I just received another legal letter from NetFlix yesterday regarding the class action suit.
I attempted to sign up for the settlement today but they make you remember either your username, e-mail address OR credit card number that you used 7 years ago. If you can’t you are out of luck as far as I can tell.
I bet less than 20% of the former members will be able to do this.
We need another objection fast.
Wednesday, May 24, 2006
Thoughts on American Inventor
We just watched an interview with the winner after watching every episode this season. I have to admit its my favorite reality show. The pure passion and creativity of the finalists just blew me away while affecting me emotionally as well. The winner deserved it even though the kid with the bike was my favorite.
To me it has more to do with the the inventor and not the actual invention.
What do you all think?
I'm actually thinking of going to the Chicago auditions. Should I?
To me it has more to do with the the inventor and not the actual invention.
What do you all think?
I'm actually thinking of going to the Chicago auditions. Should I?
Sunday, April 02, 2006
The Numbers: Can Indie Labels Really Make Money Through Downloads? Part 1
The Numbers: Can Indie Labels Really Make Money Through Downloads? Part 1
by Spencer Critchley
So far, many of the arguments on emerging music business models seem to me to be based on speculation and assertions. So I thought I’d sit down and do some actual math. I based it on two scenarios for a moderately successful indie album: physical CD sales vs. iTunes downloads.
It’s scary.
Let’s assume the following:
* 12 songs on the album
* very low recording budget of $10,000 (major label budgets are well into six figures)
* artist royalty rate of 12%, producer royalty of 3%
* mechanical royalties (which go to songwriters and publishers) are 8.5 cents per song, the statutory rate
* 40,000 CDs pressed, 30,000 sold (a good sell-through)*
First, the CD scenario. These figures are partly based on an article in the Aug, 2005 issue of Nashville’s Music Row magazine (subscription required), which, BTW, has excellent technology coverage.
CD: Label’s Gross Revenues Per Copy
Wholesale Price 9.50
Recording (0.33)
Mechanical royalties (1.02)
Artist royalties (1.14)
Producer royalties (0.29)
Postage (0.10)
Distribution Fee (1.80)
Positioning Fee (1.00)
Manufacturing (0.80)
Returns postage (0.03)
Refurbishing (0.05)
GROSS REVENUES $2.95
So if there are only 25% returns from stores, the label makes $2.95 per CD, or $88,400.00 on net sales of 30,000 CDs.
Unfortunately, that figure is before promotional and other expenses, such as radio promotion, publicity, advertising, etc. In the mainstream record business, achieving sales of 30,000 units could easily require a promotion budget of $100,000 to $300,000. Let’s assume the label is aiming for the mainstream and spends $100,000:
CD: Label’s Net Revenues, 30,000 Sold
Sales revenue 88,400.00
Promotion, etc (100,000.00)
NET ($11,600.00)
A loss of $11,600. It would be worse if we included overhead, if more albums were returned, or if the recording budget were higher–and even with a recording budget of $0, the label would still be in the hole. You can see why record company people say over and over that it’s a hit-driven business. Non-hits don’t make money.
If our label is an alternative indie, it obviously can’t afford to risk six figures to earn revenues like these–the break-even promotion budget on this project would have been $88,400. Alternative indies have to find ways to run very, very lean, such as relying on lots of touring by the artist, good will with influential press, and street teams of fans to spread word of mouth. Even so, it looks like a business to be in for love, not money**.
*You may object that the assumption of sales of 30,000 is unfairly low. Actually, it’s hard to achieve sales like that. Most alternative indie albums are lucky to hit 5,000 to 10,000 copies sold, and there are untold numbers that never break 1,000.
**Harvard Business Review sells an informative case study (PDF) on Nashville-based Compass Records, which covers Compass’ success at becoming viable, followed by its struggle to grow.
by Spencer Critchley
So far, many of the arguments on emerging music business models seem to me to be based on speculation and assertions. So I thought I’d sit down and do some actual math. I based it on two scenarios for a moderately successful indie album: physical CD sales vs. iTunes downloads.
It’s scary.
Let’s assume the following:
* 12 songs on the album
* very low recording budget of $10,000 (major label budgets are well into six figures)
* artist royalty rate of 12%, producer royalty of 3%
* mechanical royalties (which go to songwriters and publishers) are 8.5 cents per song, the statutory rate
* 40,000 CDs pressed, 30,000 sold (a good sell-through)*
First, the CD scenario. These figures are partly based on an article in the Aug, 2005 issue of Nashville’s Music Row magazine (subscription required), which, BTW, has excellent technology coverage.
CD: Label’s Gross Revenues Per Copy
Wholesale Price 9.50
Recording (0.33)
Mechanical royalties (1.02)
Artist royalties (1.14)
Producer royalties (0.29)
Postage (0.10)
Distribution Fee (1.80)
Positioning Fee (1.00)
Manufacturing (0.80)
Returns postage (0.03)
Refurbishing (0.05)
GROSS REVENUES $2.95
So if there are only 25% returns from stores, the label makes $2.95 per CD, or $88,400.00 on net sales of 30,000 CDs.
Unfortunately, that figure is before promotional and other expenses, such as radio promotion, publicity, advertising, etc. In the mainstream record business, achieving sales of 30,000 units could easily require a promotion budget of $100,000 to $300,000. Let’s assume the label is aiming for the mainstream and spends $100,000:
CD: Label’s Net Revenues, 30,000 Sold
Sales revenue 88,400.00
Promotion, etc (100,000.00)
NET ($11,600.00)
A loss of $11,600. It would be worse if we included overhead, if more albums were returned, or if the recording budget were higher–and even with a recording budget of $0, the label would still be in the hole. You can see why record company people say over and over that it’s a hit-driven business. Non-hits don’t make money.
If our label is an alternative indie, it obviously can’t afford to risk six figures to earn revenues like these–the break-even promotion budget on this project would have been $88,400. Alternative indies have to find ways to run very, very lean, such as relying on lots of touring by the artist, good will with influential press, and street teams of fans to spread word of mouth. Even so, it looks like a business to be in for love, not money**.
*You may object that the assumption of sales of 30,000 is unfairly low. Actually, it’s hard to achieve sales like that. Most alternative indie albums are lucky to hit 5,000 to 10,000 copies sold, and there are untold numbers that never break 1,000.
