Video: Karra Invested $100,000 to Create her Album and Spotify Deleted it

[Reid Rosefelt]

This is not clickbait. It's quite a story. And a very common one. Apparently Spotify will just kick people off without allowing them any recourse. If they say you're doing something nefarious, that is it--your album is off Spotify forever. It is true that there are tons of people using services that hire people or bots to click on their songs to get fake streams. It's fair that Spotify would want to protect itself from having to pay money to cheaters.

But Karra spends tens of thousands of dollars promoting herself with lavish videos and photo sessions. She's been at this a long time and has a fan base. 212 thousand followers on YouTube alone. She doesn't look like some shmo in his basement cheating to get a few streams from people who have no interest in his music. She wants a career. She's working her butt off to get people to hear about her music and want to listen to it.

Karra also had another problem. She co-wrote all her songs, so she got entangled with a lawsuit at TikTok.

 

[David Cuny]

Interesting video.

It sounded like she knew going into the project what the total cost of the album was going to be. She also knew that the revenue streams would never come close to covering the cost.

She says as much in the the summary:

So after running the numbers, was it worth it? From an artistic perspective, yes. I learned a lot. I went on an epic journey and I got the opportunity to express myself freely and creatively and just really embody what it means to be an artist.

Plus, I had so much fun along the way and I wouldn't trade those memories for the world.

The real money doesn't come directly from the music, but from being a high profile musician:

Throughout this time, I was also developing my content strategies on YouTube, Instagram, and Tik Tok. And to my surprise, this led to a ton of lucrative brand sponsorships with music tech companies, as well as revenue from my website, imcara.com, which I launched during that time.

Besides being a dream project (which is why she paid top dollar for everything), the album was intended to level up her career. Part of the outlay that she expenses to the album are long-term investments:

So, all the camera gear and lighting equipment that we purchased during this time was not only for the
future of the album, but to create profitable, high-quality content on YouTube like this.

But these are still real expenses.

The issues that she didn't anticipate were (as Reid wrote) getting entangled with were issues with working on each song with three other writers. The decision to do that came from her prior experience, where songs were built by a team:

I felt kind of powerless because while I learned recording and vocal production, I still didn't know music production yet. Every project required a team of writers and producers to complete a song. And in retrospect, I wish I started learning music production sooner simply because I could have taken things into my own hands and started my own personal journey as an artist.

Her main plan was:

In my mind, I was going to release multiple singles and albums throughout my life, and this was going
to be the start of a solo artist career on Spotify.

Being flagged on Spotify for using bots to inflate her streams left her dead in the water, since the album was then banned on that platform.

I've mentioned this elsewhere, but it's amazing how for just a small amount of money, someone can totally derail an artist's Spotify career and leave them with no recourse.

I still haven't gotten into (and probably never will) gotten into the "music is content" mindset:

Isn't that the whole point for people to easily find and use your songs in their content?

I think that speaks to how marketing music has changed. Only twelve people actually purchased the album. Social media users are content creators, and they are encouraged to use other people's music in their oen content.

That way, if their content goes viral, so does the affiliated content.

All in all, very educational.

 

[Reid Rosefelt]

It seemed to me like she spent an insane amount of money and never stopped to think of how things could be done more cost-efficiently. It's seems like it was a big shocker to her that she could make a video outside! And save costs for studio rental and a union lighting crew.

I found her very Hollywood all the way. Throw money at everything. Hire the "best." But there's also the idea of coming up with something imaginative and it doesn't have to cost much.

She was purchasing a fantasy--that she was already a star.

I'm making an album now and I'm not expecting to make any money. I'm doing all the writing and playing, and some singing. I have my own video equipment for YouTube and I know how to edit. Everything is me on the album, except for hired singers and a few musicians, and mixing/mastering. Very important is that I'll be bringing it out slowly, so I'll be earning some money from selling my movie memorabilia while I spend money on the album. Maybe 5 or 6 songs this year and then they come out bit by bit next year or even later.

And then there's the money I would have spent that I'm not. If I wasn't working on this album, I would have purchased the Soundtoys upgrade. $200. That's the cost of two mixes. I expect that when Black Friday comes out, I'll be pretty broke.

I expect no money from Spotify. I just want people to be able to easily listen to my music. If they throw me off it because some asshole set up bots on it, I would be sad. But I guess there is still YouTube, TikTok and other social media. You can't let the bastards get you down.

