Bp Business Continuation Concepts: Fill & Download for Free

This is an issue that’s been hotly debated before. Perhaps not in quite the same terms, but simply enough, “Why doesn't YG allow BP to release music?” Here’s why:First of all, YG never planned for BP to become this big.When BP debuted, they brought a new sound to K-POP that hadn’t been used before. Boombayah and Whistle were both big hits in Korea and earned BP their first win at debut.Furthermore, when BP debuted, there was an opening in the market for a girl-crush group. 2NE1 was mostly inactive and since YG was known for a badass image and concept, everyone had high hopes for a new YG girl group that could take over girl crush from 2NE1.All these factors combined meant BP got big very fast.However, that wasn't something YG had planned for. While I can’t say for sure what YG’s initial plan for BP was, it’s highly likely he never meant to treat them like a regular girl group to begin with. YG probably planned to debut a new GG with the idea of using them as a cash cow, since Big Bang was not as active and 2NE1 all but disbanded. Seeing as how these two groups were YG’s big contribution to the Hallyu Wave, YG now had to look at his current artists. Groups make more than soloists or duos, so AKMU and Lee Hi are out straightaway. That leaves WINNER and IKON, both of whom do well, but not that well. Not as well as YG wanted, anyway.So what does he do? He takes advantage of the opening in the market and debuts a new girl crush group, fully intended to be a copy of 2NE1. The lineup (4 members), who gets which position, the member that’s pushed the most—all bear resemblance to 2NE1. Seriously, YG even marketed them as “the prettier 2NE1”. Gross. Anyway, BP was now on the scene.Because YG hadn’t planned for this level of success, he didn’t have content to put out for BP.After BP’s debut, they came back in November 2016 with “Square Two”. A few listeners began to notice the similarities in “Playing With Fire” to 2NE1’s sound. However, it was mostly ignored. BP then went on hiatus for about 7–8 months. All this time passed with little to no content from the members. This is highly unusual especially for a rookie group with only 4 songs.Why? YG didn’t have content. Starving fans for content is nothing new for YG. They’ve done it to all their artists. It’s partially because YG really only has one producer, Teddy Park. He’s the one that creates that “YG sound”. Teddy can’t produce all the music for 3 groups as well as all of YG’s other acts by himself. As a result, BP ends up getting shoved to the side.YG is also quite misogynistic.YG allows his boy groups, such as WINNER’s Mino and IKON’s B.I., to take part in the production fo their groups’ music. However, he does not allow that for BP, even when the girls have proven that they can write lyrics (they wrote some of the lyrics for Stay). Okay, so YG has no new music to give BP. Now what?YG uses old 2NE1 rejects.There was no new music YG either had or was willing to give BP. The girls sat for 8 months until they finally came back with “As If It’s Your Last” in June 2017.During this comeback, many more fans started to speak up about how familiar the song was. That’s because the song was originally written for 2NE1, and was an older sound that had been covered in 2014/2015. Meanwhile, BP was over here releasing this sound in 2017.If you want proof, look at Lisa’s English rap in the second verse. She says “you can bet it on black”. That line is significant because the name of 2NE1’s fandom was Blackjacks. So, that line makes much more sense if Minzy or CL were rapping it instead of Lisa. They didn’t even change the lyrics! I’m so heated.The pattern continues.This type of low-content structure would never have flown in second-gen K-POP, but BP had a devoted following from the beginning. As a result, YG realized pretty quickly—during that first hiatus—that he could starve fans for content and they would stream all of BP’s old music videos and dance practices just to have something to do.YG noticed the behavior of fans and decided to make this their marketing strategy for BP—or maybe this was their plan from the beginning. Drop content once a year, always very minimal (4 songs is not a mini-album YG, fight me) and fans would be so starved for content that they’d stream those videos and music like crazy. Even then, three of the four songs on the album are all old 2NE1 rejects, so all he has to do is come up with a new title track each time.If you don't believe me, go listen to “Forever Young” and “Don’t Know What To Do” and TELL ME THOSE DON’T SOUND LIKE 2014/2015 MUSIC. YG breaks records without really having to do any of the work. The rest of the year, he puts out no music-related content and instead has the girls star in CFs (or ads), modeling campaigns, solo photoshoots, endorsements, etc. Why? To set them up as influencers.The Instagram Agenda:Yeah, you heard me. YG wants to turn the girls into