179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes

← back to listing · view thread

From:
Enaomi18
To:
Date:
Wed, 24 Aug 2005 20:08:52 +0200
Subject:
Re: [idm] about music and money
Msg-Id:
<BAY102-DAV8473FD262FAC6D1D4E092C7A80@phx.gbl>
Mbox:
idm.0508.gz
Thanks very much for your thoughts David. We share many of your sentiments, however I will explain our reasoning. The second option you refer to is what we are planning. An independant artist would get 30 cents of each sale, while a sale through a label would get 40 cents to split between the artist and label. The reasoning for this is to try to give the artist as high of a percentage as possible in either case although it would give them a higher profit to sell independantly than through a label depending on their agreement with their label. While it would seem most practical to just sell straight from the artist, in order to have a decently sized catalog and selection of already existing works, we still need to work with labels. I don't know how iTunes works their percentages out although I have heard some people complaining that they don't give enough to the artists. So, basically, what we are trying to do is find a balance where everyone is happy; the artists, the labels, and ourselves. This is why I am interested in what everyone thinks of these percentages. While that may be impossible to do (making everyone happy), we are most interested in compensating the artist fairly first. I'm hoping this makes sense! Naomi david@modernangel.org wrote:
quoted 2 lines if i'm reading this right, it means 30c of each sale goes to the artist,> > if i'm reading this right, it means 30c of each sale goes to the artist,
and another 40c to the label. if i'm misreading it, it means an independant artist gets 30c, while an artist with a label gets 40c to split between them? i'm assuming it's the former, anyway...
quoted 2 lines my first observation is that this is about the same as itunes, except the> > my first observation is that this is about the same as itunes, except the
proportions are different. my primary question to this model, whether through them or you, is... what exactly is the label doing to justify getting the lion's share of the money?
quoted 2 lines if you're distributing it, and this is for "independent" artists/labels,> > if you're distributing it, and this is for "independent" artists/labels,
so it's not like people are picking up on any big corporate branding, then all i see the label doing is sitting in the middle soaking up money. do they give big advances to the artists to facilitate recording? no, they're a small independent label. do they give lots of marketing and promotion? no, they're a small independent label. do they distribute the records? well, maybe, by themselves, but under this model, you would be doing the distribution.
quoted 2 lines this seems ridiculous to me, so much money is wasted on something that as> > this seems ridiculous to me, so much money is wasted on something that as
far as i can see, has no relevance to creating the music, or getting it to people who will listen. fuck the label, contact artists directly through mediums like this, make sure they get the best return for their creativity that they can.
quoted 2 lines as a sometime artist, i don't see the need for any intermediaries anymore.> > as a sometime artist, i don't see the need for any intermediaries anymore.
i can sell tracks myself with a website and paypal. i can get some more exposure by going on itunes, or another store. i see no need for a label in that scenario.
quoted 2 lines as a consumer, i would rather know the artist is getting the bulk of the> > as a consumer, i would rather know the artist is getting the bulk of the
money, not that it's being decimated by a bunch of middlemen.
quoted 2 lines david> > david
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org