Labels Want Even More Cut

[Tribalcast]

Source:
http://metalinjection.net/latest-news/want-to-get-signed-well-the-labels-want-even-more-of-a-cut

Warner Music Group CEO Edgar Bronfman, Jr. revealed to a Web 2.0 Summit audience that Warner (one of the big four major record labels in the world) now requires all new artists to sign "360" deals. This imposes artists (and reportedly a third of Warner's signed acts) to give labels a pre-arranged cut of merch sales, concert ticket profits, endorsements and anything else that pays the band. This is in addition to the standard "labels profit from CD sales" bag that's been going on since the stone age and the more recent "labels profit from digital downloads" business.

Bronfman reportedly told the crowd that the label can't continue to profit from CD sales, which have reached increasingly dismal numbers over the past several years, and that 360 deals can ensure the labels' survival and the continued promotion of their artists. He also argued that the arrangements will allow the labels to give away more music to promote concert ticket and merch sales.

Are concert ticket and merch prices going to skyrocket? Are the labels finally finding a way to co-exist with illegal downloading, in-store exclusives and artists giving away their music for free online? Is this fair to the artists? Are 360 deals the future of the music biz?

Let's discuss.

 

[visa]

screw labels, DIY is the way to go.

 

[l0stwhispers]

It's definitely not going to help the smaller artists much, but with the amount of music people have been illegally downloading lately, this is probably something labels will eventually have to resort to unfortunately. I've always been supportive of Warner Music Group though, most of my favourite bands are signed to them (Dream Theater, Porcupine Tree, Muse) and they've been doing a really great job of promoting the artists and letting them tour and letting them more or less have a relatively free reign. I'm just hoping they don't do anything drastic like increase the prices of tickets by too much etc. As long as it's reasonable, and as long as they don't take too much from the artists' share, I reckon it should be fine. If the labels went down, it'd be difficult for everyone as well.

Edit: Pardon me, I meant Roadrunner Records. D'oh!

 

[Cavett]

I've always been supportive of Warner Music Group though, most of my favourite bands are signed to them (Dream Theater, Porcupine Tree, Muse) and they've been doing a really great job of promoting the artists and letting them tour and letting them more or less have a relatively free reign.

On the contrary, Dream Theater had ALOT of problems with their label which nearly caused the band to split ways during the late 90s. Luckily with the fans support, it managed to u-turn their decision to disband.

Right now they are more than happy to be under Roadrunner Records. The band seems to have the "musical freedom" that they seek so desperately.

But ironically though, Roadrunner Records, unlike in the 80s where they were independent and were the frontrunner of promoting metal/shredders/rock, is now a subsidary of Warner Music... So hmm... :???:

 

[smurfpiss]

I can actually see majors going bust in the near future, the industry is changing rapidly and the audience is getting smarter. They're slowly realizing what good music is and the real outlets where good music thrives in are indie labels and unsigned artists...

Technology is so far ahead now any artist can cut a more than decent album in their own bedroom. There's a lot more music out there than what the majors churn out which really is the same old same old.

 

[l0stwhispers]

On the contrary, Dream Theater had ALOT of problems with their label which nearly caused the band to split ways during the late 90s. Luckily with the fans support, it managed to u-turn their decision to disband.

Oops! Lol! I meant Roadrunner, not Warner Music. I can never remember which bands are signed to which labels for some odd reason, and always resort to Wiki. And yea, I searched Warner Music on Wiki and came up with Dream Theater. Lol! I really should just not do Wiki anymore... haha. Thanks for the correction mate!

 

[AvonRellets]

screw labels, DIY is the way to go.

Awww, there goes all of Aging Youth Records' efforts down the drain. Not to mention Kitty Wu Records, WakeMeUp Music, Pulverised Records, Straits Records, Ignite Production, 29 Cornflakes and all that have come and gone over the past decade.

Labels are indeed useless. Wonder why people bother setting them up

 

[e]

READ THIS

http://www.wired.com/entertainment/music/magazine/16-01/ff_byrne?

 

[AgingYouth]

I read the Thom Yorke article. Wah lau eh, he's damn hairy man. Needs a shave...

 

[optisailor2002]

hard to manage la record label. singapore's clairvoyant records lasted awhile before it went down also. too small if you are just a record label focussing on a few artists only.

 

[billthegeek]

Maybe it has more to do with the quality of pop music these days, than with the rise of illegal downloading and indie labels.

 

[optisailor2002]

in fact, i believe downloading actually promotes artists who are not so popular and generate a larger fanbase. it can also motivate an artist to make better music to catch a larger fanbase. a true fan will buy cds instead of just download. most people download music and if they like it they buy the cds. if they dont, they just delete it.

 

[recklessnick]

bands shouldnt expect money from labels
and labels shouldnt keep all the profit
a label is supposed to help distribute records for a band right?
everything gets complicated when money is involved.

 

[XLayaR]

DIY is the way to go man, look at all the rappers coming up with their own labels....

 

[optisailor2002]

bands shouldnt expect money from labels
and labels shouldnt keep all the profit
a label is supposed to help distribute records for a band right?
everything gets complicated when money is involved.

yup, everything does get complicated when money is involved, but in this materialistic world of ours, when is money ever not involved?

no offence, but looking at most (if not all) things in this world without the $$$ consideration is plain naive.

 

[indianstallion]

Last.fm has already a program in place that allows unsigned artists to upload their music and pay royalties to them when theirs songs are played to users.

And of course the way last.fm works is to play your music to people who are more likely to listen to it, so it seems like a good idea. Not sure how it works in practice though, has any local bands tried this?

http://mashable.com/2008/07/09/lastfm-artist-royalty-program/

 

[shaneypants]

At the end of the day, music is a "passion over profit" thing. These labels can say "I'm talking all your earnings", but Dream Theatre is still holding on to their instruments.

 

[optisailor2002]

At the end of the day, music is a "passion over profit" thing. These labels can say "I'm talking all your earnings", but Dream Theatre is still holding on to their instruments.

that is if the band relaly thinks music is about passion over profit. which sadly, lots of bands do not now. most do start out that way but soon give way to the much needed money for the band to survive.

 

[billthegeek]

Last.fm has already a program in place that allows unsigned artists to upload their music and pay royalties to them when theirs songs are played to users.

And of course the way last.fm works is to play your music to people who are more likely to listen to it, so it seems like a good idea. Not sure how it works in practice though, has any local bands tried this?

http://mashable.com/2008/07/09/lastfm-artist-royalty-program/

I think Last.fm makes its revenue from advertisement placed on the artists' profiles and then distributes some of that revenue to the artists themselves. I believe that is how it works.

 

[daryl]

the interview e posted is a very good read