Channel U Exposed

T

tox

Factory Girl
MATT MAson said:
A mate just fowarded me this - http://channeluexposed.channeluexposed.co.uk/


Thought it might be of interest to Dissensians.

I worked with Channel U closely when they started, and this all seems to be pretty accurate. The only decent guy there was Charlie Beuthin who soon left once he realized what kind of business he was in.
Click to expand...

Interesting stuff.

This is a very different view of Channel U than that which was shown in the Dazed & Confused article about the channel a few months back. I'm not at home at the moment so can't dig out my copy, but fair to say it was fairly positive and on about the indepedent underground spirit etc.

There are some interesting idea's about starting a BBC funded music channel on the link you provided. To be honest, I don't see why MTVUK aren't pushing Grime/other UK underground music. They seem perfectly happy to dedicate MTV2 to nu-rave and other new indie stuff, but I'm sure there's plenty of politics going on behind the scene which I'm not aware of.

I've heard bad things about U from people who've worked with them in the past, but for now I think I'll take that site with a pinch of salt. The claims about slavery are a little over the top, and for a page about rip-offs there are far too many ads on that site. A good read still though.
 
MATT MAson

MATT MAson

BROADSIDE
I totally agree - the artists using it are the underground spirit you speak of - the guys running it, and I say this from personal experience, are something else entirely. But yeah the whole slavery thing was a little OTT.

MTV has long neglected UK urban stuff, it would be great if them or the BBC put something like Channel U together without this kind of nasty small print.
 
T

Tactics

BBP!
interesting

I know of a few labels who have complained of the 'cash for videoplay' approach of Channel U...or the outright banning of videos cos they hold grudges with the artists

matt why should the BBC or MTV get involved in UK stuff beside the obvious reasons? the 'small print' enables Channel U to make money...without it what would be the bait for MTV and the BBC? also doesn't that website partly implicate your former paymaster Rwd mag which charges unsigned artist for interviews and page features?
 
T

tox

Factory Girl
Tactics said:
matt why should the BBC or MTV get involved in UK stuff beside the obvious reasons? the 'small print' enables Channel U to make money...without it what would be the bait for MTV and the BBC?
Click to expand...

The BBC are non-profit and hence they don't need money to act as "bait." For them it would be seen as a way of helping young artists get the exposure they need. Running an operation like this must costs peanuts to an organisation like the BBC - although perhaps the content of the videos and music would be a barrier. The BBC's 1xtra has recently been critisized for using gun-shot sounds n stuff, which is fair critisism, but without those sounds the station wouldn't be so "real" for the kidz.

As for MTV, I read somewhere (perhaps that Dazed article) that Channel U actually gets more viewers than MTV's rival Base channel (and hence surely more than MTVDance too, cos thats totally shit). So the monetary draw is there in terms of advertisers. I'm sure there are many more little details that make it a much harder proposition, since otherwise they would have been right in there by now. MTV UK aren't usually ones to avoid new trends...

As for the Dazed article, the thing that suprised me about it the most is that it was about the way Channel U is run, as well as the artists on it. Perhaps that was just some killer PR to get the style-kids hooked in (worked on me, haha).
 
MATT MAson

MATT MAson

BROADSIDE
Tox pretty much covered it. It gets more ratings than Base - which shows there is demand, and the BBC should just do it cos it would support a lot of artists. Channel U doesn't have to operate like this - it's greed, plain and simple.

When we did the Booo Krooo TV series for them, the negotiations were unreasonable and heated, and they wanted similar percentages of any and all types of intellectual property that didn't even exist. It was crazy.

As for RWD's business model, no one is asking anybody for a cut of their work. It's a form of advertising. I'm not going to pretend the guys who run RWD are angels, but it was always a struggle there to make ends meet and no one involved in the business ever had any intention of ripping artists off like this.
 
Last edited:
Woebot

Woebot

Well-known member
MATT MAson said:
As for RWD's business model, no one is asking anybody for a cut of their work. It's a form of advertising. I'm not going to pretend the guys who run RWD are angels, but it was always a struggle there to make ends meet and no one involved in the business ever had any intention of ripping artists off like this.
Click to expand...

isn't RWD up for sale?
 
MATT MAson

MATT MAson

BROADSIDE
I saw that too - for 400,000 GBP. I thought it was a shame, it used to be worth a lot more than that.

RWD is nothing to do with me anymore. The company that used to own it was bankrupted last year by the four guys that started it. Our investors, the old MD and a few other people - myself included, all lost our shirts in the process. I would of thought only having a year's worth of books might make it difficult to sell.

Understandably I don't keep in close contact with them anymore, I hear a lot of second hand stories about people leaving and moving to smaller offices stuff, but whatevs. Good luck to 'em. The UK urban music magazine business is a hard, financially unrewarding one to be in.
 
C

charlie

Member
CHU Exposed...

The great problem is: its not small print. It appears that Channel U have a clever little contract which works wonders when artists will sign anything to get a little fame.

Did you read/see about the Album they are having and the Best of Britain theory?

I found out about this when someone passed me a link to http://cost.channeluexposed.co.uk which is a very very basic calculator.

RWD Mag

I also saw the advert and i think the £400,000 is a joke!

A 5 year old company with only £10,000 profit and a modest £400,000 turnover. They have big clients though like MTV, so i am suprised why they haven't made much!!??!!

I didnt know that they got 7 million hits a month. I know people who get just over £10,000 a month on their website who only get around a million hits and thats no ecommerce website.

