more,
it's about who cares for the band, music and fans, and who stands by they're
beliefs in these bands even when they're losing money (majors don't as a lot of
recently dumped bands will testify).

a major label and an indie may both make money (or at times lose money) but the
ONLY diffence is that indies TEND to care more about the bands, and their
relationship with those bands help create more diverse music which is free from
the restraints of marketing, 'product' and current musical trends.

i've typed quickly 'cause i'm on holiday, so if i've not made any sense, well, i'm
sorry. but i hope you all get the idea.

feel free to abuse me privately and spare the list (and listees) any more dribble

cheers

david kitchen

PS: oz is lovely, perth is a dream, the in-laws are great and have a cool
bar-b-que, we'll be back in mid-jan to deal with any trouble with merchandise,
whatever, we love you all loads, have a cool christmas :)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
      +---+  Brought to you by the Sinister mailing list  +---+
 To send to the list please mail "sinister at majordomo.net". To unsubscribe
   send "unsubscribe sinister" or "unsubscribe sinister-digest" to
 "majordomo at majordomo.net".  For list archives and searching, list rules,
   FAQ, poor jokes etc, see http://www.majordomo.net/sinister
          +---+   "legion of bedroom saddo devotees"  +---+
 +-+  "the cardie wearing biscuit nibbling belle & sebastian list"  +-+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+