Except this isn’t true now

Literally just getting an artist on a Spotify playlist can net $100k+ for the label. There really are not that many artists who are getting investment that is proportions higher than that and the ones that are are already proven successes

And blaming thug for his lack of popularity is bizarre that’s absolutely on the label lol

If my fave artist was fr the lead creative on his projects, he'd get his masters in court if he tried.

That’s not how it works lol

I would think a record label contract would be written much better than even if he was prince level involvement it wouldn’t make a difference cause the contract is iron clad.

Youve seen the video of lyor telling him to put more effort in his records right?

What else could the label have possibly done for him?

Labels are entirely unnecessary at this point so yeah artists should def have control of their own masters

Artist: signs bad contract willingly
Artist: asks label for most valuable asset, masters
Label:no
Artist: wah wah wah

If they want their masters just don't sign unless you get them. It could all be so simple.

Literally what they did for So Much Fun

They got Travis and Cole on a song, marketed the song properly, made it into a hit

Then released an album with that song on it, with decent features, that was a good length

Thugs label regularly made bizarre decisions with his music and releases

The first genuinely great rollout they did he sold 6x as much first week as his previous highest lol

It is tho. Its happened.

On paper, they dont have the right to those masters either.

No avys really been wilding lately

Except if the artist has willingly agreed to sign them to the label and for the label to have full ownership they’re not getting them back just because they were the creator of them

That would just set precedent to invalidate thousands of contracts

Fam Bezos owns a huge amount of Amazon because his own parents literally just gave him the start up money he needed to launch himself lmao. It’s not a normal case.

A lot of these startups, the actual creator of the product doesn’t get that big of an amount of ownership if he’s asking for a big investment lmao. The ones where the creators still own a big part of the business is where the product is so complex that the investors couldn’t do it by themselves or that the opportunity cost of getting into the industry is too big for them to look around for someone else or to make it themselves, which isn’t the case in music.

It didnt sell better tho.

It streamed better, and streaming numbers should be taken with a grain of salt (in comparison), cuz theres more factors at play than with pure sales.

OP I have a very promising job for you licking boots, I think you’d really excel in the role

But it HAS happened before.

I dont remember off the top who has won a case about it, but im sure i could google a few.

People just side with their favourite artist and have no critical thinking lmao.

this is very simple for you slow folks
the music industry does not exist without the artists actually creating the music
therefore they should be given at the very least 51%

Thanks for listening to my Ted Talk

Ur putting all blame on thugs label, and giving him all of the labels credit.

If its the labels fault, then theyre at fault for not drastically changing his image after barter 5 or whatever the f*** it was.

A skinny twink dude rocking hooters shirts and dresses has limited marketability... Im not even being mean, its just the truth.

Y’all get your way and big artists rn will get really really rich, nationwide and global artists will be a thing of the past and a s*** ton of aspiring small artists will starve

Labels should not sign artists into f***ed deals but at the same time if someone is willing to sign a f***ed deal then atleast some of the blame is on them

aren’t you a whole Wayne stan? did you forget what happened with C5 already?