Original article published on Forbes (02/08/18) by Cherie Hu

Spotify and other music streaming services are striving to prove their proprietary data can support added value in physical environments that its brick-and-mortar competitors might not be capable of reproducing. This is raising the pressure on streaming-absent music festivals to compete as well as align their business models and cultural messaging with newcomers. Live Nation offers one example of a new business model, having launched the Festival Passport, giving pass holders access to more than 90 music festivals worldwide at a fixed annual rate of $799. In terms of messaging, some festivals are trying to position themselves as "live playlists," or flexible, "shuffle-friendly" points of entry for music discovery and fandom. Innate within this model is a "moral physics" that prefers, and deliberately programs, diversity and breadth over focused depth. The music industry also is starting to view festivals as having as much influence as playlists and radio stations in launching and sustaining artists' careers, while more artists appear to be going on social media to announce "festival dates" instead of "tour dates." Indie acts in particular are highly incentivized from a financial standpoint to book more festival gigs, given they typically take a loss on normal touring with high production overhead, and like opportunities to recoup that cost with even higher festival fees. However, playlist strategies that rely too much on festivals could still potentially backfire.

Read the full story on the Forbes website.