Instagram influencers. Why? Because comebacks and album sales don't actually make that much money for idols and companies (unless you’re BTS, I guess). Most money that idols and companies earn comes from CFs or ad campaigns.By sticking them in as many endorsements as he can and effectively marketing them all as solo influencers, YG has managed to turn BP into his cash cow. Don’t believe me? Why else would BP have gotten their own individual Instagram accounts less than two years after debut? Generally, that's a sign that a group is getting ready to split off into solo activities or disband completely. Since so much in K-POP is based around a group, the group in question will usually share one social media account, like TWICE on Insta or BTS on Twitter.BP getting individual accounts was no accident. It was so YG could market them as individuals rather than a group. That way, fans could feel like they were getting even closer to the girls themselves, almost like they could be just like them. BP was selling a fantasy, and fans were buying in. For more info on this, check out these videos by i-spy on Youtube:---So that's that. YG has created the perfect strategy for BP. He knows fans will eat up any content he gives them, so he gives them as little as he can. He never has to give BP a full album because he has no need for it. It doesn’t make him money. He is content making money off of BP and using it on anything BUT them. The sad part is that it works. From a business standpoint, it’s hugely successful. If I were him, I wouldn’t change a damn thing.Hope you enjoyed!

Hello, I'm a Blink and also was a korean citizen :)BLACKPINK is popular, but not actually as popular as a normal K-Pop fan would think. They're known in the general public due to being under the BIG 3 and having lots of “scandals”, but a lot of their public acknowledgment comes from their individual popularity, like Jennie's Chanel stuff or Lisa's chinese show mentoring. They don't have much in the way of group popularity because they rarely promote together as four.The way they are marketed is exclusivity, where they are made to seem untouchable and above things like grinding out albums and promoting on shows. So in the music scene, they arent terribly well versed or have much to give at all ( 13 songs over the past 4 years ). Because of the "elitism," people know about them but dont relate to their work or put much thought to a band that isnt reliably setting out music for consumers to enjoy.The elitism also brings in lots of international fans, who use self insert narratives to the four members, wishing they could be just like Rosé or Lisa ( lots of thinspo narratives ), and badass concept also brings lots of international attention, which in then fuels their youtube views. Because korean fans support their idols in other ways than YouTube, you'll see idols like Seventeen only having 30 million views on a title track but selling over 800,000 physical albums on the domestic market while Blackpink has like 1 billion views on a title track but it sells around 250,000. But because fans see stream views easier than counting album sales, they think " Oh they must be more popular “.For example, ( I hate comparing but I have to ) >>>BTS sales :BTS' Map of the Soul Persona debut in the US: 232k sales/No.1 on BB 200Then BLACKPINK sales :BP'S Kill This Love debut in the US: 18.4k sales/No. 24 on BB 200Of course, BLACKPINK is popular, but the arrogant elitist way they're being marketed by YG creates lots of discord among the public market, who wants idols to work hard and continuously show their efforts, like Red Velvet having three comebacks in a year while also juggling japanese album promotions.But according to a report by Soompi, all four BLACKPINK members made it to the Top 10 of this month's brand reputation rankings released by the Korean Business Research Institute.Claiming the top spot is Jennie, who scored a brand reputation index of 4,820,968. She more than doubled her score for the previous month by ranking high in keywords like YouTube, How You Like That, and Twitter. She also ranked high for the search terms surpass, release, and take on a challenge. Jennie also boasted of a 82.01 percent score in positive reactions.BLACKPINK's Lisa trailed Jennie at No. 2 as her brand reputation index shot up by 147.51 percent from the previous month. She ended up with a 3,468,433 for July.Jisoo secured the third position with a 3,310,960 index for July, improving her score from June by 92.70 percent. Rose did not stray too far behind because she also made it to the sixth position this month.This achievement came shortly after BLACKPINK also secured the top position for this month's brand reputation rankings for girl groups.Based on an analysis of consumer participation, media coverage, interaction, and community indexes from June 10 to July 11, BLACKPINK dominated the list by charting an impressive 89.56 percent positive reaction from