 

[David Cuny]

It seemed to me like she spent an insane amount of money and never stopped to think of how things could be done more cost-efficiently.

No doubt.

But it's her money, so if that's how she wants to spend it, that's fine.

She didn't really express any regret at spending the $100,000 price. Rather, the complaint was how she was locked out of the social meda market.

It's seems like it was a big shocker to her that she could make a video outside! And save costs for studio rental and a union lighting crew.

I don't think it came as a shock, it just wasn't an approach she wanted to take. The team didn't go completely hog-wild with costs the first time. For example, they chose a studio for their shoot they could re-dress and re-use.

Many of the expenses came from hiring professionals.

And prior to the "western" video shoot, they didn't have the camera equipment. And as she said, they'd gained experience with editing and directing.

I found her very Hollywood all the way. Throw money at everything. Hire the "best." But there's also the idea of coming up with something imaginative and it doesn't have to cost much.

I agree that the final songs - or at least the ones I listened to - felt like retreads.

She said "I got the opportunity to express myself freely and creatively and just really embody what it means to be an artist." (emphasis added)

If by "embody what it means to be an artist" she means having professionals work on your songs/photos/videos, mission accomplished. There's something to be said about not having to look back and wonder what would have happened if you had only just fully committed to the project.

But if she she means to express her own unique voice, that's not what I heard. The songs seemed derivative. And that's coming from me, someone who doesn't even follow the genre.

It's like her team sat down and tried to duplicate what others had done, many times before. Exactly the sort of complaint people have about corporate suits.

But it's her money, and her choice. If that's what she wanted to accomplish, more power to her. It's not like I'm trying to compete in that space, so what do I know?

 

[Tim Nash]

Just another example that the 20th century music business is dead. Lets just bury it and move on. I listened to her music and it's the same old, same old. Good luck trying to stand out when you sound like everyone else.
As for spotify, the CEO is too busy trying to be Darth Vader. He doesn't care about artists at all. This is common knowledge, so why would anyone continue to use streaming services?

 

[Reid Rosefelt]

Maybe the story is simple. She really has nothing to say. She has no stories that are all her own that she needs to tell, no new style of music she needs to offer, no anything except her desire to be famous. When I was a movie publicist, there was a parade of young people who came to my office. They were rich kids going to Sundance. They used their wealth to make movies so they could get their picture in Vanity Fair and get hot people and celebrities interested in them. No particular interest in expressing themselves. I walked away from a lot of easy money.

Movie and music companies have tried to do this all my life. They pick some attractive person and try to make them into stars. They invest a lot of money. Sometimes it even works, but usually not. Star quality isn't something that can be manufactured. She tried to do this herself. She's still at it. This video is part of that strategy.

She's readjusting to what happened and I'm sure she'll make more albums. Maybe it will even occur to her someday that bland music is not the way to go today, and maybe she'll team up with somebody really offbeat and talented.

why would anyone continue to use streaming services?

Because that is how people listen to music now. If I tell somebody about the songs I've done, I want them to be able to ask Alexa (or whatever) to play them. It's not about money at all.

When they asked Willie Sutton why he robbed banks, he was reported to say, "because that's where the money is." Spotify, other streamers, and social media are where the listeners are today. Of course, there's also Satellite Radio and other things, but streaming is where it's at right now for music, TV and Movies.

It's brutal that some shit-head could spend a few bucks and get me off streaming. I would say the death penalty would not be enough for somebody like that. I would want a reasonable amount of torture added onto the sentence. Seriously, companies that provide ways to bilk streaming services out of money should be illegal. It would seem like Spotify would have enough money to purchase some congressmen. And people who use these services should be fined. If it wasn't for these low-life lazy scumbags, people who are putting their heart into writing songs and their hard-earned money into producing them, wouldn't have all their work in jeopardy. I find this very scary.

I'm also not terribly thrilled with AI. But I think talent will out. Working in the movie business for over 50 years, I found that 99% of movies were mediocre or total shit. With a little help from marketers like me, the 1% of good stuff did fine. I think that will always be the case. Billie Eilish put "Ocean Eyes" on EDIT: SoundCloud because she and Finneas wanted to show it to one person. One person! It went viral and kicked off her career instantly.

It the work is good enough, I think it can stand out amidst all the litter. But if it can get kicked out of the musical ecosystem for no good reason, without recourse, that frightens me.

