Details re: the Vinyl Collective Cooperative label

[ronniethebear]

The way I understood it was that the 10 would be out of the 100 total.

[chaps]

My Wallet Is Open

also, a suggestion for label name: "we just found a box of" records

BACKED

[Guest scriptedrain]

The way I understood it was that the 10 would be out of the 100 total.

This is from the original post by Virgil:

"...200 pressing (100 to shareholders, 10 to board members, 20 to band, 20 to label, 10 to Vinyl Collective, and 40 for sale on VC)..."

[reginaldbuxley]

I don't mind if it's single shares only - but a thought - maybe there's an initial 100 people buy-in, then after that - you can purchase additional shares [if virgil finds out he needs a couple more bucks] but you /don't/ get more than one "vote" to your assigned board member.

Otherwise you'd see things like this happen: "Reginald bought 50 shares, so it looks like we're doing a 2xLP Steinways Box Set, hope you guys enjoy sugar'punk"

[counterfiction]

Sounds great to me. I'm going to read this entire thread over my lunch break but I'm looking forward to being involved.

[captainmorgan]

If a release doesn't generate enough funds to drive a further release could shareholders give more money to keep things moving? Kind of like an NPR fund-raiser or something... I see lots of problems with this idea already (what if not all shareholders want to throw in more cash, and if only some people do, does everyone see the benefit/get a copy of the new release). But it seems the biggest hurdle would be if a release tanks and another release couldn't be pressed. How would we as shareholders help records continue to get pressed? I feel that 100 people that would buy into this would really want it to keep going. I think the "one bad release sucking up all the funds" is a problem a lot of small labels deal with, just from reading what folks on this board have to say.

Yeah, that is a little concerning, but I think you're right that it's pretty reasonable to expect that everyone would want to keep the thing going. I doubt that additional investments would have to be as large as the initial one.

Plus, maybe if someone wanted to bow out they could sell their share to someone new? That might get complicated, though.

[sgoodcore]

We could come up with all kinds of extravagant rules but honestly, you're not investing in a sure thing. If records tank, they tank. That's a risk with any business and I think if you're not okay taking that risk, you shouldn't buy shares. I mean the records that you'll get from buying a share would be available for much cheaper on their own. The idea is you invest the money with the risk being you could pay $30 a record but the reward being you could pay $60 for 25 records.

[ericxthexred]

im in

[bigmonkey]

We could come up with all kinds of extravagant rules but honestly, you're not investing in a sure thing. If records tank, they tank. That's a risk with any business and I think if you're not okay taking that risk, you shouldn't buy shares. I mean the records that you'll get from buying a share would be available for much cheaper on their own. The idea is you invest the money with the risk being you could pay $30 a record but the reward being you could pay $60 for 25 records.

I completely agree. And here's the but: But what if we want to keep it going? I wouldn't mind investing more money after the first couple records. I'm certainly not planning on buying into this with the idea that I'd be getting tons of records for only $60. I think it'd be cool to be able to keep supporting this imprint, and I'm curious what other people think would be an easy way to do that, that's all.

[captainmorgan]

The way I look at it is that by the time I start seeing records, I'll have totally forgotten about that $60 anyway.

It's like pre-orders that come out 6 months later. It feels almost like getting a free record.

[Guest Admin]

To address some of the issues, it is my idea to have each board member work directly with 10 shareholders. Shareholders will communicate with their assigned board member and will offer their nominations during the induction period. I want all of the shareholders and boardmembers to have the ability to vote on the nominated releases. Sure, there is a likelihood that not everyone is going to love every release, but if we can keep this thing going, there are sure to be enough good records that it will make your money well spent.

There wasn't a process with how I selected my board members. I picked a few folks who run great labels, a certain music editor, some close friends who help me out with Vinyl Collective quite a bit, and people who I thought would be a great asset to this imprint. Don't feel bad if you were not selected, many of you would have been great on the board, but I just went with certain people I thought would fit nicely.

About keeping this thing going and concerns about selling through pressings, there is a bit of a risk involved. I think with the numbers I mentioned, if we had around 600 copies to sell after shareholders, band, board members, and what not, if we sold them for $9.99 in the store and $6 or $7 to distributors, we should be able to recoup enough money for another pressing and have a little extra money for VC, too. I had it planned that your initial investment would cover shipping costs, too, and international folks are welcome, too.

With all the enthusiasm, we might need to consider offering a few more shares. I will think about how this will affect things and if we do offer more shares, then we might allow a few people to buy more than one share...Maybe.

And about transferring shares, I don't see an issue with that at all. I think it should be the shareholder's responsibility to take care of that and in doing so just get us the info of the new shareholder. I would like to think that most shareholders would be happy holding onto their shares since once the initial investment is done, there is no more money to put into it and just more records.