**Harvard Business Review sells an informative case study (PDF) on Nashville-based Compass Records, which covers Compass’ success at becoming viable, followed by its struggle to grow.
The Numbers: Can Indie Labels Really Make Money Through Downloads? Part 2
The Numbers: Can Indie Labels Really Make Money Through Downloads? Part 2
by Spencer Critchley
Related link: www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/8788
In Part 1 we looked at the revenues and costs of a moderately successful indie album release, and saw how hard it is for a record company to make money selling CDs. The promise of digital downloading is that it offers dramatically more efficient distribution. But a look at a comparison scenario using iTunes shows that the label may end up worse off.
In our first scenario, the label lost $11,600 (before overhead) on sales of 30,000 CDs, based on a low end mainstream marketing budget. For an indie, 30,000 units sold is an achievement. But it would still need to sell a few more thousand to break even, and wouldn’t earn serious money unless it had a hit (especially since more marketing will be required to drive more sales). Alternative indies make do with lower marketing budgets, and try to compensate with heavy touring and other tactics.
Now we’ll run a comparable project through iTunes. My numbers here are based in part on an article at musicbizacademy.com by entertainment lawyer Diana LaPolt:
iTunes Scenario: Label’s Gross Revenues Per Album1
Wholesale Price2 6.44
Recording (0.33)
Mechanical royalties (1.02)
Artist royalties3 (1.00)
Producer royalties3 (0.25)
Postage (0.00)
Distribution Fee (0.00)
Positioning Fee (0.00)
Manufacturing (0.00)
Returns postage (0.00)
Refurbishing (0.00)
GROSS REVENUES $3.83
Wow, looking good so far! The label makes $3.83 per album as opposed to $2.95, even with a wholesale price of $6.44 instead of $9.50. It looks like we’re seeing the magic of zeroing out all the manufacturing, shipping and handling associated with physical product (and last I heard, Apple doesn’t charge for favorable positioning).
Now let’s factor in the marketing expenses (radio promotion, publicity, advertising, etc) and estimate the take from sales of 30,000 albums–with, of course, no returns:
iTunes: Label’s Net Revenues, 30,000 Albums Sold
Sales revenue 114,805.00
Promotion, etc (100,000.00)
NET $14,805.00
A profit! $14,805 to put towards rent and salaries.
Except… There’s a new factor with downloading: Digital delivery unbundles the album format, allowing the purchaser to buy only the songs he or she wants. How often do people buy an entire album on iTunes? I don’t know, but on average they buy some fraction of total number of the songs.
Let’s see what happens if our 12-song album sells an average of six songs to each customer, which actually seems optimistic to me, at 64 cents wholesale (based on iTunes’ 99 cent/song retail price):
iTunes: Label’s Net Revenues, Avg. Customer Buys 6 Songs1
Sales revenue 72,943.00
Promotion, etc (100,000.00)
NET ($27,057.00)
Oh oh.
This is why record companies want you to buy albums. From the consumer’s point of view, it stinks to buy a whole album if you only end up liking a few songs. But from the label’s point of view, selling singles is a lousy business.
And of course it gets worse if people buy fewer songs from the album. At an average of three songs per album, the label loses $72,022. At one song, they lose $87,843.
Again, they will make a profit on a hit, but labels have similar up-front investments for dogs and for hits. The rule of thumb in the traditional record industry is that you’re doing well if one out of ten of your artists sells enough to pay for the other nine who lose you money. You can see why artists’ royalty rates work out to be roughly 10 cents on the dollar–the other 90 cents is paying for the other nine albums.
From the artist’s point of view: Your advance is recouped at the royalty rate. So if your record earns $1,000, your debt to the label goes down by only $100. It’s kind of an owing-your-soul-to-the-company-store thing. Producer Steve Albini runs those numbers in “The Problem With Music” at negativland.com. See also Moses Avalon’s Confessions Of A Record Producer.
1. After a challenge from teejay (see below) I’ve corrected some of these figures.
2. A typical album retails for $9.90 on iTunes, a single is 99 cents, and Apple takes 35%.
3. Artist and producer royalties are based on 130% of the wholesale price. As in the CD scenario, I’m assuming a 12% royalty for the artist and 3% for the producer.
Next time: According to the Long Tail hypothesis, good filters are critical to making downloading work as a business. We’ll look at the value those filters will have to add.
by Spencer Critchley
Related link: www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/8788
In Part 1 we looked at the revenues and costs of a moderately successful indie album release, and saw how hard it is for a record company to make money selling CDs. The promise of digital downloading is that it offers dramatically more efficient distribution. But a look at a comparison scenario using iTunes shows that the label may end up worse off.
In our first scenario, the label lost $11,600 (before overhead) on sales of 30,000 CDs, based on a low end mainstream marketing budget. For an indie, 30,000 units sold is an achievement. But it would still need to sell a few more thousand to break even, and wouldn’t earn serious money unless it had a hit (especially since more marketing will be required to drive more sales). Alternative indies make do with lower marketing budgets, and try to compensate with heavy touring and other tactics.
Now we’ll run a comparable project through iTunes. My numbers here are based in part on an article at musicbizacademy.com by entertainment lawyer Diana LaPolt:
iTunes Scenario: Label’s Gross Revenues Per Album1
Wholesale Price2 6.44
Recording (0.33)
Mechanical royalties (1.02)
Artist royalties3 (1.00)
Producer royalties3 (0.25)
Postage (0.00)
Distribution Fee (0.00)
Positioning Fee (0.00)
Manufacturing (0.00)
Returns postage (0.00)
Refurbishing (0.00)
GROSS REVENUES $3.83
Wow, looking good so far! The label makes $3.83 per album as opposed to $2.95, even with a wholesale price of $6.44 instead of $9.50. It looks like we’re seeing the magic of zeroing out all the manufacturing, shipping and handling associated with physical product (and last I heard, Apple doesn’t charge for favorable positioning).
Now let’s factor in the marketing expenses (radio promotion, publicity, advertising, etc) and estimate the take from sales of 30,000 albums–with, of course, no returns:
iTunes: Label’s Net Revenues, 30,000 Albums Sold
Sales revenue 114,805.00
Promotion, etc (100,000.00)
NET $14,805.00
A profit! $14,805 to put towards rent and salaries.
