JPF Home Page Forums General Messages Songwriter Message Forum Clive Davis urges singers to stop writing songs

Sometimes, the writer is the best singer and player for their song. Look at Stevie Wonder, Todd Rundgren, Lennon/McCartney, Hank Williams, Gordon Lightfoot, Mose Allison, Tom Waits, etc. etc. I am hard pressed to think of anyone covering their songs better as singers or even musicians. Just a thought.

Clive was not trying to be a prophet, he didn't "mean this? and "say that", he is not talking about anything else.

He was stating a fact - SINGERS ONLY do not write the best songs, never did, still don't... probably never will.

Unless those "singers" are in BANDS and that's NOT what he was talking about at all.

Nothing else to really learn here so maybe this thread will go back to the stockpiles for the second time

I think you could make the case for the opposite too. If the songwriter can write, record, perform & produce, the overall expression of music can be closer to the musical vision of the originator. Im not saying this is always desireable, or all good in commercial contexts - but if music is an expression, it certainly is fulfilling for the writer/musician/producer..

The money talk is not all, we have to enjoy ourselves as well, and there ARE other motivations for doing music.

I think Clive was commenting on an individual singer who he knew could not write songs and he knew that from a biz POV these self written below par songs would bomb.
Sadly the record companies whilst still just about able to make money have all but lost the art of making decent records and finding top performers.
The DIY digital age has shown us all that just about anybody can write perform and record a song up to a decent standard just as good as the record cos. and in a lot of cases better than the record labels. So at the end of the day we know that a lot of us can do the job as good if not better. So it is just down to getting the backing, hype and exposure that the labels can give that separates us from them. The diff between them and us is not talent but money and backing.
I have never been booed off stage but Whitney has.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/showb...-we-have-a-problem-with-whitney-again.do
LOL

I'm not sure I would put Whitney in that class. She should stay away (retired) until and if she can even regain any of her former greatness. Drugs and Bobby Brown ruined that girl, and she let it happen.

But do you truthfully and honestly think that the difference between yourself and Whitney Houston was money and backing?

Just take a look at the pic...there is no diff between me and Whitney. LOL I was just having a bit of fun there.

That said I feel that myself and many others in obscurity who have not made it are just as, if not more, talented than many folk who have huge fame, fortune and chart success behind them.

I am not saying that we are so great more like they are so mediocre in comparison to what SHOULD be there.

The reasons for their success and our failure are complex but basically all boils down to a public who have a poor taste and education in music and an industry who find the common denominator and are reluctant to venture away from the usual churned out pop songs and disposable pretty boy and girl clones they manufacture.

Out there folks are also clamoring for some songwriters to stop singing.

Kevin

We can't have songwriters playing electric guitars either, can we!!!

Shhhh....Miss Boyle is trying to write.

If I had lots of money and wanted to build a custom dream home, I would look for the best person I could get to draw up the plans, the best firm to build the best foundation I could get, the best carpenter to build the house, the best plummer to put in the plumming, the best electrician to wire my house,the best interior painter and decorator I could get, and the best landscaper to do my lawn. I would have something well built that I would have no trouble selling at a high price. I could go to a general contractor who could supply most, if not all those things, but would I be getting the best that was available, would corners be cut to increase profit levels.

That is what is happening in the music industry. The best singers are not being used, the best songs are not being used, cutting corners to increase the bottom line profit, but they are not getting the best return on their investment, they either have to cut their prices to sell the quanity needed to produce a profit,or they have to further cut cost to make a profit,I.E. less songs on a CD. People don't mind paying a little extra to get quality, but will not buy an inferiour product, even if the price is low. If you put out CDs with six to eight top quality songs for $20.00, people will buy, but if you put out 12 songs with only one or two top songs and the rest poor songs for $15.00, they will not buy, they will download the one or two that they like off the net, even if they have to pay a couple dollars a song.

Staff writers give publishers a steady built in supply of songs, but how many are great songs, the poor songs cost just as much to write as the great ones, that is why so many fillers are put on a CD with one or two top songs, they get the same mechanical royalties as the great songs when CDs sell. I don't think publishers should have staff writers, open up to the public and screen songs to find the few gems amongst a lot of crap, thats the way diamond miners do it, search through a lot of clay to find those valuable stones.

