Do you think an agency should always give the best treatment/management to their most successful acts?

You either invest on ur most successful acts or your youngest acts that have plenty of years in the future to get return investment

Quote from Armedryu

You either invest on ur most successful acts or your youngest acts that have plenty of years in the future to get return investment

This. It's one thing to not spend ALL the money on an act that's been around for a while and just doesn't have a big enough fanbase to get that return on investment. But they should invest enough to give their artists a chance to succeed first.

Quote from centen

This. It's one thing to not spend ALL the money on an act that's been around for a while and just doesn't have a big enough fanbase to get that return on investment. But they should invest enough to give their artists a chance to succeed first.

If the scenario were Twice not going to renew their contracts in JYP. JYPE would rather invest on NMIXX which have 6-7 years in their lifespan than Twice who had just finished their world tour and only have less than half a year before their contracts are expiring. For example

Quote from alexS

At least I know I can swear at DIV3 for being stupid with Twice and DIV4 for being stupid with NMixx.

The worst div in JYP is Div 2 by far it's not even close. GOT7 ran away from this company for a reason.

Groups should get the bare minimum agreed upon in their contracts if that's how it works.

Anything more I guess it's up to capitalism.

Imagine if SM stopped caring about RV and put all the dough only on Aespa.

In kpop success and how long it lasts is very unpredictable. If a company isn't willing to put the effort on a group why even bother to keep them?

Plus not everything is number and charting.

LSM called Key up to thank him bc him as a person make people view SM more favorably. He might not pull the best numbers among SM solos, but he is sure AF the most talked about in SK.

The fact that this anthem was paid dust is a crime

well I expect a rookie group should get decent amount of support by the company at the start of their career but I wouldn't expect a company to go all out on them.

then at around 3 to 4 years in, companies should go all out on that group to make that group reach it's full potential

after 6 years in, companies can slow down a bit and listen to their groups opinions and directions when it comes to music and concept, give more creative freedom to the group, compromise with individual schedules and such

if you talking about quality of music then it should be equal

treatment and management should also be equal

quality of content should be consistent

amount of album releases is dependent on the group, a rookie group would most probably go for multiple singles or mini albums in the first two years.

a 3 to 4 year old group would want to go for full album if haven't done so already

it's to prepare for concerts and tours you see

and 6 plus year group can go for releasing once per year or even longer

Individual identity is the best

An agency should be able to read the room & promote their acts according to their strengths for the best results

YG is incompetent.

No, only blinks think that.

Everyone should get fair treatment, both older groups and newer groups. But if company wants to invest in their newer groups more then that's understandable as well, though that doesn't mean they can neglect their older groups. If you have no intention in supporting your older groups then you should just let them leave the company.

when blackpink is under your company, yes

I mean, in the end, Kpop's a business. A business made to make money, obviously.

On a personal note, I'd want Agencies to treat all members equally and fairly.

But as a shareholder, i'd want that Agency to generate profits for me and that may very well include pushing the most successful acts forwards to make it happen!

It's a double-edged sword, really. One that undermines certain members at time, it's sad.

Of course

Quote from Minazuki

BLACKPINK is a special case to me, because I just want them to be treated fairly, I don't even care if It's worse than other groups or equal atp, If they were receiving what they deserve.

Same, if they gave bp 1 album a year which is still little for kpop standards trust me I wouldn't even complain if ikon, winner and treasure were getting @@@67f3ac19-1fdd-4b3a-b1a4-adc6d2bdb286@@@ songs albums every 4 months. Yes it would not be equal but we would be getting SOMETHING

yes, no point throwing away money at dead weight

I think it should be equal once the groups establish

newer groups really needs a stronger push from the agency in their early years than the older groups because they might represent the company's future one day so I understand when agencies do that, but they can't "sabotage" their older groups for that to happen tho

Yes, but they don't always.

treat them equally

Quote from Minazuki

This thread is not a criticism, It's just that I've been reflecting about it and I noticed It's how a lot of K-pop stans think.

Are you like that? Do you think the most successful act in an agency should receive the best treatment/management, the best promotions, the most high-quality content, the biggest amount of releases?

Do you think all acts should be treated equally?

Or do you think an agency should invest more in the newer/less successful acts to give them bigger opportunies to grow that other acts might not be needing?

Display More

They probably make market analyses of the probability of an act making it or not and whether it's worth to still invest in, but I can see why any profit-driven company wouldn't want to waste money in the long-run on a non-profitable project. In the end, it's business, not charity.

Yes

But in many companies the decision is made by the owner's whims, since the owner wants to show that he is correct.