 

[Nekujak]

If the goal is to make my music accessible or shareable, Spotify is hardly the only game in town. Yes, it's currently the most prevalent music streaming service, but there are other major players, including Apple Music, Amazon Music, Tidal, Deezer, YouTube Music, etc. Not to mention YouTube itself (videos).

Incidentally, "Ocean Eyes" was initially shared on SoundCloud, which is where it went viral, so Spotify wasn't even involved in the song's early success.

If it's so easy for bad actors to get my music bumped off Spotify, that signals to me it's a flawed platform and I shouldn't be putting my focus there.

If I simply need to share my song with others, all I really need is a link, which all DSPs provide.

As for Karra's story... what can I say? I find it full of strange incongruities, questionable decisions, and a bit of an attention grab. At best, it's a cautionary tale of how not to manage a music career. Beyond that... meh.

 

[Reid Rosefelt]

If the goal is to make my music accessible or shareable, Spotify is hardly the only game in town. Yes, it's currently the most prevalent music streaming service, but there are other major players, including Apple Music, Amazon Music, Tidal, Deezer, YouTube Music, etc. Not to mention YouTube itself (videos).

Incidentally, "Ocean Eyes" was initially shared on SoundCloud, which is where it went viral, so Spotify wasn't even involved in the song's early success.

If it's so easy for bad actors to get my music bumped off Spotify, that signals to me it's a flawed platform and I shouldn't be putting my focus there.

If I simply need to share my song with others, all I really need is a link, which all DSPs provide.

As for Karra's story... what can I say? I find it full of strange incongruities, questionable decisions, and a bit of an attention grab. At best, it's a cautionary tale of how not to manage a music career. Beyond that... meh.

The comment I responded to was about streaming services. All streaming services. Streaming services and social media are the town square of music today. If somebody can get kicked off Spotify, they can get kicked off anything, as she did with TikTok. And, despite what she says, many people get kicked off YouTube too.

Spotify is the dominant streaming company in the US. I'm not willing to just give up on Spotify. I am going to fight.

I knew "Ocean Eyes" was shared on SoundCloud. That was a typo. I'm very aware of all the hoops that I have to jump through to get something on streaming services. SoundCloud takes a minute. The idea that Billie and her brother would go to that kind of effort to put out a song to reach one person doesn't make sense. I made a boo-boo.

 

[Polkasound]

She was purchasing a fantasy--that she was already a star.

That's the feeling I got as well. She strikes me as a dime-a-dozen wannabe pop star but with one huge exception — she had a lot more money to throw at that dream. So that's what she did, and the result was a professional-looking video that her family, friends, and a few thousand people would enjoy.

If burning money on self-promotion is her hobby, more power to her. But if she's complaining that her $100,000 investment in herself isn't paying enough of a return, I think she has much bigger things to worry about than getting kicked off Spotify.

 

[Dzilizzi]

I haven't read all these things, but if I remember correctly, most of the big guys made their money from touring, not album sales. The record label made the album money and a little went to the writers. This is why you see these big tours, like Taylor Swift's ERAS tour. Unfortunately, it is hard for independent artists to get big tours going unless they can get on as an opener for a bigger name.

 

[David Cuny]

I haven't read all these things, but if I remember correctly, most of the big guys made their money from touring, not album sales. The record label made the album money and a little went to the writers. This is why you see these big tours, like Taylor Swift's ERAS tour. Unfortunately, it is hard for independent artists to get big tours going unless they can get on as an opener for a bigger name.

I don't think she was planning to go on tour.

Her primary audience is on social media, and income is from being an influencer. Releasing the album would have been a step up in her status as a musician, so the actual payout would be from an increase in her influencer status.

That would likely lead to more product promotion opportunities, and so on.

She (and her husband) have made the most from the experience. They have pivoted to YouTube, picked up equipment, updated their studio, and leveled up their skills. She's even managed to turn issues with the album release into a video, which has gotten 236K views in four days.

 

[Dzilizzi]

I don't think she was planning to go on tour.

Her primary audience is on social media, and income is from being an influencer. Releasing the album would have been a step up in her status as a musician, so the actual payout would be from an increase in her influencer status.

That would likely lead to more product promotion opportunities, and so on.

She (and her husband) have made the most from the experience. They have pivoted to YouTube, picked up equipment, updated their studio, and leveled up their skills. She's even managed to turn issues with the album release into a video, which has gotten 236K views in four days.

Ah, the new way to make money and be (in)famous! Though the video was on how she barely made any money from her music. I wonder how much she still has to pay to all the co-writers for each YouTube video. May still not be much money.