Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Law Firm Events
Law Firm Deadlines
TCLA TV
Members
Leaderboards
Premium Database
Premium Chat
Commercial Awareness
Future Trainee Advice
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Interviews & Vacation Schemes
Commercial Awareness Discussion
Bruce Springsteen Music Catalogue
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jessica Booker" data-source="post: 105867" data-attributes="member: 2672"><p>Money can be made from music in many different ways - not just royalties from songs being played. For instance, concerts, documentaries, TV appearances, merchandise etc. A record company won't just make money from songs being played or sold, and therefore can afford to be flexible with what they negotiate with a singer or songwriter.</p><p></p><p>But even outside of that, songwriters or singers both have the ability to negotiate what they want into a contract if they are good enough and in demand. As they become bigger artists and renegotiate contracts by extending them with a record company (or jumping ship to another one), they are probably in a strong negotiating position. They are the brand after all, and the music company is not likely to make money without them. I bet Bruce Springsteen's first record contract was worth a lot less than one of his contracts at the peak of his career because of that.</p><p></p><p>Plus royalties can be (and are set) as percentages - they don't have to be exclusively owned by one party. The record company might take the largest percentage, but the songwriter will take another, the producer another, and possibly even the management company of the artist would take a percentage too. Once you cut that all down, the artist themselves might also get a small percentage.</p><p></p><p>Like any contract, you have two or more parties that need each other. Record companies might be tougher based on how music markets have changed in the last 20 years and because of large amounts of money being paid for back catalogues, but they will still have an artist they want to sign and will therefore make them an attractive offer based on that, which is likely to include royalties. Otherwise artists will just go to another record company that can offer them what they do want.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jessica Booker, post: 105867, member: 2672"] Money can be made from music in many different ways - not just royalties from songs being played. For instance, concerts, documentaries, TV appearances, merchandise etc. A record company won't just make money from songs being played or sold, and therefore can afford to be flexible with what they negotiate with a singer or songwriter. But even outside of that, songwriters or singers both have the ability to negotiate what they want into a contract if they are good enough and in demand. As they become bigger artists and renegotiate contracts by extending them with a record company (or jumping ship to another one), they are probably in a strong negotiating position. They are the brand after all, and the music company is not likely to make money without them. I bet Bruce Springsteen's first record contract was worth a lot less than one of his contracts at the peak of his career because of that. Plus royalties can be (and are set) as percentages - they don't have to be exclusively owned by one party. The record company might take the largest percentage, but the songwriter will take another, the producer another, and possibly even the management company of the artist would take a percentage too. Once you cut that all down, the artist themselves might also get a small percentage. Like any contract, you have two or more parties that need each other. Record companies might be tougher based on how music markets have changed in the last 20 years and because of large amounts of money being paid for back catalogues, but they will still have an artist they want to sign and will therefore make them an attractive offer based on that, which is likely to include royalties. Otherwise artists will just go to another record company that can offer them what they do want. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Our company is called, "The Corporate ___ Academy". What is the missing word here?
Post reply
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Interviews & Vacation Schemes
Commercial Awareness Discussion
Bruce Springsteen Music Catalogue
Top
Bottom
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…