Except… There’s a new factor with downloading: Digital delivery unbundles the album format, allowing the purchaser to buy only the songs he or she wants. How often do people buy an entire album on iTunes? I don’t know, but on average they buy some fraction of total number of the songs.
Let’s see what happens if our 12-song album sells an average of six songs to each customer, which actually seems optimistic to me, at 64 cents wholesale (based on iTunes’ 99 cent/song retail price):
iTunes: Label’s Net Revenues, Avg. Customer Buys 6 Songs1
Sales revenue 72,943.00
Promotion, etc (100,000.00)
NET ($27,057.00)
Oh oh.
This is why record companies want you to buy albums. From the consumer’s point of view, it stinks to buy a whole album if you only end up liking a few songs. But from the label’s point of view, selling singles is a lousy business.
And of course it gets worse if people buy fewer songs from the album. At an average of three songs per album, the label loses $72,022. At one song, they lose $87,843.
Again, they will make a profit on a hit, but labels have similar up-front investments for dogs and for hits. The rule of thumb in the traditional record industry is that you’re doing well if one out of ten of your artists sells enough to pay for the other nine who lose you money. You can see why artists’ royalty rates work out to be roughly 10 cents on the dollar–the other 90 cents is paying for the other nine albums.
From the artist’s point of view: Your advance is recouped at the royalty rate. So if your record earns $1,000, your debt to the label goes down by only $100. It’s kind of an owing-your-soul-to-the-company-store thing. Producer Steve Albini runs those numbers in “The Problem With Music” at negativland.com. See also Moses Avalon’s Confessions Of A Record Producer.
1. After a challenge from teejay (see below) I’ve corrected some of these figures.
2. A typical album retails for $9.90 on iTunes, a single is 99 cents, and Apple takes 35%.
3. Artist and producer royalties are based on 130% of the wholesale price. As in the CD scenario, I’m assuming a 12% royalty for the artist and 3% for the producer.
Next time: According to the Long Tail hypothesis, good filters are critical to making downloading work as a business. We’ll look at the value those filters will have to add.
The Numbers: Can Indie Labels Really Make Money Through Downloads? Part 3
The Numbers: Can Indie Labels Really Make Money Through Downloads? Part 3
by Spencer Critchley
Related link: www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/8816
In Part 1 of this series I looked at how hard it is for an indie label to make money selling CDs. Part 2 was about how it can be even harder with iTunes. In this part, I talk about where all the money went, and about what new models, such as those based on the Long Tail, will have to be worth.
First of all, where’d the money go? As I mentioned in Part 2, even though iTunes eliminates a lot of a label’s expenses related to physical distribution, it may yield the label less money. That’s partly because iTunes, like other download services, unbundles the album format, allowing customers to buy individual songs. That’s great for customers, but given that the up front marketing costs to launch a new project are roughly equal for an album or a 99 cent single, it’s big trouble for labels.
In response to Part 2, teejay argued that because singles are so much cheaper than albums, people will buy more singles, and the increased volume will help make up for the lower price. I agree that more people are likely to buy a single, but I’m not convinced yet that the increase will be in the hundreds per cent, which is what would be needed to replace physical album sales (physical singles sales have become close to negligible). And given that cheaper digital production and distribution are leading to an explosion of new product, I’d expect the benefit from increased singles sales to be diluted by the availability of more releases, except in the case of big hits.
But there’s more to it than just unbundling. Comparing the numbers in Part 1 & 2 for CD sales vs. iTunes sales, I notice that the wholesale album price has gone down just over three dollars, from $9.50 to about $6.44 (depending on the retail price1). That might seem logical, given the savings realized by dropping physical distribution:
Postage (0.10)
Distribution Fee (1.80)
Positioning Fee (1.00)
Manufacturing (0.80)
Returns postage (0.03)
Refurbishing (0.05)
TOTAL GROSS SAVINGS (3.78)
“Gross” savings because digital distribution is not cost-free.
But have a look at this line-up of figures:
Gross distribution savings 3.78
Reduction in wholesale price to labels (9.50 - 6.44) 3.06
Apple’s gross margin (9.90 - 6.44)1 3.46
Steve Jobs showed the record companies a way to reduce their expenses and convinced them to give almost all the savings to him.2 There IS a reality distortion field! One begins to see why EMI and some other labels have begun arguing that Apple should raise its iTunes prices.
So that’s where the money went. For now, anyway, it looks as if labels have lost the advantage gained from increased distribution efficiency. So is there a way left for labels, in particular the indies, to make money? As Philipp and dannyo_152_redux have pointed out, reduced marketing expenses could be another route to profit.
This is also the promise of Wired editor Chris Anderson’s Long Tail model. Anderson says that in the digital economy hits will serve as entrees to similar non-hits that are further down the long tail of the sales curve. And he highlights the importance of filters, such as recommendations from trusted experts.
This kind of marketing can be close to free. But what’s it worth? And how much value does it have to make up? As I mentioned in Part 1, marketing expenses for indie albums that are attempting to compete in the mainstream are in the range of $100,000 to $300,000. Alternative indies can’t spend that much cash, so they do things like have their artists play lots of shows. But I’d guess that if you account for time and work, the investment is similar. I hope new forms of marketing can have comparable impact for less money, but I haven’t seen convincing details yet of how that will work. I’ll repeat what I said a little while ago in a post called “Beware Of Risk-Free Business Models”:
So far in business history, there’s been a requirement that risk and reward roughly balance… Many of the alternative models I’ve seen seem to be based on the assumption that merit is enough: people will hear good music and recommend it to their friends, who will want to buy it. But it’s at that point that the model appears to go risk-free… [the] marketing investment is the risk in the risk-reward equation. In particular, it’s the “impresario fee” for finding an artist that is extraordinary in some way and then doing all the things that have to be done to, in effect, modulate pop culture with the image and sound of this artist.
If there’s little or no risk behind a product, why will anyone want to pay for it? So far there have in fact been few money-making acts to emerge from the net, and there have by now been many attempts. It may be that the era of hit recordings is ending, as David Bowie3 and others have argued. Until now, only hits have made profits; the hope for the new models is that increased efficiencies will make non-hits profitable. But in order to make that work these models will have to overcome some powerful forces pulling in opposing directions–in particular, the conversion of music into a commodity whose unit value is approaching zero.
1. iTunes’ retail prices vary.