I would predict the company is worth £25,000. I would make an offer of £3000 just for the name.

I also strongly disagree with the no money in it statement...

The UK Magazine trade is worth £22bn a year which makes it the largest in Europe!!

All it need is someone to turn it round: there is no real big competitors.

Did anyone buy it?
 
MATT MAson

MATT MAson

BROADSIDE
Just because you have big clients doesn't mean they will pay you big money.

You can get a page in most urban music mags for 300-400 quid no matter who you are, in fact, you'll probably get a discount if you're a big brand because it makes the mag look better - the buyers know that so they might squeeze you down to 250, which is cost for something like RWD.

Talk to some of the people running UK music magazines - especially urban music magazines, they will tell you it's not an easy business to be in, for most it's really a labor of love that just about pays the rent. People in it for money don't last, because they find out there isn't any.

The market for UK urban music is much smaller (and is perceived as being even smaller than it actually is by the media agencies) than the market for US urban music, and your competition for that market is Vibe, XXL etc, who UK titles can't compete with in terms of production values/access etc.

Style magazines will always do better too, there is an institutional racism in the buying industry that will always mean the odds of urban brands doing well are slim, not impossible, but slim.

And on top of this you have the old-media-crushing power of 'the internets' to contend with.
 
C

charlie

Member
MATT MAson said:
Just because you have big clients doesn't mean they will pay you big money.

You can get a page in most urban music mags for 300-400 quid no matter who you are, in fact, you'll probably get a discount if you're a big brand because it makes the mag look better - the buyers know that so they might squeeze you down to 250, which is cost for something like RWD.

Talk to some of the people running UK music magazines - especially urban music magazines, they will tell you it's not an easy business to be in, for most it's really a labor of love that just about pays the rent. People in it for money don't last, because they find out there isn't any.

The market for UK urban music is much smaller (and is perceived as being even smaller than it actually is by the media agencies) than the market for US urban music, and your competition for that market is Vibe, XXL etc, who UK titles can't compete with in terms of production values/access etc.

Style magazines will always do better too, there is an institutional racism in the buying industry that will always mean the odds of urban brands doing well are slim, not impossible, but slim.

And on top of this you have the old-media-crushing power of 'the internets' to contend with.
Click to expand...


I understand what you are saying. But "The Buyer buys the Seller not the Salt". They stuck in the facts about the 7 million hits and promoted it on the business for sale site.

To survive you need to treat each advertiser the same, yes add discounts, but dont go offering massive discounts to big names. If your magazine is good enough and is the advertisers target market they WILL pay FULL price.

Only give discounts for REPEAT advertisers. Look at your local supermarket... Buy One Get One FREE promotions are better then selling them half-price, as if you sold them half price the customer may only buy one and thats lost custom. Even sign an long term agreement where they pay £1000 for a year worth of advertising: this is a loss then if you sold them long term but its all money upfront.

You need to be PROUD of your BRAND, if you get no sale, you get no sale. There are always other advertisers (adverts are for finance, it doesnt matter what brand they are: its not like you have a partnership or anything with them) - if you find it hard, you will get advertisers asking for distress space - then you would give discounts to fill up the magazine (but only because its NOT currently full!)

Problem with RWD (yes they have a website and forum) is they never exploited web advertising (AdSense on Forums etc.) to gain huge revenues. Also they dont respond to many advertiser requests. I heard articles that people have emailed asking for prices etc. and they received a "Deleted" notification 2 weeks later.

All RWD need to do is see an PR or Advertising Consultancy firm. I also think the MTV Base is a joke, RWD should negotiate to get a programme on Channel U, who viewers are ALL into UK Urban music. More targeted! But there are a few problems with Channel U ...
 
MATT MAson

MATT MAson

BROADSIDE
I really wish it was that straightforward. But after nearly four years there, plus a few years working as a buyer at Mediacom, my experience was different. But I like your optimism Charlie, maybe you should go see the bank manager!
 
C

charlie

Member
MATT MAson said:
I really wish it was that straightforward. But after nearly four years there, plus a few years working as a buyer at Mediacom, my experience was different. But I like your optimism Charlie, maybe you should go see the bank manager!
Click to expand...

To buy RWD? Not sure its even still for sale...
 
R

ramadanman

Well-known member
i wrote a report on RWD Mag for this journalism module i'm doing at uni. content analysis and stuff like that

first time i'd read RWD in a year or so

hate to say it, but it was really bad. what was lacking was CONTENT. interviews were brief, completely saturated with ads, and poor reviews. used to be so much better i seem to remember

matt - i remember coming to RWD focus group a few years back. good times!
 
C

captain easychord

Guest
ramadanman said:
i wrote a report on RWD Mag for this journalism module i'm doing at uni. content analysis and stuff like that

first time i'd read RWD in a year or so

hate to say it, but it was really bad. what was lacking was CONTENT. interviews were brief, completely saturated with ads, and poor reviews. used to be so much better i seem to remember
Click to expand...

to which i would add the unecessary prevalence of badly used 'road' slang by almost all of their writers. it's like, read a magazine like don diva or something ,which basically caters to hardcore rap fans/drug dealers (or those aspiring to be as such) and it uses 'adult' language. (e.g. if i have to hear one more writer talk about brapple pie, braptacular, brappage etc i'm gonna flip for real.)
 
MATT MAson

MATT MAson

BROADSIDE
I haven't picked up a copy since I moved to the US so I can't really comment. Like i said, nothing to do with me anymore...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top