Is BroadJam after TAXI's Market Share?

[bc]

Is BroadJam blatantly using TAXI's biz model, or have they contracted with TAXI in a kind of cross marketing loop? Not cool if they're just greedily fishing for market share. They don't have the street creds or grassroots passion and love for our industry that Michael demonstrates -- IMO. Push come to shove I'll stick with TAXI...not even up for debate.bc

[Casey H]

Quote:Is BroadJam blatantly using TAXI's biz model, or have they contracted with TAXI in a kind of cross marketing loop? Not cool if they're just greedily fishing for market share. They don't have the street creds or grassroots passion and love for our industry that Michael demonstrates -- IMO. Push come to shove I'll stick with TAXI...not even up for debate.bcHi BCWhoa... Let's not pick on Broadjam. There are many music sites on the Internet which you can join and also submit to listings for $5 or $10 a pop. This is not something new and is not the same business model as TAXI. I am not saying one is better or worse, just different. For example, one of TAXI's strengths for the listing parties is that they heavily screen submissions. Other business models allow the public to submit what they want. Some artists want the chance to do that without a middleman screener. And there are even some clients who are very much OK with that.For example, I belong to 1-2 of those websites that allow you to submit music. Recently I submitted a track for a cable TV series and got a reply from the show that they are considering my track. So, other business models are not all bad. I do think that, in general, TAXI has a higher caliber of listings because of their reputation for screening.Business models are always evolving. When Broadjam started, they were one of the early entrants into the music hosting site game. In the early days they were a lot about peer reviews. You had to do 3 reviews for others for each track you wanted to upload. That model didn't work and they moved into web hosting and other services. Now they are moving into providing leads for their members to submit to. Given that this concept is nothing new (not saying it's bad), it is in no way a threat to TAXI's market share. A few years ago I spoke at length with the CEO of Broadjam. He's a good guy. honest and hard working, and wants to provide a good service for his members. Any time I've called Broadjam's customer service a got quick and cheerful response. This included when I was a dispatch member and needed a song encoded quickly. Whenever I asked for a favor in that regard, I got it. BTW, that other site that got me the cable TV opp takes about a week to respond to a customer service email. Broadjam and TAXI both respond within a day- at least that has been my experience. So cheers to both of them for exellent customer service.OK, my 2 cents are done... Casey

[matto]

Quote:Is BroadJam blatantly using TAXI's biz model, or have they contracted with TAXI in a kind of cross marketing loop? Not cool if they're just greedily fishing for market share. They don't have the street creds or grassroots passion and love for our industry that Michael demonstrates -- IMO. Push come to shove I'll stick with TAXI...not even up for debate.bcWell Taxi is rolling out a free hosting service to all of its members. I think they're rolling it out to 500 members at a time, and I'm sure they'll tell us more about it shortly (I'm on the beta team for it, that's why I know).As far as the BJ "fishing operation", I've heard rumors that Taxi may be involved in a legal dispute with BJ over the legality of BJ marketing a Taxi-like service to all the Taxi members in the BJ database (like all of you submitting via BJ).I even heard (and this is only a RUMOR) that BJ told Taxi they'd shut down Taxi members' ability to submit to listings unless Taxi gave BJ the submission fees...Which seems a little ...uhm, untoward, but like I said this is strictly a rumor and I'm sure Michael wouldn't let that happen.But I think it's safe to say it's definitely not a "cross marketing loop" or anything of that nature...unfortunately.

[bc]

It looks like BJ is aggressively and not-so-uprightly targeting TAXI members. Casey-- I am a marketing consultant by day; so I'm not naive about biz. But...BJs current tactics are below the belt IMO. BJ needs to hear the sound of TAXI members burning rubber...if you know what I mean. Update: Michael Laskow clearly does NOT endorse BJ's decision to farm TAXI members for their new biz.

[Casey H]

Quote:It looks like BJ is aggressively and not-so-uprightly targeting TAXI members. Casey-- I am a marketing consultant by day; so I'm not naive about biz. But...BJs current tactics are below the belt IMO. BJ needs to hear the sound of TAXI members burning rubber...if you know what I mean. Update: Michael Laskow clearly does NOT endorse BJ's decision to farm TAXI members for their new biz. BCI could be wrong. From the "rumors" it could be more of a legal battle between the companies (RUMORS ONLY!!) than a steal market share issue. But, I definitely could be wrong! ALL RUMOR AND SPECULATION!! PURE SPECULATION: Often, if 2 companies are working together, they often have an agreement that they will not do things directly competitive to each other's business. So, let's say BJ wanted to entire the "pitching" market. That could have gotten ugly.BC, point well taken... I happen to like BJ and maybe got a bit defensive. Casey

[bc]

No prob Case -- Quote:an agreement that they will not do things directly competitive to each other's business.We call 'em "Non Competes" and I'll very surprised if Doug (M) and Michael omitted that from TAXI's contract with BJ. Also note that BJ insiders have been lurking here and posting. They've been doing their DD. OK I guess, but I've always thought this forum - or components of this board -- should be exclusively for TAXI members only.

[Casey H]

Quote:No prob Case -- We call 'em "Non Competes" Yup and I have to sign those darn things all the time!I don't know if the board could be limited to TAXI members ... That would not allow people considering joining to come on board and see what's happening. If only some parts of the board were limited, there would always be questionable posts in the non-limited section... BTW, I am not a TAXI member- I am a former one. Wouldn't you miss me? I'm sure if someone from BJ posted anything that was business competitive, it would be quickly erased. The only post I recall was discussion about problems with their player. Casey

[bc]

Quote:BTW, I am not a TAXI member- I am a former one. Wouldn't you miss me? Of course Though I wonder how you can participate in all the online stuff you mentioned and still have time to write music. I've been here since Feb. 2004 and haven't breached the 200 post mark yet. This open board is an asset to TAXI for the reasons you mentioned. Still, I would like a members only area where those of us who lay down cold hard cash could have a bit of privacy if we so desired. Not a big deal, but would be a nice feature for those who bite the bullet and anti up. A members only area might foster more personal interaction from TAXI headquarters too.

[broadjammatt]

bc,My apologies if I've given the appearance of lurking. I specifically included Broadjam in my name so that people wouldn't feel that I was trying to be sneaky.I am not here to comment on the relationship between Broadjam and Taxi - I don't think that would be an appropriate thing for me to do on Taxi's forum, or really any public forum. I just wanted to address some of the technical issues regarding streaming because I know how important the issue was to our members.I will not deny reading posts on this board. It's very important for me personally to understand how Broadjam is perceived by people that are being totally honest. I can't think of a better place to do that than right here.Matt

[bc]

Hi Matt.Lurking is not a pejorative in my lingo. I always lurk before posting As for BJ, I was noting the serendipitous confluence of your presence and the TAXI/BJ thingy. I'm sure this board has been on BJ's radar for a long time now. best,bc