2. Apple is believed to make little direct net profit from music sales, but the value in iPod sales is huge. The money saved by switching to digital distribution will vary widely depending on the particular model. Running iTunes is apparently quite expensive, while P2P networks can spread expenses so thin they pretty much disappear.
3. ‘’Music itself is going to become like running water or electricity… So it’s like, just take advantage of these last few years because none of this is ever going to happen again. You’d better be prepared for doing a lot of touring because that’s really the only unique situation that’s going to be left. It’s terribly exciting. But on the other hand it doesn’t matter if you think it’s exciting or not; it’s what’s going to happen.'’–New York Times, June 9, 2002.
by Spencer Critchley
Related link: www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/8816
In Part 1 of this series I looked at how hard it is for an indie label to make money selling CDs. Part 2 was about how it can be even harder with iTunes. In this part, I talk about where all the money went, and about what new models, such as those based on the Long Tail, will have to be worth.
First of all, where’d the money go? As I mentioned in Part 2, even though iTunes eliminates a lot of a label’s expenses related to physical distribution, it may yield the label less money. That’s partly because iTunes, like other download services, unbundles the album format, allowing customers to buy individual songs. That’s great for customers, but given that the up front marketing costs to launch a new project are roughly equal for an album or a 99 cent single, it’s big trouble for labels.
In response to Part 2, teejay argued that because singles are so much cheaper than albums, people will buy more singles, and the increased volume will help make up for the lower price. I agree that more people are likely to buy a single, but I’m not convinced yet that the increase will be in the hundreds per cent, which is what would be needed to replace physical album sales (physical singles sales have become close to negligible). And given that cheaper digital production and distribution are leading to an explosion of new product, I’d expect the benefit from increased singles sales to be diluted by the availability of more releases, except in the case of big hits.
But there’s more to it than just unbundling. Comparing the numbers in Part 1 & 2 for CD sales vs. iTunes sales, I notice that the wholesale album price has gone down just over three dollars, from $9.50 to about $6.44 (depending on the retail price1). That might seem logical, given the savings realized by dropping physical distribution:
Postage (0.10)
Distribution Fee (1.80)
Positioning Fee (1.00)
Manufacturing (0.80)
Returns postage (0.03)
Refurbishing (0.05)
TOTAL GROSS SAVINGS (3.78)
“Gross” savings because digital distribution is not cost-free.
But have a look at this line-up of figures:
Gross distribution savings 3.78
Reduction in wholesale price to labels (9.50 - 6.44) 3.06
Apple’s gross margin (9.90 - 6.44)1 3.46
Steve Jobs showed the record companies a way to reduce their expenses and convinced them to give almost all the savings to him.2 There IS a reality distortion field! One begins to see why EMI and some other labels have begun arguing that Apple should raise its iTunes prices.
So that’s where the money went. For now, anyway, it looks as if labels have lost the advantage gained from increased distribution efficiency. So is there a way left for labels, in particular the indies, to make money? As Philipp and dannyo_152_redux have pointed out, reduced marketing expenses could be another route to profit.
This is also the promise of Wired editor Chris Anderson’s Long Tail model. Anderson says that in the digital economy hits will serve as entrees to similar non-hits that are further down the long tail of the sales curve. And he highlights the importance of filters, such as recommendations from trusted experts.
This kind of marketing can be close to free. But what’s it worth? And how much value does it have to make up? As I mentioned in Part 1, marketing expenses for indie albums that are attempting to compete in the mainstream are in the range of $100,000 to $300,000. Alternative indies can’t spend that much cash, so they do things like have their artists play lots of shows. But I’d guess that if you account for time and work, the investment is similar. I hope new forms of marketing can have comparable impact for less money, but I haven’t seen convincing details yet of how that will work. I’ll repeat what I said a little while ago in a post called “Beware Of Risk-Free Business Models”:
So far in business history, there’s been a requirement that risk and reward roughly balance… Many of the alternative models I’ve seen seem to be based on the assumption that merit is enough: people will hear good music and recommend it to their friends, who will want to buy it. But it’s at that point that the model appears to go risk-free… [the] marketing investment is the risk in the risk-reward equation. In particular, it’s the “impresario fee” for finding an artist that is extraordinary in some way and then doing all the things that have to be done to, in effect, modulate pop culture with the image and sound of this artist.
If there’s little or no risk behind a product, why will anyone want to pay for it? So far there have in fact been few money-making acts to emerge from the net, and there have by now been many attempts. It may be that the era of hit recordings is ending, as David Bowie3 and others have argued. Until now, only hits have made profits; the hope for the new models is that increased efficiencies will make non-hits profitable. But in order to make that work these models will have to overcome some powerful forces pulling in opposing directions–in particular, the conversion of music into a commodity whose unit value is approaching zero.
1. iTunes’ retail prices vary.
2. Apple is believed to make little direct net profit from music sales, but the value in iPod sales is huge. The money saved by switching to digital distribution will vary widely depending on the particular model. Running iTunes is apparently quite expensive, while P2P networks can spread expenses so thin they pretty much disappear.
3. ‘’Music itself is going to become like running water or electricity… So it’s like, just take advantage of these last few years because none of this is ever going to happen again. You’d better be prepared for doing a lot of touring because that’s really the only unique situation that’s going to be left. It’s terribly exciting. But on the other hand it doesn’t matter if you think it’s exciting or not; it’s what’s going to happen.'’–New York Times, June 9, 2002.
Thursday, March 16, 2006
The CMCFund is Working!
[b]TOTAL COLLECTED: $95.48
AVERAGE COLLECTED: $19.08[/b]
[quote]I've listened to your music and have greatly enjoyed it over the past couple years. I look forward to hearing more from you soon. I'm sure its going to inspire you to create some damn good music out of this fiasco. Keep up the good work. moontrains ($10.00)[/quote]
[quote]To further the Intergalactic circulation of CMC's music, here's my $10 spot. sogax ($10.00)[/quote]
Come on people give until it hurts
If you are one of the other 3 who have given, please send a little blurb so we can post it.
Thanks in advance...Flo
AVERAGE COLLECTED: $19.08[/b]
[quote]I've listened to your music and have greatly enjoyed it over the past couple years. I look forward to hearing more from you soon. I'm sure its going to inspire you to create some damn good music out of this fiasco. Keep up the good work. moontrains ($10.00)[/quote]
[quote]To further the Intergalactic circulation of CMC's music, here's my $10 spot. sogax ($10.00)[/quote]
Come on people give until it hurts
If you are one of the other 3 who have given, please send a little blurb so we can post it.