Hope that answers some of the questions. Keep em coming.

[counterfiction]

We could come up with all kinds of extravagant rules but honestly, you're not investing in a sure thing. If records tank, they tank. That's a risk with any business and I think if you're not okay taking that risk, you shouldn't buy shares. I mean the records that you'll get from buying a share would be available for much cheaper on their own. The idea is you invest the money with the risk being you could pay $30 a record but the reward being you could pay $60 for 25 records.

You just said it far better than I could have.

Basically the idea is that you invest in a business and you only see returns if the business is doing well. I don't have too many doubts about this (the people on this board are pretty smart) considering the bands that have already been suggested in other threads.

I think that once the ball gets rolling on this project it will not only generate a LOT of interest from people on this board but would be very easy to promote and showcase on other sites around the net (deadformat, punknews, absolutepunk, vlv, etc) which would probably generate a lot of buzz. I think half of the process would be selecting the record and the other (maybe more important) half would be effectively advertising and promoting the release.

Any way this all works out I'm excited and think it will certainly be a success.

[ronniethebear]

So are you saying the board members you chose have already been contacted? I would have liked to be on it, but if not that's cool too.

[burntwolf]

i'm late to the thread but still totally in

[sgoodcore]

Maybe we do 150 or 200 shares and just up the initial printings or do more of each record by a small amount? I like the option of putting more money in but then you get in to the problem of making people transfer shares to raise proper funding and other related issues.

[roadmonkey]

I Too want in on this!!

[dylan]

im wondering how often you plan on having releases come out. i know there is a lot of stuff that goes on in between picking what we want released and actually having a copy in our hands

maybe, since you said originally we are gonna do two, have us decide on the first four releases, then once the first two are successful and we have the money to press the next release, all the leg work of deciding and gaining the rights to press it will be done and it can go straight off to the plant

[counterfiction]

I would be suprised if it takes any less than 4-6 months before the first release is pressed and shipped.

[sgoodcore]

im wondering how often you plan on having releases come out. i know there is a lot of stuff that goes on in between picking what we want released and actually having a copy in our hands

maybe, since you said originally we are gonna do two, have us decide on the first four releases, then once the first two are successful and we have the money to press the next release, all the leg work of deciding and gaining the rights to press it will be done and it can go straight off to the plant

I like the idea of picking four, doing two, and then voting on two more so everyone involved knew what the next four releases would be, assuming they could be done.

I take it Virgil is on the board as well to give us a total of 11 board members so there are no ties in voting?

[counterfiction]

I agree since that will also give Virgil (or whomever is in charge of licensing rights) time to negotiate the rights and make sure that the albums are available to press at all.

[skumbucket]

I'm down for the cash, definitely. Since i didn't get picked for the board, i'm also willing to do any work that needs to be done to contribute to this thing. I love it. I really do.

[aarondanger]

This is a great idea and the fact that virgil is taking time out to organize something like this is awesome. Most people who run labels as a living would not normally take the time out to do this.

my thoughts.

1. having 100 people vote on putting out 1 record is impossible.

Lets say everyone votes to release a record and the Label/Band says no. Dont get bummed, this kinda stuff may or may not happen but just be prepared.

2. I think setting limits on the amount of colors of the pressing will be important. I think everyone would like there to be be 5 different colors in each pressing, but thats going to bring the price per record UP alot and intimately bring the amount of records the group can release DOWN.

so yea

my ideas

[jhulud]

Hell...I've already practically paid for Virgil's kid's first couple of years of college tuition with the amount of money I've spent here...what's a little more? Bring it!

[dylan]

2. I think setting limits on the amount of colors of the pressing will be important. I think everyone would like there to be be 5 different colors in each pressing, but thats going to bring the price per record UP alot and intimately bring the amount of records the group can release DOWN.

so yea

my ideas

i think virgil is only going to press 2 colors of each. 200/800 split

[ronniethebear]

This is a great idea and the fact that virgil is taking time out to organize something like this is awesome. Most people who run labels as a living would not normally take the time out to do this.

my thoughts.

1. having 100 people vote on putting out 1 record is impossible.

Lets say everyone votes to release a record and the Label/Band says no. Dont get bummed, this kinda stuff may or may not happen but just be prepared.

2. I think setting limits on the amount of colors of the pressing will be important. I think everyone would like there to be be 5 different colors in each pressing, but thats going to bring the price per record UP alot and intimately bring the amount of records the group can release DOWN.

so yea

my ideas

I agree with both of these ideas. I'd personally like to see no more than 2 colors/pressings of each record.