51–60 of 245 posts
So if I'm reading this correctly, this guy is saying that traditional labels put too much time and effort into album sales and completely ignore the money available from licensing and performance royalties (if they don't own the rights to a song why would they care to) So by buying up the rights he has the incentive to push hard to sell licenses to that music and can build up teams of salespeople to do only that. Wha…
Has he never heard of the Hunt Brothers and their attempt to corner the silver market? Supply & Demand dictates that prices can go higher than you are liquid. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_Thursday
With songs though, they'll generate revenue while you're sitting on them. Silver doesn't do that.
How, exactly? I'm fairly certain most of a songs revenue is made by the first year. To go beyond that, you've got to get your song back in the public mind.
> Silver doesn't do that.
You can certainly borrow against the value of the silver to fund low risk investments.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With songs though, they'll generate revenue while you're sitting on them. Silver doesn't do that.
> With songs though, they'll generate revenue while you're sitting on them. How, exactly? I'm fairly certain most of a songs revenue is made by the first year. To go beyond that, you've got to get your song back in the public mind. > Silver doesn't do that. You can certainly borrow against the value of the silver to fund low risk investments.
Bass player with a 70s pop star who's still working and making music here.... I know that his hit songs still generate a significant amount of income for him (I'm not giving figures, but I would be more than happy if I had that much coming in for a full time income, let alone as passive income 50 years later). The songs get airplay, and get used in adverts and so on, and that generates income that I'd certainly be very happy to have. (I don't, I'm just a hired hand, very late to the party!)
So if I'm reading this correctly, this guy is saying that traditional labels put too much time and effort into album sales and completely ignore the money available from licensing and performance royalties (if they don't own the rights to a song why would they care to) So by buying up the rights he has the incentive to push hard to sell licenses to that music and can build up teams of salespeople to do only that. Wha…
I think he's buying the publishing (mechanical royalties).
Heck, the record labels might do it at this point - after all, they'll still have the rights to the actual performed audio ("the master").
Not a bad idea. Finding avenues to rent-seek seems to be the winning strategy, especially with all the cash floating around looking for returns.
So if I'm reading this correctly, this guy is saying that traditional labels put too much time and effort into album sales and completely ignore the money available from licensing and performance royalties (if they don't own the rights to a song why would they care to) So by buying up the rights he has the incentive to push hard to sell licenses to that music and can build up teams of salespeople to do only that. Wha…
I think he's buying the publishing (mechanical royalties).
With Hipgnosis Songs Fund, Mercuriadis bypassed all of them. Songwriters are able to generate revenue from three sources: mechanical royalties (the sale or legal download of a song), performance royalties (paid every time a song is heard in public, whether it’s a live performance, on TV, or in a movie; played in a bar or restaurant; or streamed), and synch fees (song licensing for use in movies, video games, and commercials). Mechanical royalties are the only stream with a set rate; performance and synch royalties are negotiated percentages. Synchs are often more lucrative for the songwriter, since they generally split 50% for the writer and the artist, with the label taking its cut from the artist’s piece of the pie. Synch is where Hipgnosis Song Fund could make them money, as Mercuriadis explained to the 177 hedge fund and private investors he pitched between 2015 and 2018.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With songs though, they'll generate revenue while you're sitting on them. Silver doesn't do that.
> With songs though, they'll generate revenue while you're sitting on them. How, exactly? I'm fairly certain most of a songs revenue is made by the first year. To go beyond that, you've got to get your song back in the public mind. > Silver doesn't do that. You can certainly borrow against the value of the silver to fund low risk investments.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> With songs though, they'll generate revenue while you're sitting on them. How, exactly? I'm fairly certain most of a songs revenue is made by the first year. To go beyond that, you've got to get your song back in the public mind. > Silver doesn't do that. You can certainly borrow against the value of the silver to fund low risk investments.
> How, exactly? I'm fairly certain most of a songs revenue is made by the first year. To go beyond that, you've got to get your song back in the public mind. Bass player with a 70s pop star who's still working and making music here.... I know that his hit songs still generate a significant amount of income for him (I'm not giving figures, but I would be more than happy if I had that much coming in for a full time inc…
This doesn't bother me one bit. I think he's making a mistake though. Taylor Swift, Timbaland, and Bruno Mars are all arguably homogenous music made by marketing groups for middle American focus groups. They are endlessly replaceable, rather forgettable, artists and will be lost to history by the 'next big thing' that sounds just like it or very similar in a year or two. It has more in common with pop fashion than or…
This company is often buying songwriter's catalogs, not just specific public-facing artists that come and go.
And while you may not remember the artists names, these songs often end up in commercials and other adaptations that generate revenue, even if they're not actually the original recording.
If a commercial plays the song "Whip It," do you remember that it was performed by Devo? I sure didn't, but I've seen it in a heck of a lot of commercials, like this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqnPciNhQXU
The rights holder to that song undoubtedly made money from that commercial, even though the lyrics have been changed.
The importance of the songwriter over the artist has been growing, all of this was mentioned in the article.