Paying for features (worth the investment?)

callofdevoid

New member
Waddup doe,

Do you think it is smart business decision to pay for features or to create a whole album solely with featured artists? I see this happen quite frequently and find it to be a very expedient way to get your name and production out to a wide audience. The artists who immediately spring to mind when considering this strategy of self-marketing are Statik Selektah, Dela, and JR&PH7. It is difficult to know whether any of these producers paid for their features, but I feel safe in making the assumption that a disbursement of funds was surely included to varying degrees (although I would also safely assume that Staik Selektah now works without this provisional transaction in place). But Dela and JR &PH7 both had virtually no notoriety prior to their lengthy collaborations with a host of various well-regarded artists. Granted, I find both Dela and JR&PH7 to boast high quality production, but I find it also highly unlikely that artists such as Guilty Simpson, Skyzoo, Ed O.G., Large Pro, and Elzhi (to name a few) would be willing to work with relatively unknown artists free of charge. I cannot fathom how much it cost JR&PH7 to put together the selection of features on their second album, "The Good Life", but I imagine it may have cost easily over 5 figures, if not 6 with their first release included. To a lesser extent, is a such a decision smart? Perhaps acquring a feature or two for under a G? From a marketing standpoint, is there any downside to the branding of the producers involved? If a producer with genuine talent (not myself, but one I work closely with) is struggling to break into the industry, would venturing down this path be a smart option worth considering? Can one, hypothesizing that the production and collaboration are received well, then go on to break from this feature-based mode and attract an audience detached from the feature-based mode that first reeled the artists and listeners in? I cannot see how, if choosing artists wisely, one cannot attract attention to himself, merely based on the fact that he is working with artists who have cultivated a following and carnivorous fan base that seeks out all related releases. The question is whether this is a solid jumping off point for a producer, or at the very least, one solid avenue to venture down in acquiring notoriety and a following of one's own. Thoughts on this matter would be greatly appreciated, especially those with experience. Thank you.
 
Last edited:
I'm going to answer one of your questions which is:

"Is such a decision [to invest heavily in features for your next album] smart?"

It's a simple answer. It all depends. Will it work for you? It worked for some, it wasn't as effective for others.

Features work if they actually add to the albums marketability. By this I mean, if you are unknown to an artists set of fans but they match your target market, then getting that artist to feature is a good move as it makes you more visible to those fans.

I think Marco Polo is a great example of using features to gain momentum with his career. I wouldn't necessarily say Statik is as impressive. But that's the opinion I hold.

Hope I've helped,
Jordan
 
Last edited:
The definition of an investment is... to spend money with hopes of making back what you spent AND SOME PROFIT.
This profit can be monetary, some profits are priceless (LEARNING how to work with different artist, LEARNING new tricks, the fun, meeting new connects)
If you're not going to profit, don't spend.
 
The definition of an investment is... to spend money with hopes of making back what you spent AND SOME PROFIT.
This profit can be monetary, some profits are priceless (LEARNING how to work with different artist, LEARNING new tricks, the fun, meeting new connects)
If you're not going to profit, don't spend.

Agreed 100%. Don't only use monetary measurements for the profit of your investment. The networking and skills learned from working with other artists can be worth more than a few bucks
 
Back
Top