All--

Everyone knows that change is the only thing in BIZ that stays the same--Competition is fierce in a declining economy--It doesn't matter, whether it's MUSIC or building AUTOS--Trade secrets, technology, insight, and insider information all play a part in who or what is successful.

Money is the bottom line in BIZ--Music has taken it's share of HITS and MISSES.

Integrated in with success of BIZ, is GREED, always an element to consider, and a reason behind, the direction Labels have decided to go. Until another Garth or Beatles comes along, BIZ will go with the LAW OF DEMINISHING RETURNS--AND WHAT EVER IT TAKES TO SURVIVE. Writers, Artists, Labels, and All others in the Industry, have to work harder to be on the winning team. If they aren't on that team THEY WILL HAVE TO TRY HARDER AS AVIS used to advertise.

I am 72 now, and have watched my share of BUSINESSES come and go. The competitive edge, is WHAT IT"S ALL ABOUT--what has always helped, IS CREATIVITY--Take that away and a BIZ will stumble and fall.

Some of the Greatest Businesses, in the history of our Great Country, have always
believed in INCENTIVE PROGRAMS for all in the COMPANY--IE: KODAK, 3M, LINCOLN ELECTRIC, MOTOROLA and many others--RCA is the only one that comes to mind, associated with MUSIC BIZ--that doesn't say much.

We may just be in the wrong BIZ--

Mackie

Amen Brother Marc!

Success in the music buisness....so what is it? That's the question. The fact that you are on the beach writing songs and playing those songs to attentive listeners for 3.5 hours and getting paid tells me one thing: You're living the dream. What else is there? Sure, more money, more fame, more whatever. But no matter how much we have we always want more.

They just did this big study. They asked people who make $25,000 a year how much they'd need to be happy. They said (after averaging) $50,000. They asked people who make $75,000 a year what they'd need to be happy. They said $150,000. They asked people who made $250,000 a year how much THEY'D need and they said $500,000. See a pattern developing here? We all make half as much as we'd like, so we're all destined to live life feeling like we don't have enough. There, that's that. (If they'd asked me I'd have said $20 million and i sure as hell didn't make 10 million last year, but I digress....)

I say do what you love and love what you do. That's why I put out a CD last month that's called 'me being me'. Not 'me being Nashville', or 'me trying to make a hit record', or 'me trying to satisfy industry reps' or 'me trying to get a cut'. It's about sharing my favorite songs that I've written in Hashville with the world and finding out that there are some people out there who actually like some of those songs. Some even used the word 'love'!(ok, so what if one of them was my old college girlfriend?) I guess I made damn sure it wouldn't be 'commercially successful' by putting 4 instrunentals on the thing... Why? Because I LOVE those 4 instrumentals, that's why!

Hey, I just put out a CD that I love and there are some people out there that say they really dig it and some that are actually BUYING it! So what else is there? Next months mortgage payment? Of course. But I'd need that even if I WASN'T living the dream. So I figure given the choice....

Bill

www.writethismusic.com

www.myspace.com/billrenfrew

Check out my latest CD on www.cdbaby.com/billrenfrew

Also, check out my new blog, "D/B/A Songwriters" which starts Friday on www.americansongwriter.com.

I'd take Clive Davis' sage advise with a grain of salt. This is the man who, when rejecting the "Bat Out of Hell" project, told Meat Loaf that "actors don't make records" and questioned Jim Steinman's writing abilities and knowledge of rock music.

Bat Out of Hell has sold more than 43 million copies and still sells over 200,000 copies a year.

Kevin,

That is exactly right. No one is one hundred percent right all the time. Clive has hit more times than he has missed and he is an amazing legend and should be listened to, but you do take it all with a grain of salt. And it is like this in many things.

There is a friend of mine who is the number one song plugger in Nashville. He has had HUGE hits and really knows his stuff. And he has gotten a lot of experience.

When he first started dealing with music, he had a job at Buckhorn music. His main job was to go through the songs of Kris Kristofferson, to update the catalogue and get songs ready to pitch. He say's, "Everybody knows Kris from about five or six amazingly huge songs. But Kris wrote some ABSOLUTE DOGS! There were a LOT of Monday morning hungover songs, a lot of songs that went no where, a lot of "I'm pissed at the world because "I want to be an actor songs."

So you take the good with the bad and always hope your law of averages catch up with you.

