BMB 515 Module 10 Final Project Example

Strategic Plan, 2026-2028

[Student Name]

Southern New Hampshire University

BMB 515: Music Business Structure and Strategies

Final Project

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

The organization, setting and figures below are a composite written as a model document. No real employer, client, colleague or patient is described.

Strategic Plan, 2026-2028

Executive Summary

Fourteen roots artists, roughly 900 masters, 1,300 songs under administration and $6.8 million of annual sales make this Austin company a respected name in its field. Its model works but is fragile: most income arrives through three streaming services, two artists account for 44 percent of sales and the business keeps about a nickel of each dollar as operating profit. This plan sets four objectives for 2028 and five initiatives to reach them: registering for neighboring rights, building a sync licensing function, launching a membership program, acquiring two small catalogs and developing artists at lower cost. If the base case holds, the company ends 2028 with sales near $7.8 million and roughly $465,000 of operating profit. The plan keeps a $600,000 cash reserve and sets conditions under which the catalog purchase is delayed.

Mission

The company exists to record, publish and champion artists in American roots music, to give them the funding and services they cannot easily provide for themselves, and to leave their touring income and creative control with them. The mission rules out two paths that others in the industry take: multiple-rights deals that take a share of live income, and licensing artists' music for uses they have refused. Osterwalder and Pigneur (2010) describe how a value proposition must be clear to every customer group, and for this company that includes the artists who choose it.

Situation Analysis

SWOT summary

The industry's shift toward access and platform power (Wikström, 2020) explains why the company's largest weakness and largest threat both concern streaming services it cannot control.

Objectives for 2028

First, raise licensing income from 9 percent to 15 percent of revenue. Second, reduce the share of revenue from the two leading artists from 44 percent to no more than 35 percent. Third, reduce the three main streaming services' share of total revenue from about 47 percent to about 41 percent. Fourth, raise operating income to at least $450,000 while keeping a cash reserve of $600,000.

Initiatives, Owners and Dates

Initiatives and responsibilities

Implementation Schedule

The first half of 2026 starts the low-cost, high-certainty work: hiring the neighboring rights administrator, auditing registrations and recruiting the sync manager. The second half of 2026 launches the membership program, signs the first developing artist and begins renewal talks with the lead artist. The first half of 2027 completes due diligence on the two catalogs and seeks financing. The second half of 2027 completes the purchases, provided the decision rule below is met, and signs a second developing artist. 2028 is for consolidation and review.

The schedule deliberately avoids launching two staff-heavy initiatives in the same half-year. The membership program and the catalog due diligence both draw on the same small marketing and finance team, so they are a year apart. The head of publishing, who will oversee neighboring rights, is also the person who clears sync licenses, which is why the sync manager is hired early: to take routine licensing work off a key person before the catalog purchases add more songs to administer.

Financial Plan

In the base case, revenue grows from $6.8 million to about $7.8 million and operating income from about $340,000 to about $465,000, after a dip to about $260,000 in 2026 as costs lead revenue. In the downside case, where the lead artist leaves and streaming income falls 5 percent, operating income in 2028 is about $20,000 and the company loses about $70,000 after loan interest. The plan therefore keeps a cash reserve of $600,000 throughout and finances the catalog purchase only under the conditions below. The reserve equals about one month of total costs and many times the downside case's annual pretax loss, enough to keep the company paying artists and staff on time while it adjusts. Teece (2010) argues that a model must capture value, not only create it, and the plan's emphasis on owned rights and direct sales is meant to keep more of each dollar.

Measures and Decision Points

The founders will review six measures each quarter: licensing income and placements, the leading artists' share of revenue, the three services' share of revenue, membership numbers, neighboring rights receipts and cash on hand. Two decision points are set in advance. If the lead artist has not renewed or agreed terms by June 2027, the catalog purchase is delayed a year. If the sync manager has not produced at least $150,000 of new licensing income within twelve months of starting, the role is restructured on a commission basis. Each measure has a named owner who reports it, and the founders will meet the lender twice a year with the same dashboard, which builds the credibility needed for future catalog financing.

What the Company Will Not Do

The plan rules out several options the founders considered. It will not take a share of artists' touring or merchandise sold at shows, because that independence is a key reason artists sign. It will not expand into new genres such as pop or hip-hop, where competition for artists and playlist attention is far greater and the company has no reputation. And it will not open a second office, since the gains from a Nashville presence are better achieved by the sync manager's relationships than by fixed costs.

Conclusion

The plan keeps what makes the company distinctive, its ownership of masters and publishing and its respect for artists' independence, and uses those strengths to reduce its dependence on a few platforms and two artists. Its objectives are measurable, its initiatives have owners and dates, and its decision points protect the company if the main risks arrive.

References

Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2010). Business model generation: A handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers. Wiley.

Teece, D. J. (2010). Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long Range Planning, 43(2-3), 172-194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2009.07.003

Wikström, P. (2020). The music industry: Music in the cloud (3rd ed.). Polity Press.