fans.BLACKPINK also improved their score from June by 154.40 percent, as they scored a brand reputation index of 11,638,631.Not surprisingly, the top girl group from YG Entertainment-managed ranked high for the terms YouTube, hanbok, and Billboard. They also topped for search terms like record, achieve, and surpass.It can be recalled that following the release of their comeback after over a year of hiatus, BLACKPINK's How You Like That smashed YouTube viewing records for the biggest music video premiere, the fastest MV to reach 100 million views and the most number of views within 24 hours.The milestones were even recognized by the Guinness World Records, Billboard reported.How You Like That collected 86.3 million views within 24 hours of its release and managed to reach the 100 million views milestone within only 32 hours. BLACKPINK managed to unseat previous record-holders BTS, who held on the title for more than a year with Boy with Luv. They also dethroned BTS who held the honor for the biggest MV premiere when they released ON last February.I know internationally (where I live now) BLACKPINK is the most popular girl group ( without hesitation ) because of YouTube view hype and the socialite attraction, but in East Asian countries, girl groups who are continuously putting out music and shows and constantly touring are much more popular. TWICE is the number one girl group in Korea (and East Asia) leagues ahead of everyone else ( they're actually breaking records, get a good number of views and wins ), Red Velvet is second, Iz*One/Mamamoo is somewhere below them, and then maybe BLACKPINK ( when they promote once a year ), then GFRIEND or (G)I-DLE , and more.Most popular K-Pop group of 2020 ( BP is ranked as the most popular female group ) :I really try to be objective ( even if I'm a fan ) the most possible.Tell me in the comments if you disagree.That's it !

As many people have aptly noted, petroleum is not an optional part of modern civilization. That strongly shapes the opinions and beliefs that we industry insiders have about global warming.Transport fuel is just as important to society as food, running water, electricity, and sanitation. When you include the importance of petrochemicals and flexible electricity generation, the idea of giving up fossil fuels is almost unthinkable. It would mean reverting society back to the pre-coal era... roughly speaking, a mid-1700s level of technology, powered by chopping down the world's forests for firewood and charcoal. We do not have the technology to support 7 billion people on this planet in a 20th or 21st century lifestyle without consuming massive quantities of hydrocarbons. There are still far too many applications where fossil fuels are irreplaceable.If you want to lift the billions of global poor up to the quality of life that the EU or US enjoys today, the world will eventually have to produce over twice as much primary energy as we do today. Much of that is simply going to have to come from coal, oil, and gas. We can talk all you want about electric cars and renewables, but you and I are going to be long dead before those are able to reduce fossil fuel use by even half. Nuclear power offers promise for electricity generation, but can't replace transport fuels (for now) or petrochemicals -- and is wildly unpopular. I think we'll be lucky if fossil fuel use even stops growing in the next 30 years. The trends and underlying economics all indicate global fossil fuel use will continue to rise, not fall. Yes, the developed world is reducing its hydrocarbon consumption rate, but that micro-trend is being swamped by the macro-trends of global economic development and population growth.China and India are lifting two billion people out of poverty as we speak. The UN expects world population to rise to 10 billion before it stabilizes. Development places inexorable demands on the world's energy systems.So in terms of epic struggles for the future of humanity, the oil industry's priority is figuring out how to meet ever-rising demand -- even as the "easy oil" is starting to run out. We must find more oil, and we must bring it to market at an acceptable cost. The alternative -- world-wide economic depression, resource wars, and wiping out two generations' progress in battling global poverty -- is simply unthinkable. The stakes are every bit as serious as I'm presenting here. I find it utterly terrifying.And as an industry, that's all we have mind-space for. Providing the energy required to sustain and improve mankind is a powerful, powerful imperative. We know civilization would collapse in a matter of months if the taps suddenly went dry. Global warming, as a concept, just can't compete with that. It's in the future, and no one knows how bad it will be. Widespread harm from climate change is still very much an idea, a theory, a prediction -- whereas oil is our civilization's lifeblood now. Given that, do you have any doubt where the industry tends