I understand Mr. Davis's sentiments. Just don't know that it really is going to work in this day and age.

MAB

Kev he has turned down lots of people, but has signed many. While the Meatloaf album was brilliant especially with Todd Rundgren involved, I could see how he or a label might be skeptical. t was very different, like later on "The Rocky Horror Picture Show" was different. But that sold...
Regardless of the theatrics of the 1st Meatloaf album, which is what Clive was picking up, it sounded "theater" to him. Not like Bruce or Steely Dan or Janis Joplin that he signed earlier on.

What he probably didn't catch right was "Two Out Of Three" which is a hit no matter how you slice it or who does it. He wasn't thinking about "Air Supply" who he had signed and also is credited for co-writing That means he must have made a lot of suggestions. He did that!
When something is so so different it can also get overlooked.

I agree with Marc completely in that anyone can miss something. My friend and collaborator Mike Appel passed on John Cougar.

Only with what Clive said here is 100% TRUE it's "too bad" it will not work in this day & age. Again ALL day & night long "singers" do not make the best writers, or the best producers, and in most cases not the best musicians. Naturally if they DON'T really play,singers with mic only in hand, which is EXACTLY what Clive is talking about. "Kelly Clarkson"

Clive is a "real record" guy, one of the last.

While what I posted above is completely true, the tone in which it was meant didn't come across as intended. I just find it amusing that someone as knowledgeable as Mr Davis can get it wrong, showing that he is human just like all of the rest of us. Rest assured, Clive Davis knows a LOT more about the music industry than I do.

Agreed. A good song is a good song no matter the source.

Steve,

This is true.But unfortunately, there are enormous amounts of "good songs." So they never make it through the pile of good songs out there. So they remain "good songs" in many writer's living rooms. The industry is looking for "Great songs." And if the quality between what the artist or industry themselves can write, and outsiders writing the same "good songs", they are never going to take an outsiders songs over their own or that of their friends.

Many people often ask what the "industry is looking for." The answer is "Nothing." The industry is looking for something BETTER than what they already have.

"Good" songs simply don't factor in to the discussion.

MAB

For the first time in a long time I had a chance to listen to some country songs on TV, many I had not heard before, and though I heard a few (very few) good songs, I heard nothing that I would call a great song. Nothing that I would say "I wish I had written that". Most of the artist I did not know at all, I guess this is the singer/songwriters that the labels are signing. Good luck to them.

Everett,

We all judge things by our backgrounds and own tastes. The chances are that your taste is different than those in the mainstream now, the same as the tastes of people before your day were not in the mainstream of yours. Also you are probably getting a very small selection of what is out there. Again there are 30 million artists out there, so listening to just a few songs even those that are on the charts are a VERY small sample.

MAB

Agreed, but these are suppose to be the best of the best, They were good singers and good songs but not great, which you'd expect from the top of the heap.

It's not at ALL about the best songs.. it's about the most commercially viable songs. Think of it this way: McDonalds isn't the best food available, but it's the most commercially viable food.

Radio chooses the songs least likely to get someone to change the station before the next commercial break. They will choose a song that tests less favorably than another all day long as long as the one they choose keeps more people tuned in. And these songs that you may not be impressed much with often grow on you quickly once you've heard them in heavy rotation.

Brian

Good comments Brian. That is exactly right.

Everette, music has NEVER been that way. There are always more Marcarena's than Let It Be's. It has never been about the best songs or artists. Which is why often artists, songs, etc. don't even catch on until people are dead. Hendrix, Joplin, Buddy Holly, people that now are considered Icons, as well as songs that are the things every one points to as inspirational, often fell flat in the times they were out.

Think back throughout history. Mozart, Van Gogh, great artists died broke, with no one every knowing about them or at least supporting their art until long after they were gone.

I think writers tend to look at everything through their own prism. And as I said, this is also generational. If you think back to your early years, I am sure you music had the exact same detractors and comments are you are making on today's music. It is always that way.

So allegedly "this is supposed to be about the best.." never is. Never has been and never will be.

MAB

This is so way off base Marc and putting something into a one perspective way. I think what you mean is it has always been "partly" that way and off balance at times perhaps,but really.

WHAT has never been about the bets songs or artists? Music or the music business?

So ALL of Motown for all those years was never about the best?

