Here’s the thing: Drake gets to do that because there’s no risk tied to a Drake record, either for him or for the label
A law comes into effect tomorrow saying that only licensing deals should be put in place in the music business and what do you think happens? No more big artists like Baby or even Yachty, way less deals are cut, etc.
But assuming they still have an advance recoupment thing in place there’s no more risk to licensing than ownership
There’s just less potential payoff 10 years down the track since thee labels only have a lease and sure we’d see the market adjust to that to a degree but I don’t think it’s wildly different
Also I don’t think the current label system is ever going to reform - I see the solution as being more of a funding/investment platform for artists
How do you deal with session musicians or producers that worked on the album paid by the label? Shouldn't they get some ownership of the masters too?
S***'s a really complicated problem IMO, if artists have deals where they get their masters back then everyone else that worked on it should get a cut, but Kanye ain't gonna say Consequence should own part of his song.
It’s a valid point, but it’s not being brought up because this whole movement comes from the fact that big name artists are the only ones that can actually speak to the fans
Ask niggas like Kanye or Jay if their producers and writers should get a similar portion of the ownership since they were just as important to the creation of their music than them and you’re gonna see the big bad capitalists that this thread hates come out of em
But assuming they still have an advance recoupment thing in place there’s no more risk to licensing than ownership
There’s just less potential payoff 10 years down the track since thee labels only have a lease and sure we’d see the market adjust to that to a degree but I don’t think it’s wildly different
Also I don’t think the current label system is ever going to reform - I see the solution as being more of a funding/investment platform for artists
How do artists that flop pay back labels?
How do artists that flop pay back labels?
they don’t, they’re just in debt for life. that’s why people call these contracts slave deals
Was completely uneducated on this. I assumed advances was an investment but artists are required to pay it back.. wtf
The idea of this isn’t inherently unfair
Labels are betting on artists and SHOULD be able to earn their investment back first especially since the artist keeps a chunk of their advance for themselves
The issue is that labels present the advance as being a $20m record deal when that is incredibly dangerous if the artist doesn’t realize it’s a loan and they’re not gonna earn royalties till they have it back. Also labels jack up costs to prevent the artist earning royalties
bc the debt artists owe labels has interest, so the longer the label holds new music hostage, the more debt the artist owes the label. it’s completely f***ed but @op probably masturbates to the thought of having the opportunity to take advantage of a naive up-and-coming artist like that
Idt there's interest in an advance it's not a loan it's only paid through music royalties they aren't taking your house
Idt there's interest in an advance it's not a loan it's only paid through music royalties they aren't taking your house
many contracts, especially 360 deals, have interest on advances
bc the debt artists owe labels has interest, so the longer the label holds new music hostage, the more debt the artist owes the label. it’s completely f***ed but @op probably masturbates to the thought of having the opportunity to take advantage of a naive up-and-coming artist like that
You got to chill. I said artist aren't entitled to their masters. I never said they should be put into s*** contracts. Calm down with the hate. You could not own your masters and still have a decent deal.
We both agree labels are slimey. However, in any facet of life you should never sign something you don't understand. You have to take responsibility for your actions in life. It's literally part of being an adult.
But assuming they still have an advance recoupment thing in place there’s no more risk to licensing than ownership
There’s just less potential payoff 10 years down the track since thee labels only have a lease and sure we’d see the market adjust to that to a degree but I don’t think it’s wildly different
Also I don’t think the current label system is ever going to reform - I see the solution as being more of a funding/investment platform for artists
This recoupment s*** inly works if every artist they sign actually pans out and that’s not the case.
For every Drake that UMG signs, there’s thousands of 20-50k deals that has to be thrown out to rnadoms that don’t pan out and that labels end up losing money on even if they have a recoupment process and ownership of the masters.
Which means that the only artists labels would end up signing are those that they’re absolutely sure will succeed which means way less deals and way less money in the business for small artists.
How do artists that flop pay back labels?
Sometimes they don’t but labels take everything you earn musically until the advance is paid off so the label will push songs and do features and etc to recoup as much as possible
But advance payments are planned to offer minimum risk and maximum reward for the label
You got to chill. I said artist aren't entitled to their masters. I never said they should be put into s*** contracts. Calm down with the hate. You could not own your masters and still have a decent deal.
We both agree labels are slimey. However, in any facet of life you should never sign something you don't understand. You have to take responsibility for your actions in life. It's literally part of being an adult.
“labels are so slimey. they shouldn’t face any consequences about being slimey though. there are very fine people on both sides.”
you look dumber and dumber with every post. honestly keep going at this point it’s kinda entertaining to see how stupid you can make yourself look.
yup. Kreayshawn is still literally millions in debt to her label and they took every penny of profits from Gucci Gucci
Last time I checked she was white. Is it okay for us to talk about white artist on here. I got told I support white lives matter for saying they get f***ed over too.
Just checking what was okay with you.
This recoupment s*** inly works if every artist they sign actually pans out and that’s not the case.
For every Drake that UMG signs, there’s thousands of 20-50k deals that has to be thrown out to rnadoms that don’t pan out and that labels end up losing money on even if they have a recoupment process and ownership of the masters.
Which means that the only artists labels would end up signing are those that they’re absolutely sure will succeed which means way less deals and way less money in the business for small artists.
I agree! But I think the risk is smaller than that now that revenue in the industry is so stupid high
A label can earn $150k just by getting their artist on a major Spotify playlist so I feel like it’s become massively easier for labels to recoup advances and the market hasn’t corrected to reflect the change in risk
many contracts, especially 360 deals, have interest on advances
Sounds like fake news to me
“labels are so slimey. they shouldn’t face any consequences about being slimey though. there are very fine people on both sides.”
you look dumber and dumber with every post. honestly keep going at this point it’s kinda entertaining to see how stupid you can make yourself look.
When did I ever say they shouldn't face consequences. You are talking out your ass just to feel good about your self. Your ignorance is unbelievable
op has a point, ktt too young to understand business. no ones forcing any artist to sign to a label tho but if you do sign and they invest all this money in you, theyre gonna want money in return. its a business, not a charity