Lady Gaga Case
Executive Summary
Lady Gaga burst onto the music scene in 2008, after being signed on by superstar producer Vincent Herbert of Streamline Records. Young, talented, all out glam rock diva - within her first year she snagged 3 awards at the VMAs. Her spectacular performance heralded the launch of her upcoming collaboration with rap sensation Kanye West – together, they would co-lead a 3 month long, high profile arena tour called the ‘Fame Kills’ tour.
The ‘Fame Kills’ tour was significant for several reasons. It was to be Gaga’s first performance as a co-lead, as opposed to the opening/supporting role she played for bigger stars such as the Pussy Cat Dolls and Natasha Beddingfield. In just a year, she had tied with Beyonce Knowles for the highest number of nominations at the VMAs, and the tour would further establish her as a serious performer with lead ability. Her second album was in development – the tour would provide an invaluable PR opportunity for its promotion. From the music industry perspective, live performances were becoming an increasing source of revenue for all players involved. Concert production, ticketing, and heavy promotion were already underway.
However, disaster struck at the VMAs when her collaborator Kanye West instigated a PR debacle onstage, witnessed by industry fellows and fans all over the world. The episode was severe enough to make him withdraw from the public eye and the tour concerts altogether, leaving Gaga and team with the tough decision of how to move forward.
With Kanye’s withdrawal, the question is on whether to continue as a solo lead, or scale down the scope of the concerts to smaller venues at fewer locations, or to cancel it altogether. What if Gaga decides to go full-scale, but fails to draw in the 20,000+ seating capacity? Her career is still fresh, and with a radical persona, her brand image is at a vulnerable juncture. If she cancels it altogether, how will Team Gaga’s $4 million investment be recouped? And by doing
Lady Gaga burst onto the music scene in 2008, after being signed on by superstar producer Vincent Herbert of Streamline Records. Young, talented, all out glam rock diva - within her first year she snagged 3 awards at the VMAs. Her spectacular performance heralded the launch of her upcoming collaboration with rap sensation Kanye West – together, they would co-lead a 3 month long, high profile arena tour called the ‘Fame Kills’ tour.
The ‘Fame Kills’ tour was significant for several reasons. It was to be Gaga’s first performance as a co-lead, as opposed to the opening/supporting role she played for bigger stars such as the Pussy Cat Dolls and Natasha Beddingfield. In just a year, she had tied with Beyonce Knowles for the highest number of nominations at the VMAs, and the tour would further establish her as a serious performer with lead ability. Her second album was in development – the tour would provide an invaluable PR opportunity for its promotion. From the music industry perspective, live performances were becoming an increasing source of revenue for all players involved. Concert production, ticketing, and heavy promotion were already underway.
However, disaster struck at the VMAs when her collaborator Kanye West instigated a PR debacle onstage, witnessed by industry fellows and fans all over the world. The episode was severe enough to make him withdraw from the public eye and the tour concerts altogether, leaving Gaga and team with the tough decision of how to move forward.
With Kanye’s withdrawal, the question is on whether to continue as a solo lead, or scale down the scope of the concerts to smaller venues at fewer locations, or to cancel it altogether. What if Gaga decides to go full-scale, but fails to draw in the 20,000+ seating capacity? Her career is still fresh, and with a radical persona, her brand image is at a vulnerable juncture. If she cancels it altogether, how will Team Gaga’s $4 million investment be recouped? And by doing