Let it Be? The Stones - The Who & Zeppelin alone even without the Beatles were ALL out at the same time making incredible music
and setting the standard for what great music is all about.
And they SOLD more and longer than anybody, then the live venue work was massive. Then along with them a large amount of groups and artists that were not only massively successful and hugely popular but also GREAT in every musical regard. Such as The Eagles" etc...

As far as RADIO and AM Radio types a pop star like Elton John was not only played because he was made POPULAR like Leif Garret was.. He was THE BEST! The best or right next to the best then and better than EVERYONE now.

So when we listened to the radio and in ONE DAY in a row we heard, Elton John, Billy Joel, Queen, Sly Stone, The Allman Brothers, Stevie Wonder, Carol King, The Eagles, The Stones, Marvin Gaye, Chicago, Earth Wind And Fire, The Bee Gee's, Paul Simon, ALL IN A ROW.
We were not hearing The Best? Of course we were.

Or we thought we were but they were only melted in our minds because of radio rotation? I don't think so.
I didn't have to hear Bohemian Rhapsody or "Sir Duke" or "Saturday In The Park" twice to know I was hearing GREAT music.
Or was it back when Swing Music dominated popular music?
Like after Benny Goodman's GREAT band was on the radio, the other musicians of the time kinda sucked? lol Don't think so..

Or are you only referring to the "One Hit Wonders" that were always mixed into the mix on the charts and radio, I think that's what your referring to.
Ya know, "The Night Chicago Died" "Seasons In The Sun" "Billy Don't Be A Hero" "Lights Went Out In Georgia" and the countless other songs like them. Good tunes by the way all with good lyric/stories But not quite "Piano Man" and his countless other gems. But hey at least THEY were trying. even the cheesier songs knew they needed to be solid songs to compete wit the greats I mentioned.

Great music is where you find it.. And Rock did not die with Buddy Holly or Jimi Hendrix. It's demise started with the girl/man hair band stuff of the later 1980's
Then with the rise of hip hop and rap as the dominant popular music on this planet. Even very very good bands and very very good PURE artists from the early 90's could not stop that..

Many artists NOW should have been "one hit wonders" but instead they are kept around and have ten year plus careers.
The biggest difference now is simply one thing besides "it's all been done before" The RADIO industry, theeee chart and the internet and most media forces a TYPE of music on you. They are not giving you a choice. There is NO "Dueling Banjo's playing right after "Lil Wayne" on the same station.

Yes I know it's ALL OVER but don't think or say it never was.

Hope you are well and doing good over there with all the troubles to the area. Your a good Nashville mentor my friend and I only hope I can get out there one day take your tour and hang.
Me I'm just sick all the time & VERY passionate lol
But I'm trying HARD!

Mike,

One hit wonders are EXACTLY what I am talking about. There are always more "Marcerana's" than "Let it Be's". I remember the 60's and 70's and there was ALWAYS fluff. There were always mindless love songs, Flying Purple People Eaters, The Night Chigago Died, whatever.

Songs are always remembered more fondly than they often were. that is not to dis the great ones. Those do come out. But if you study charts you will always find more fluff than those huge hits we hear in every movie and classic radio.

There are no bigger fans of Motown than me, and I am the first to talk about how great they were. But do you know that Motown actually had to have four separate labels because the charts would allow one record company only three slots in the top 40?

And as far a "choice" isn't that what the internet is all about?
You know that now you are more likely to hear about a new song when some friend sends you a personal e-mail or MP3 than you are to find it on radio? That is the current business model.

MAB

Anybody can write a song. Damn few can write a good song. And even fewer can ever write a great song.

I like what MAB said about all the bellyaching and moaning about the business: "Do what you do and do it the best you can. Can't do much about anything else."

I'm going to try and write one more good song. To hell with the rest of it.

I'd take it a step further than e-mails, even. Most teenagers and college kids I know are passing on new music and music videos through social media. If it's not on YouTube, MySpace or Facebook, it better be on sites like Pandora or Vevo.

Also, if I have this correct, Clive was wise and musically instinctual enough to insist Barry Manilow sing "Mandy" even though Barry wasn't interested. It became Barry's first hit single.

Here's the link for enjoyment.
Lyrics: Scott English
Music: Richard Kerr
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uoGcH2L68Mg

The point Clive made to use the best ingredients makes perfect sense. Ask any chef

My understanding is that greed and ego drive the performer to obtain writing\publishing credits etc when they can. But that is so delusional.

