The post seems to assume that every artist's goal is to become a top-forty act - in which case, I agree, a deal with a major would be highly beneficial. But if your goal is to simply build a fan base and make a decent living, then I think it's realistic to do that without a deal.Hold on a secBut before you go ripping up that contract that’s sitting on your lap from EMI, make sure you look a little closer at the state of today’s unsigned play. Koopa made headlines around the world… but will anyone remember the music? And if we’re honest, they really made headlines because they were the first unsigned band to do it. Do you seriously think you will get the headlines if you’re the second band to do it? Or the third? And it must have been easier for them to persuade their loyal fanbase to buy the single with this historical outcome looming, and something that they could all be part of. (And the fact that they band got to that chart position by only shifting a relatively small number of ‘singles’ also points to a) the fact they didn’t make a lot out of it and b) what it takes to have a hit these days – all subjects for future rants believe me!)
I don't know much about Koopa's background, but it seems to me that they stand a much better chance at longevity not because they made the top-40 (in the UK), but because they've obviously figured out how to build a strong fanbase willing to spend money on their music. Playing almost 500 gigs in 3 years probably didn't hurt.
A band that signs with a major doesn't have to do much of the work that Koopa did themselves, (and still has no guarantee of a top-40 hit) so when they're eventually dropped, as most are, they'll be back to square one, trying to figure out how to keep the fans they got while their label was (hopefully) keeping them in the public eye.
Despite the fact that I'm right and he's wrong, there's a lot of good information on the site and it should be checked out thoroughly.
