The logic problem is with you, and how you would side with smarmy business people over artists that create the actual music. That’s your position? That’s fucking weak.
The simple truth is they need each other. My position is that too often bands/artists have to sell their souls in lopsided deals that don’t actually benefit them in the long run. Short term? Great, cool. Buy a new guitar and book a bunch of studio time. Long term? Now you’re an employee in debt. No one goes into music for that.
In what universe is making money by working within an existing market weak? You can easily turn this on its head and say artists that are underinformed on their own finances are who is truly weak.
Yeah - the exact same way any commodity and market need each other. The point was that this particular commodity, and this particular market aren’t any different than an insurance provider and a policy owner. So why would cost-to-risk metrics not follow the same principals? It’s an investment, and a product for the sake of a return. Nothing more nothing less.
You said this should not be the case in music? Again, why do you think that?
First of all, they DON’T have to sell their soul. If they choose to, that’s on them.
Actually you’re an independently incorporated entity with a secured lean against your intellectual property assets. Record deals are about lending money. Money lending is a market. The artists is free to find another loan underwriter.
LOL I’m not getting into a sentence-by-sentence multi-quote debate with you. I’ve explained my position and if you disagree, then good.
A lot of stuff I’ve ended up doing was pretty application specific and boring, but it kept the bills paid.
The stuff that I’d licensed was usually little bits and pieces of stuff that I was involved as a co-writer on, or at minimum an arranger (which is still possibly a royalty generating composer ship roll in some cases).
I thought this was pretty closely related to one of the topics of this thread (accounting & finance?), so I decided to post it here. The sale of Bob Dylan’s music catalog to Universal Music Publishing Group (UMPG).
I haven’t fully processed or analyzed all of it, and it may not be my forte anyway, but I did grab a few quotes.
Bottom line: The tax on a deal like Dylan’s could almost double if it doesn’t get done by New Year’s Eve.
It all began with a $100 advance in 1962. On Monday, December 7, 2020, almost six decades and six hundred songs later, Bob Dylan’s publishing rights, covering everything from “Blowin’ In The Wind” to the recently-released “Murder Most Foul,” were sold to Universal Music Publishing Group (UMPG) with a staggering nine-figure price tag. While the exact amount is not public, it is rumored to be north of $200 and likely more than $300 million.
EDIT: For clarification, this one talks about the publishing being sold, but not the masters (yet!).
Publishing business sources have said Dylan’s catalog was sold for a multiple of almost 30. To put that in context, most catalogs sell for an average of 16-18 times net publisher’s share (NPS), or gross revenue after songwriter royalties are paid.