Thanks in advance...Flo
Tuesday, March 14, 2006
CMC Fund: The 1999 MP3.com Rolling Stone AD Fiasco Revisited
CMCFund PayPal E-mail Address
I was just asked by a good friend for some help ($$).
More on that later.
In late 1998 I was hanging out at the old MP3.com Message Board when they were indie before their IPO and before they soldout to Vivendi, chatting with some pretty brilliant artists who spanned the globe. At this time there were less than 1000 pioneering artists utilizing digital distribution through the 'net. More on them later.
I had an idea to place a full page ad in Rolling Stone for one of the artists that I couldn't understand wasn't signed to a large label. His name is The Crack Emcee (www.myspace.com/thecrackemcee).
I called the President/CEO of MP3.com at the time and convinced him that I could raise enough support from the less than 1000 pioneering artists that were using his site to promote their indie music to pay for 50% of the Rolling Stone bill.
He told me that he would pay the other half.
I got to work. In less than 1 week we had over $6,000.00 in support from the indie artists and were on our way to placing the ad.
At that point people started to question why The Crack Emcee deserved to be the only artist featured in the ad and over the next several days the entire 'project' fell apart. The President/CEO of MP3.com's ADD didn't help too much either - haha.
Anyway back to my friend's request.
I don't have the amount he needs so I thought I would reach out to every music community out there to see if we could put together a similiar project not to promote his music but to save him from losing his apartment, his instruments and his recording equipment because his wife left him while taking all of their savings in the process.
He's really in a tight spot and this is the time where all good inie artists should come to the aid of their fellow indie artists.
If you were there back in 1998 and feel the same regret of not seeing that Rolling Stone AD to the end, here is your chance to do something about it.
CMCFund PayPal E-mail Address
I'm sure he would appreciate if you can give whatever you can to this effort. If donating is out of the question, please contact me at the same e-mail address and let me know how you can help. Anything you can do will be appreciated.
Karma is a blast you all.
Sincerely,
Flo
52media.com
I was just asked by a good friend for some help ($$).
More on that later.
In late 1998 I was hanging out at the old MP3.com Message Board when they were indie before their IPO and before they soldout to Vivendi, chatting with some pretty brilliant artists who spanned the globe. At this time there were less than 1000 pioneering artists utilizing digital distribution through the 'net. More on them later.
I had an idea to place a full page ad in Rolling Stone for one of the artists that I couldn't understand wasn't signed to a large label. His name is The Crack Emcee (www.myspace.com/thecrackemcee).
I called the President/CEO of MP3.com at the time and convinced him that I could raise enough support from the less than 1000 pioneering artists that were using his site to promote their indie music to pay for 50% of the Rolling Stone bill.
He told me that he would pay the other half.
I got to work. In less than 1 week we had over $6,000.00 in support from the indie artists and were on our way to placing the ad.
At that point people started to question why The Crack Emcee deserved to be the only artist featured in the ad and over the next several days the entire 'project' fell apart. The President/CEO of MP3.com's ADD didn't help too much either - haha.
Anyway back to my friend's request.
I don't have the amount he needs so I thought I would reach out to every music community out there to see if we could put together a similiar project not to promote his music but to save him from losing his apartment, his instruments and his recording equipment because his wife left him while taking all of their savings in the process.
He's really in a tight spot and this is the time where all good inie artists should come to the aid of their fellow indie artists.
If you were there back in 1998 and feel the same regret of not seeing that Rolling Stone AD to the end, here is your chance to do something about it.
CMCFund PayPal E-mail Address
I'm sure he would appreciate if you can give whatever you can to this effort. If donating is out of the question, please contact me at the same e-mail address and let me know how you can help. Anything you can do will be appreciated.
Karma is a blast you all.
Sincerely,
Flo
52media.com
Tuesday, March 07, 2006
A creative use of Digital Distribution
Multimedia & Death Cab Fans - CLICK HERE
I just found out that Death Cab is releasing 12 videos for each song off the band's major label debut "PLANS." Every song off of Plans will be shot by a different director and released one by one through [b]Digital Distribution[/b] over the next several months on their website.
This project gives a lot of merit to their decision to sign with a major label in the first place, um...budget, as well as show how digital distribution is increasing the the channels artists have to promote their records ....Flo
--------------------------------
Multimedia & Death Cab Fans - CLICK HERE
I just found out that Death Cab is releasing 12 videos for each song off the band's major label debut "PLANS." Every song off of Plans will be shot by a different director and released one by one through [b]Digital Distribution[/b] over the next several months on their website.
This project gives a lot of merit to their decision to sign with a major label in the first place, um...budget, as well as show how digital distribution is increasing the the channels artists have to promote their records ....Flo
--------------------------------
The unprecedented collection came about as the brainchild of otaku-house, the production company owned and run by childhood friends Nick Harmer, bassist for Death Cab for Cutie, and video director Aaron Stewart-Ahn. They saw the opportunity to enlist a variety of talented young artists to each make a short film set to a Death Cab song, without the constraints of the traditional music video -- no arbitrary performance footage, the band themselves would not appear in the films. Though the budgets would be small, there would be no creative limits placed upon the filmmakers' imaginations. The ultimate goal was to create a series of small films that worked together as both individual pieces of art and as a unified whole.
Stewart-Ahn and the band compiled a list of directors, including superstars, up-and-coming new talents, and even a graphic novelist who had never had his work animated before. "We named the project 'DIRECTIONS,'" says Stewart-Ahn, "because it's a pun on 'PLANS,' obviously, but ultimately because we feel this project is about unique directorial visions more than anything else. We wanted to create a situation where that would be the emphasis, and I feel the list of directors alone proves that."
Among the filmmakers contributing to "DIRECTIONS" are Lance Bangs, famed for his work alongside Spike Jonze, as well as his videos for such artists as R.E.M. and Green Day; P.R. Brown, who has directed videos for Billy Corgan, Matisyahu and Motley Crue; Ace Norton, a stop-frame animation maestro; acclaimed graphic novelist Jeffrey Brown ("Clumsy"); the Cincinnati-based motion design collective, Lightborne; longtime Death Cab photographer Autumn de Wilde; writer/director Rob Schrab, the mind behind the legendary never-aired Jack Black pilot, "Heat Vision and Jack," and co-founder of the Channel 101 website; acclaimed music video directors Laurent Briet and Monkmus, as well as Stewart-Ahn himself, following up his critically hailed video debut, the Decemberists' "16 Military Wives."