Here's the economic fact

Lets say the outside writers (would have) earned 50 cents per cd as royalties.

If the difference that causes is 750k units vs 11 million sold, yup, the performer gets an additional $375,000 as a writer, and strokes his ego, and gets the credit, but has lost out on their own "normal royalties" on an additional 10,250,000 units.

IF the song's a hit, there's lots of money to go around. I guess that because it does not come around often enough, there's lots of folks wanting to tear a chunk off for themselves when it does, no matter what the damage

here's the link to the video for this
http://www.urbandevelopment.co.uk/u...views/advice-clive-davis-songwriting_419

I still believe in the power of a great song, it can come into your ear and whop you up side of your head so bad you can't do nothing but play it over and over. Seems there's a lot of things on the air these days that I don't consider great, and maybe only one out of every ten thousand is great anyway. They all took somebody writing them, working them, getting them out there somehow, some way. Hats off to all of the effort it takes to get one cut and out there. The great songs Clive Davis speaks of are those one in ten thousand that grab the sh*t out of you. Those make great artists more memorable, from his perspective, given the level of talent he works with, I think he's earned the right to consider his advice wisdom.

In this day and age, having an artist as a writer on the song is more than just a choice. It is survival. At around $2.5 million dollar cost to launch a major artist, if they are not in on the revenue streams of everything, they are not going to earn that money back.

And the songs that earn big money, (they are more likely to sell 11 thousand now, more than eleven million. They may be downloaded free ten million times, but the money collected is on the eleven thousand.

MAB

I'lll a remember that

Humm,
Actually I would advise Artists to write songs. Remember, that's write songs not Gar*age. Very few Artists ever wrote many Hits. Merle Haggard could write. Webb Pierce could not. Both are/were Major Stars. Some Artists don't need outside material. Most do. Why would you brew your own soup when you can go to a restraunt and get the best. Anyone need a few good songs?

I actually come at it from a different perspective. If you are an artist and have your emotions, your real life, break ups, falling in love, having children, going through the struggle of life, etc. whose emotions are you going to be attached to? Your own or that of someone else writing ABOUT your emotions, break ups, having children, going through the struggles of life?

Which one do you think will win out? Since songwriting is mostly about harnessing emotion and dealing with real life now, why would an artist take someone else's word for it or their own.

And writing "garbage" is very subjective. One man's trash is another man's treasure. The public usually is the one who decides.

MAB

You also have to factor in the change in the listening audience's habits. I've hit this theme before. In the Beatles era, you'd buy the LP, call your friends over, and sit around listening to the music -- reading the lyrics, discussing the meanings. It was a Big Event when the new Beatles, the new Billy Joel, the new Springsteen, was available at the record store. You'd have to make a special trip to get it.

But now you carry around in your pocket more music than you could listen to in a week, and you're always getting more. Music is constantly playing, in the car, while you're walking, while you're surfing the web. Music is no longer a special event for most people, it's this pile of stuff that keeps growing and is always in the background. It is only one track on their multitasking. Few people Sit And Listen To The Songs anymore.

They listen to one track instead of the whole album *because they can.* They listen to songs out of order *because they can.* They listen to songs from several different albums at once *because they can.* The album is less effective a concept now because most people don't deal with music in a physical form anymore -- they don't buy the THING (some do, older folks like me do, but it's a gradual and ongoing change). If you aren't picking up the object, with the artwork and liner notes, you're not thinking of it as an album.

I'd love to write songs for Frank Sinatra and Connie Francis, too. They're not still singing.

I once had the chance to pitch directly to Josh Groban's A&R rep and she had me write special material for her to show to him. That was right around the time he decided to write his own stuff. It would sure be nice if the business weren't changing this way, but it is. And it's going to become whatever it's going to become.

Most record companies will not let a good song or even a bad song get in the way of business and making a buck so if the artist is popular enough they are allowed to do their own thing and write their own songs albeit inferior to what proven songwriters would produce for them to sing. I listened the other day to the top 40 charts.........maybe we should go back to the bad old days when songs were songs and performers were performers. The best of both worlds were combined and used to produce great songs and musical performances rather than the drivel we here today.

