Member Info for reynard28

We need to be all over this asap - https://www.npr.org/2020/03/17/816504058/a-list-of-live-virtual-concerts-to-watch-during-the-coronavirus-shutdown?t=1584915176854

@Captain - you are absolutely right in that it is the artists who are practically creating the content, performing the shows etc but ultimately it is the labels / publishers licensing the rights to MVR to make any content that features songs they control (with the exception of backstage, artist extras etc). Somewhat similar to Spotify Singles, where Spotify ends up owning the content, not the artists or labels.

Telco deals are essential for MVR at this point - Spotify, Deezer, Netflix etc all have or still do rely on partnerships with telcos around the world to funnel in subscribers and hope they stay to pay. That's particularly interesting Mel5! Verizon would be a big big win.

I should add to my last post that the agreements MVR has with venues and festivals are also of significance and something that FB etc don't have (even if they can record gigs like Billie Eilish for Oculus Venues). Here's a good review of that show btw: https://vrroom.buzz/vr-news/music/watching-billie-eilishs-concert-oculus-venues

Hi Captain. Good thinking and agree that YouTube is probably the closest comparison.

Although I would argue that MVR are a content creator as they capture and own the content even after the exclusivity period ends (unless i'm mistaken), where they then share revenue with the record label and publisher rights holders (and whoever else takes a cut). That’s always been a possible point of contention for me as - until MVR having a big enough user base, the revenues are therefore marginal - the record labels might see more interest in owning the content to exploit elsewhere. I'll be interested to hear more from MVR on any renewals they have with the major labels and whether they look to move away from MVR owning the content in perpetuity.

I think the value of MVR lies more in their ability to capture content in a unique way that currently no-one else can match, as opposed to their licenses with the major labels or their app. A partnership would ideally be with a platform with a significant user base to open up MVR content to the masses, then out pours the rest of the library and live shows, the labels start to get a share of incremental revenue that is tangible and interesting to them, and it becomes self fulfilling.

Facebook have the licenses with the labels/publishers but no means to create the same content (not to say they couldn’t go down that road in developing similar camera tech) and their ambitions in music, video and VR make it seem a perfect fit. If MVR go it alone without a partner like FB, they're taking a huge gamble - is the content/app/idea compelling enough to pull in a huge user base on its own, or do they need the help of a partner to ignite the awareness and bring the true value to what they're doing.

Great comments LowiePete. I did think a FB acquisition or majority stake was unlikely as they are, like you say, not a publisher and steer clear of creating content to distribute on their own platforms. That said, you could argue the BeatSaber acquisition, although different to the type of content produced by MVR, was surprising as it's the first higher profile instance of Facebook entering the content creator world, albeit in gaming and restricted to Oculus.

I'm not going to pretend i'm savvy with US publisher laws and may be missing the point but do understand that FB, same as other user generated content platforms the likes of YouTube, were able to shirk responsibility for any unlicensed/infringing content that ended up on FB/IG via mostly video posts under the DMCA Safe Harbor provided rights holders could take that content down if it was found. In recent years and specifically in music, their licenses with record labels and music publishers means that any such content is no longer infringing, and development of rights management tools shows they are moving away from the position of being 'unaware' what content is being uploaded to their platform, and taking the responsibility to pro-actively license or block/control it. Were they to own MVR content and publish it across FB/IG/Oculus, it wouldn't, to my understanding, be any different to MVR doing just that over the last year with Liam Payne and Wireless.

I don't get the feeling that AM + SH will sell, but Facebook feels to me like the most fitting partner. The interest from Mark so early, the current status of Facebook's music strategy which would be completed by a 'streaming' platform such as MVR, funnelling more users in VR...I was as sceptical as you but can't rule out FB in my head just yet.

Why, because they linked @ YouTube in their tweet?

Tenuous.

Well said lowiepete - that's the reality of this company.

Optimist and Themis are spouting unfounded nonsense and it doesn't need me or anyone else to point that out.

@potty.mouth - wind your neck in you little brat.

Optimist - whilst what you say does not surprise me, coming from you - you've been here long enough to perhaps see that EVRH are not just jumping on the VR bandwagon, they've been pulling it for years. They're making smart decisions, rationally led, not rushing to please people like you who wanted MVR to launch full-steam over a year ago to certain failure.

When the bandwagon reaches the top, EVRH have set the foundations to prevent a fall and are ready to ascend into full-scale operations and offering.

Blood hell bunsen, wise insights there! Up and down eh!

"You can always rely on him to do or not do the right thing..."

Eh? You're waffling again optimist.

No, undoubtedly not forever, but i'm sure Oculus see the value in an exclusive partnership should EVRH carry out launch events with global superstars, and similarly EVRH need the FB $$$ right now.

I'm not so sure about other platforms - if I were Oculus i'd want to keep an exclusive relationship throughout the early stages of EVRH

Do you really think that?

what would the significance be?

Yes! Finally on Android. Hopefully more news on Wireless and the VR viewer soon!

How does that mean that MVR have missed the boat?

That's the first generation of Oculus devices now out, complete. You think they RNS'd about working on an app for the second generation? Rubbish.

Great finds Cunir!

Just goes to show what's possible with their app - it's exactly what the artists and labels are looking for in further abilities to engage with fans and tell a story.

For anyone still questioning it - they stated they are building a new version of the app for a 'forthcoming' Oculus device. FB have today completed their first generation of products - the Go, Quest and Rifts. If it's another device i'd be very surprised.

https://www.roadtovr.com/facebook-ceo-mark-zuckerberg-oculus-quest-completes-companys-first-gen-lineup/

Whether MVR have built the new version of the app in time to be available at launch is the question. They had a relationship with FB early on and received funding for the app update - one would hope they were given plenty of lead time and support in the app development. Hopefully that's answered in an RNS very soon though.

https://www.billboard.com/articles/business/8508771/facebook-music-strategy-licensing-content-rights-streaming

FB is cementing a relationship with all the stakeholders in the music industry, tangibly, through license deals and providing an incremental revenue stream for all involved. Music is a strong driver for mass-market product adoption and with FB aiming to accelerate growth and dominate market share in XR (AR, VR and mixed reality) as the next major computing platform, they will be incentivised to see their partners perform and contribute in their own way. Still confident and positive.

https://www.roadtovr.com/report-zuckerberg-email-facebooks-xr-strategy-goal-unity/

is that based on fact horse.mouth? Sad to read your messages.