"Each interpretation is phenomenal and our hats go off to everyone involved," says Death Cab's Ben Gibbard. "It's our hope that this project serves as a model to both labels and bands as a way to grant the directors the type and amount of freedom we've enjoyed in the creation of the music itself."
"We have truly been blessed to have met so many creative and energetic artists over the years of being a band," says Harmer. "It just seemed so appropriate to build a project that so many artists that we admire could be a part of and it's so inspiring to stand back and watch them work."
"It's thrilling to have so many enthusiastic artists involved," comments guitarist Chris Walla, "and better still that they're such a varied bunch: Some are heroes; some are exceptionally talented friends; some are brilliant people none of us had heard of. I don't know of any projects quite like this one, and it's a testament to Atlantic's commitment to our artistic vision (and partial lunacy) that they've gotten behind us completely to ensure that it happens."
"They're all so good," concludes drummer Jason McGerr. "The first rough cut I saw blew my expectations out of the water. To read about someone else's interpretation of your song simply isn't enough. To be given an opportunity to see it through their eyes is astonishing."
Multimedia & Death Cab Fans - CLICK HERE
Monday, March 06, 2006
MTV2 of all places turned us on to this throw back to 70's hard rock, wolfmother from down under. For some reason their use of fuzzy guitars, organs and passionate tenor vocals just hit the sweet spot this weekend. Enjoy. We did..Flo
-------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.wolfmother.com People unite for the Wolfies have returned from the canyons of L.A with a fusion of freaked out jamming, delicate melodies and gallant rock riffage that shall be known collectively as Wolfmother. Myles Heskett, Chris Ross and Andrew Stockdale are the key holders to the future of all things Wolf . Together they write all their songs while contributing drums, bass/keyboards and guitar/vocals respectively. In their lives before Wolfmother, Myles worked in graphics, Chris in things digital and Andrew was a photographer so they all shared a passion for creative expression. After years of jamming in anonymity they finally stepped out in public during early 2004, playing shows and signing to Modular Recordings. Later that year the trio released an independent EP that caused ink to be spilled and fans to be won. Then after 6 months of nonstop Australian and overseas touring it was time to start creating a vast album with a deceptively simple title. Their partner in this conception was producer D. Sardy; catalyst for the likes of Dandy Warhols, Oasis, Autolux, Jet and Helmet. Chris, Andrew and Myles decamped to L.A. in May, 2005 and rented an abandoned Hollywood recording studio called Cherokee for their rehearsal space. In its heyday Cherokee hosted sessions like Pink Floyd's "The Wall" but most of its equipment has since been sold or stolen. Even so, from this barren place came lush things as freeform jams evolved into fully formed songs. The themes of the album also took shape in the City Of Angels; a city that thrives on chaos presenting many lyrical possibilities to Andrew Stockdale. The complexities of living in the metropolis also helped shape the escapist imagery of Wolfmother... simple philosophies for complex times. After six weeks of focused creativity at Cherokee - and many fish tacos - the band finally began recording at legendary studio, Sound City. As a result 'Wolfmother' was incubated in the same room as albums like 'Nevermind' and 'Rumours'. After just two weeks in that cavernous space the band had captured the inspired live performances which would form the backbone of their debut album. They then spent another month elsewhere in L.A. adding the little touches that help make 'Wolfmother' such a sprawling beast. And in their downtime they became Champions of every pinball machine in the valley. Throughout this process Myles, Andrew and Chris remained committed to retaining the raw, emotive punch of their live performances. Everything was directed toward capturing "the perfect feeling" rather than "faultless performance". The result is a record on which reckless abandon and glorious imperfections underpin the most evocative moments. As their studio time came to an end the band filmed some videos in the same patch of California desert which featured in the original Star Trek before venturing forth for more live shows. The New York Times gushed about their gig downtown and the NME said kind words about their UK trip. Then they came home to hear "Minds Eye" on the radio ushering in the forthcoming Wolfmother album. The disc comes wrapped in some fine art by illustration icon Frank Frazetta. The images are timeless and impossible to ignore - like the music itself - and it all lands in Australia on October 30. At that time Wolfmother will embark on a month long Australian tour. It will be followed by December appearances at the Homebake, Rockit, Meredith and Falls Festivals. 2006 will see the band taking their music to people around the rest of their world. Please experience Wolfmother [link=http://www.wolfmother.com/2005.html]http://www.wolfmother.com/2005.html[/link]
-------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.wolfmother.com People unite for the Wolfies have returned from the canyons of L.A with a fusion of freaked out jamming, delicate melodies and gallant rock riffage that shall be known collectively as Wolfmother. Myles Heskett, Chris Ross and Andrew Stockdale are the key holders to the future of all things Wolf . Together they write all their songs while contributing drums, bass/keyboards and guitar/vocals respectively. In their lives before Wolfmother, Myles worked in graphics, Chris in things digital and Andrew was a photographer so they all shared a passion for creative expression. After years of jamming in anonymity they finally stepped out in public during early 2004, playing shows and signing to Modular Recordings. Later that year the trio released an independent EP that caused ink to be spilled and fans to be won. Then after 6 months of nonstop Australian and overseas touring it was time to start creating a vast album with a deceptively simple title. Their partner in this conception was producer D. Sardy; catalyst for the likes of Dandy Warhols, Oasis, Autolux, Jet and Helmet. Chris, Andrew and Myles decamped to L.A. in May, 2005 and rented an abandoned Hollywood recording studio called Cherokee for their rehearsal space. In its heyday Cherokee hosted sessions like Pink Floyd's "The Wall" but most of its equipment has since been sold or stolen. Even so, from this barren place came lush things as freeform jams evolved into fully formed songs. The themes of the album also took shape in the City Of Angels; a city that thrives on chaos presenting many lyrical possibilities to Andrew Stockdale. The complexities of living in the metropolis also helped shape the escapist imagery of Wolfmother... simple philosophies for complex times. After six weeks of focused creativity at Cherokee - and many fish tacos - the band finally began recording at legendary studio, Sound City. As a result 'Wolfmother' was incubated in the same room as albums like 'Nevermind' and 'Rumours'. After just two weeks in that cavernous space the band had captured the inspired live performances which would form the backbone of their debut album. They then spent another month elsewhere in L.A. adding the little touches that help make 'Wolfmother' such a sprawling beast. And in their downtime they became Champions of every pinball machine in the valley. Throughout this process Myles, Andrew and Chris remained committed to retaining the raw, emotive punch of their live performances. Everything was directed toward capturing "the perfect feeling" rather than "faultless performance". The result is a record on which reckless abandon and glorious imperfections underpin the most evocative moments. As their studio time came to an end the band filmed some videos in the same patch of California desert which featured in the original Star Trek before venturing forth for more live shows. The New York Times gushed about their gig downtown and the NME said kind words about their UK trip. Then they came home to hear "Minds Eye" on the radio ushering in the forthcoming Wolfmother album. The disc comes wrapped in some fine art by illustration icon Frank Frazetta. The images are timeless and impossible to ignore - like the music itself - and it all lands in Australia on October 30. At that time Wolfmother will embark on a month long Australian tour. It will be followed by December appearances at the Homebake, Rockit, Meredith and Falls Festivals. 2006 will see the band taking their music to people around the rest of their world. Please experience Wolfmother [link=http://www.wolfmother.com/2005.html]http://www.wolfmother.com/2005.html[/link]
Friday, February 24, 2006
Lords of Dogtown - Revolution In The Streets
Anyone seen it yet?
