Lesson 1: don't trash plan A before checking plan B works
That creative work for Sinfini Music came from Studio Output. This creative shop's client list numbers a slew of BBC brands including the BBC Symphony Orchestra, and J.K. Rowling's personal company Pottermore. Studio Output's credentials presentation features its work for Sinfini, but makes no mention of the project's failure and closure. Presumably because the Sinfini work is considered a success by the creative shop; which would have received a generous non-performance related fee for its work paid from the millions that were squandered on the aborted website. Bobby Gillespie of Primal Scream nailed it in a recent interview:
I have zero expectations for the music industry. [Labels] beholden to shareholders... only invest in Ellie Goulding or puppet girl singers or boybands they know they can make a killing on. They'll never invest in art, they're not artistically driven people... It's impossible to earn a living from making records unless you're Adele.More lessons from the failure of Sinfini via this link.
Any copyrighted material is included as "fair use" for critical analysis only, and will be removed at the request of copyright owner(s). Also on Facebook and Twitter.
An example from the U.S.: All corporations were required to have a mission statement and to list those they served. In the 50s, such statements from the likes of GE, Chrysler, etc., differed little one from another. First they served their customers, then employees, then the local community, the larger community, and some way down we come to "shareholders".
I should hazard that the sea change started with a slight swell around 1960, and all these laws have fallen into legal desuetude, but not because they were obsolete; rather, because they were no longer enforced. They are still on the books, though, and I remember that every time some character appears before us to to justify a 'downsizing' or 'outsourcing' by telling us that, "We must consider the interests of our shareholders".
But Gillespie's comment reminds me that I'm not sure even that bold-faced statement is what they are doing. This is because it seems that these 'shareholders' are more often than not the executives of the corporations, including the one making the announcement. Remember all those stock options. And legally, an executive, whether a shareholder or not, is a 'stakeholder'.
The above is the simple line of thought that led me to a simple thought: I've never thought about the financial structure of CAMI. Or Sinfini. Or DGG today. Perhaps when Gillespie speaks of "shareholders" he's unknowingly referring to what are, in fact, 'stakeholders'. I must stop here, else I shall get out of my depth, for I haven't researched this and don't intend to. My superstructure is fragile, and I'm not stooping to researching Economics (Oz inhabited by a horde of wizards) or Finance (most of the greatest experts on which live in country-club prisons, so they can't be that expert, obviously). I should simply like to know the very basic structure of corps in the music world, corps in all areas thereof, and who really owns them, for whom they really speak.