to sit on the subject of global warming?Our priorities are perfectly clear.As a sidenote here, it's really not about greed or protecting our business models. Oil companies are truly energy companies and are the largest non-government source of funding for renewables research. When electric cars or hydrogen vehicles saturate the transport market, you can bet Exxon and BP and Chevron will be running the corner charging stations. The world's need for energy isn't going to go away, therefore our big-picture business model isn't going to go away. The survival of "big oil" is assured for much longer than anyone currently working in the industry cares about.But there is still some degree of skepticism, uncertainty, and doubt around anthropogenic climate change. Even if the consensus view is 100% correct, there are enough real and imagined chinks in the theory to leave space for selective disagreement. So most people in the oil industry take the intellectually-easy way out: disbelieve and deny, or perhaps simply ignore.It's not easy to be simultaneously pro-oil and anti-carbon-emissions. It's human nature to resolve mental conflicts by rejecting whichever side of the issue we're less emotionally invested in. We (as a species) seek out consistent narratives to shape our worldviews. The narratives of global warming ultimately matter more than the facts do. Are you receptive to stories where you're cast as the villain?Let's look at how the narratives clash:Oil industry insiders know that the idea of stopping fossil fuel use in our lifetimes is somewhere between laughable and suicidal.Environmentalists and climate scientists say we have to stop using fossil fuels to prevent global warming.We are therefore strongly disinclined to listen to the environmentalists and climate scientists.How else would you expect people to react? You might as well tell farmers that they have to stop growing food because obesity is going to cause massive health problems. It attacks the pride-of-purpose of a very hard-working group of people, and the argument completely misses the forest for the trees. There's more to food than obesity and more to oil than circling parking lots in SUVs. They're both critical to society, and it's not the farmer's fault or the oilman's fault if society over-consumes his product.Just like food, the world continues to need more oil, not less. Just like food, we could cut back on oil consumption but can't stop altogether. Just like food, oil is one of the pillars of civilization.So industry insiders can do one of four things:Deny anthropogenic global warmingBlame the consumersIgnore the problemAccept that we're screwed, and continue generating global wealth so we will have the resources to deal with the impacts of climate changeObviously, the first is going to be the most popular option. It's the most intellectually-consistent (i.e. black & white) way to look at things.Personally, I lean towards the fourth. I know the global energy trends too well to think we have any chance of reducing CO2 emissions enough to meet the IPCC targets. If the models are correct, it's already too late. China and India (and many others) are already building too many coal plants for there to be any chance of significant global reductions in CO2 emissions in the next 50 years. Even if electric cars exceed all expectations at reducing oil use, coal- and gas-fired electricity will still dominate 21st century global energy flows. Renewables are simply 50-100 years behind where they need to be on the growth curve.So I'm in favor of continuing to generate as much broad-based wealth as we can, so that humanity has the resources to survive whatever new climate unfolds. Rich nations can cope with rising sea levels and changing weather patterns. It's the global poor who will suffer most from climate change. Which is just one more reason why providing the energy needed to sustain development and end poverty is one of the great moral imperatives of our generation.In the light of climate change, it's hard to imagine a more important geopolitical priority than development. It's obvious that the only way to end the post-colonial legacy of poverty and exploitation is to let everyone rise to first-world standards. It would be deeply, resoundingly evil to prevent the developing world from gaining access to the energy and wealth they need to survive the consequences of the developed world's profligate energy use.And I'm in favor of geo-engineering solutions, such as stratospheric sulfate aerosols. We know how to cool the planet -- Mount Pinatubo showed it was possible -- so we already have our last-ditch strategy more or less figured out. But it's still scary to imagine relying on engineered systems to regulate planetary energy flows. The ability to warm or cool the planet with the flip of a switch will mean we've "graduated" as a species. We'll truly be in control of the entire biosphere's destiny.As I said, I find it utterly terrifying.