Jay, Stacy and Tony are my new (anti) heroes.
One of the best movies I've seen in a long time. Great surfing, skateboarding, acting, soundtrack and directing....MUST SEE
It all started from an..
"Edgy documentary on skateboarding..., .....A close-up look at the birth of skate board culture in Southern California, Dogtown and Z-Boys has attitude to burn, just like the sport it documents. Directed by Stacy Peralta, one of the legends of the sport, it captures the punk rock spirit of skate boarding, and perfectly places it into context within the boundaries of time (the 1970s) and location (a neighbourhood between Santa Monica and Venice, California). Even if you are not a fan you'll be fascinated by the story, which is told using a combination of narration, stills, great vintage 1970s skate boarding footage and new interviews with all the key players. Sean Penn provides the narration, and adds a flair all of his own. The opposite of stodgy, Penn speaks to the audience not at them, sounding like someone sitting at a bar telling the tale. At one point in mid-sentence he coughs, pauses for a moment and then continues. It's this kind of approach that gives this movie its edge." Author: mrchaos33 from Toronto, Ontario 5 July 2003
KILLER
Heath Ledger was a terrific boozed up - drugged out hippie surfer / board manufacturer and small Dogtown bidness owner.
The entire young triple threat called the J-Boyz acted heads and shoulders above nearly all the adults in the movie BUT NOT including Rebecca Demorne (sp?).
Most of these new faces have only been in a handful of films like Emperor's Club with Kevin Kline (another great actor) and I'm going to follow their careers to see if they can ever match this film again.
AWESOME
I see this movie as a revolution on the streets.
PUN INTENDED and stolen.
Just like the punk music and new rock (bowie, acdc, etc) music that we were listening to at the time, this event pretty much helped shape the counter-culture that is alive and kicking and marketed to death today.
JUST as it was back than.
Whjat a wicked film.
Bands at the time and after: Iggy, T-Rex, Clash, Suicidal Tendancies and Honk added to the rallying cry & importance of this scene.
"We're gonna fight your brother...,...And raise HELL". Joe Srummer
I love that music man.
FUCKING A
Back in the 70's and STILL today people eat what they are fed from the media and this movie just killed me with their attitude and badassedness and anti-hero nonconformity. I wish there was a movie like this when I was 13 years old. I had "Pump up the Volume" which I believe did me OK, but this would have been a little more enlightening
Like it is NOW for me at age 37.
Sincerely,
Flo
www.52media.com
502.777.5252
Saturday, February 11, 2006
Class Action Settlement/Software Update Notice
Anyone who bought MMJ's "Z" on my recommendation can get $7.50 AND another album download!
[b]The RBB AARR - Making you money and getting you more music from Sony's Fuck-up:)[/b]
Enjoy....Flo
Class Action Settlement/Software Update Notice
***IMPORTANT LEGAL NOTICE/SOFTWARE UPDATE NOTICE***PLEASE READ*** (Please do not respond to this email. Responses will not be read.)
If You Bought, Received or Used a SONY BMG Music Entertainment CD Containing Either XCP or Media Max Content Protection Software, Your Rights May Be Affected By a Class Action Settlement, And You Should Download Updates For That Software.
What is this about?
A settlement has been proposed in a lawsuit brought against SONY BMG Music Entertainment, Inc., SunnComm International Inc., and First 4 Internet, Ltd. ("Defendants"). The lawsuit, In re SONY BMG CD Technologies Litigation, Case No. 1:05-cv-09575-NRB, is pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and relates to XCP and MediaMax content protection software installed on certain SONY BMG music CDs.
The Settlement resolves claims that the Defendants manufactured and sold CDs containing XCP and MediaMax software without adequately disclosing the limitations the software imposes on the use of the CDs and the security vulnerabilities it creates. The Defendants have denied that they did anything wrong.
Who Is Included, And What Does The Settlement Provide?
The settlement provides relief for persons who bought, received or used SONY BMG CDs with either XCP or MediaMax software. Under the settlement, any person in possession of an XCP CD can exchange it for a replacement CD, an MP3 download of the same album, and either (a) cash payment of $7.50 and one (1) free album download from a list of 200 albums, or (b) three (3) free album downloads from that list.Purchasers of CDs containing MediaMax 5.0 software will receive a free MP3 download of the same album and one (1) additional free album download. Purchasers of CDs containing MediaMax 3.0 software will receive a free MP3 download of the same album.
The settlement also requires the Defendants to stop manufacturing SONY BMG CDs with XCP or MediaMax 3.0 and 5.0 software and, until 2008: (1) make available updates to fix all known security vulnerabilities caused by XCP and MediaMax software; (2) provide software programs to uninstall XCP and MediaMax software safely; (3) fix any future security vulnerabilities discovered in MediaMax and any other content protection software placed on SONY BMG CDs; (4) provide independent verification that personal information about users of SONY BMG CDs has not and will not be collected through XCP or MediaMax; (5) waive certain provisions of the end user license agreements for XCP and MediaMax software; and (6) ensure that any other content protection software will be clearly disclosed, independently tested and readily uninstalled.