Sadly you are right and it’s certainly not a special event in the way that it was. I think now the true magic moments will more likely occur in a live sense. I’m not necessarily talking about the major act live shows, it could be an open mic at your local or maybe some festival. The magic is still available; it just doesn’t come in a gatefold sleeve anymore.

Who can blame an artist for wanting songwriting royalties? It is one of the only ways he or she will be making any money after he has fallen out of favor. Unless you are at the top of the heap, most other streams of income for the artist are absorbed by record companies, LiveNation and other leeches. Songwriting royalties however can keep on arriving to fund your retirement if you have good, long-lasting songs.

Who can blame an artist for wanting songwriting royalties?
you can't, but SONGS are the star. Artists think they are, but if they release a CD filled with weak songs, the public votes with their dollars and sales suffer.

Songs must be amazing, incredible, timeless,
they need to move the masses to get off their a$$es to listen, BUY, and share.

Interesting all around.

I'm sick today and maybe a little off-kilter but here's something else that's bugged me actually about AI for all the years it's been on ---

SINCE it's pretty much the norm for new Artists to WRITE -

why on earth don't we have a couple of SONGWRITING WEEKS in the AI competitions? See who can write the best new songs.

Maybe it's a royalties etc issue all told, but it's something I have always felt these guys should also be competing with.

Jason Castro actually writes great material!! :-)

...Anyway I think part of the AI non-songwriter ALL cover songs deal is - making sure the public gets to hear known hits - and royalties/publishing rights etc.

But seriously......... I do watch and am interested in how Idol goes each season, but with the exception of Susan Boyle no new artist in the last however long has maintained a career singing JUST covers.

We want new stuff.

Why DON'T they test them during the season with "Brand New Material" week??


(whosever material it is.... )

Anyway OK I'm loopy, I hope that made sense.

Linda

sounds interesting

Linda,

They have tried the songwriter part on American Idol. It really did not work. People simply don't care about songwriting and the artists are not really able to focus on that aspect of the entertainment business.

There have been a couple of Nashville based songwriter reality shows and the ratings were hideous. Watching people sit around quietly while they write really forgettable songs does not really make for good television.

One thing you can be sure of. If you can come up with this idea, there are veritable dozens of teams of consultants, assistants, writers, directors, producers, advertisers, etc. that all come up with the exact ideas. They also film TONS of things, test market it and check it out LONG BEFORE anything comes to air.

So you have probably been beaten to the punch quite a bit and there is a REASON you don't hear any of that.

MAB

I had to laugh at the thought of AI contestants writing songs. I also laughed at Marc saying "the artists are not really able to focus on that aspect of the entertainment business" That is a polite way of saying that they suck at writing songs.
Most contestants can barely sing in tune and have little or no experience or talent actually playing music to any great standard never mind writing it. The powers that be churn out poor karaoke type cover versions knowing that to do anything else would make them look worse than they already are. You can hear as good in most bars any night of the week. I do not see the point of such third rate talent shows as Idol, X factor and Got Talent.

I wouldn't have said it exactly that way, but ol' Big Jim, you and I are pretty much exactly on the same page on this one. The fact is that it takes years to really develop the skills on any of this. Songwriting actually takes longer. So you are right, it is the Karaoke effect of American Idol. Pretty much why I have never and will never watch the show. I usually do view the results, top finalists, whatever, have never really been too impressed with any of them.

On this one Sir Jim, I wholeheartedly concur.

MAB

Carrie Underwood has done a few things in Nashville, right? Made believers at the awards show last year or so? Remember that night? Many called her performance stellar. And they went in not liking her singing the closer, until she sang. She evidently impressed many top pros there.

Not a bad top pick, I would say at the very least. If being honest, she is a solid talent with perfect pitch singing. (the times with no pitch control), if she uses it at all. ???

She and Jennifer Hudson have done well. About ten out of the top 100 or so finalists. The rest dissapear pretty quickly.

MAB

Does seem that the show's title doesn't mean the winner will actually be one. For just ten out of a hundred to be at or near the top of the charts sure doesn't speak well for that assumption of being an idol.

Johnny,

The other thing she did that was smart was go directly to country, as opposed to the others who have tried to swim in the world of rock. She had Nashville writers and songs which made her different than most of the rest of them. Clever marketing. And she shifted elements of the country market to her.

MAB