At 9:15a.m. on May 22, 2006, the Court will hold a hearing at the United States District Court, Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, Courtroom 21A, New York, New York 10007-1312, to decide whether to approve the settlement and the class attorneys' fees and costs.
How Do I Participate In The Settlement?If you bought or received a SONY BMG Music CD containing XCP or MediaMax software and want to receive the relief you may be eligible for under the settlement, you must submit an online claim form at www.sonybmgcdtechsettlement.com, or mail a claim form to:
SONY BMG CD Technologies SettlementP.O. Box 1804, Faribault, MN 55021-1804
All claim forms must be submitted by December 31, 2006.
What Are My Other Options?
If you bought, received or used a SONY BMG Music CD containing XCP or MediaMax software, and you do not want to be legally bound by the settlement or receive a replacement CD, cash, free downloads or other relief, you must exclude yourself by May 1, 2006. If you do not exclude yourself, certain of your claims against the Defendants that were or could have been asserted in the lawsuit will be released, meaning you may not be able to sue the Defendants for those claims.To view the detailed legal Notice of Proposed Class Action Settlement, Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Settlement Fairness Hearing and to download the software updates, visit www.sonybmgcdtechsettlement.com. You may obtain further information by contacting the claims administrator at the address above or by calling toll free 1-800-242-7610.
[b]The RBB AARR - Making you money and getting you more music from Sony's Fuck-up:)[/b]
Enjoy....Flo
Class Action Settlement/Software Update Notice
***IMPORTANT LEGAL NOTICE/SOFTWARE UPDATE NOTICE***PLEASE READ*** (Please do not respond to this email. Responses will not be read.)
If You Bought, Received or Used a SONY BMG Music Entertainment CD Containing Either XCP or Media Max Content Protection Software, Your Rights May Be Affected By a Class Action Settlement, And You Should Download Updates For That Software.
What is this about?
A settlement has been proposed in a lawsuit brought against SONY BMG Music Entertainment, Inc., SunnComm International Inc., and First 4 Internet, Ltd. ("Defendants"). The lawsuit, In re SONY BMG CD Technologies Litigation, Case No. 1:05-cv-09575-NRB, is pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and relates to XCP and MediaMax content protection software installed on certain SONY BMG music CDs.
The Settlement resolves claims that the Defendants manufactured and sold CDs containing XCP and MediaMax software without adequately disclosing the limitations the software imposes on the use of the CDs and the security vulnerabilities it creates. The Defendants have denied that they did anything wrong.
Who Is Included, And What Does The Settlement Provide?
The settlement provides relief for persons who bought, received or used SONY BMG CDs with either XCP or MediaMax software. Under the settlement, any person in possession of an XCP CD can exchange it for a replacement CD, an MP3 download of the same album, and either (a) cash payment of $7.50 and one (1) free album download from a list of 200 albums, or (b) three (3) free album downloads from that list.Purchasers of CDs containing MediaMax 5.0 software will receive a free MP3 download of the same album and one (1) additional free album download. Purchasers of CDs containing MediaMax 3.0 software will receive a free MP3 download of the same album.
The settlement also requires the Defendants to stop manufacturing SONY BMG CDs with XCP or MediaMax 3.0 and 5.0 software and, until 2008: (1) make available updates to fix all known security vulnerabilities caused by XCP and MediaMax software; (2) provide software programs to uninstall XCP and MediaMax software safely; (3) fix any future security vulnerabilities discovered in MediaMax and any other content protection software placed on SONY BMG CDs; (4) provide independent verification that personal information about users of SONY BMG CDs has not and will not be collected through XCP or MediaMax; (5) waive certain provisions of the end user license agreements for XCP and MediaMax software; and (6) ensure that any other content protection software will be clearly disclosed, independently tested and readily uninstalled.
At 9:15a.m. on May 22, 2006, the Court will hold a hearing at the United States District Court, Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, Courtroom 21A, New York, New York 10007-1312, to decide whether to approve the settlement and the class attorneys' fees and costs.
How Do I Participate In The Settlement?If you bought or received a SONY BMG Music CD containing XCP or MediaMax software and want to receive the relief you may be eligible for under the settlement, you must submit an online claim form at www.sonybmgcdtechsettlement.com, or mail a claim form to:
SONY BMG CD Technologies SettlementP.O. Box 1804, Faribault, MN 55021-1804
All claim forms must be submitted by December 31, 2006.
What Are My Other Options?
If you bought, received or used a SONY BMG Music CD containing XCP or MediaMax software, and you do not want to be legally bound by the settlement or receive a replacement CD, cash, free downloads or other relief, you must exclude yourself by May 1, 2006. If you do not exclude yourself, certain of your claims against the Defendants that were or could have been asserted in the lawsuit will be released, meaning you may not be able to sue the Defendants for those claims.To view the detailed legal Notice of Proposed Class Action Settlement, Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Settlement Fairness Hearing and to download the software updates, visit www.sonybmgcdtechsettlement.com. You may obtain further information by contacting the claims administrator at the address above or by calling toll free 1-800-242-7610.
Friday, December 09, 2005
Songwriters object to C-J editorial
We are responding to the Dec. 1 editorial headlined "Lewis honky-tonk tax cuts." The editorial implies that the "Songwriters Capital Gains Tax Equity Act" is some sort of special-interest legislation that is undeserved. Here are the facts and what every songwriter goes through:
Our profession's average annual income is below $5,000 per year. The federal government determines our maximum wage of 8.5 cents per song, per record, which we usually divide four ways with our co-writer and corporate music publisher to generally earn 2.175 cents every time a record is sold. We earn even less when a song is played on the radio and on top of all that, the federal government requires us to receive royalties immediately after collection. This means we earn virtually nothing for years, then on a successful song are thrust for one year into a tax bracket for rich people! No other authors in
Every day our work is being stolen -- 30 billion times in 2004 -- on the Internet. We have no company health insurance, pension or other benefits. Two-thirds of all American professional songwriters have lost their jobs in the last decade.
If you are one of the lucky few to write some hits, you can propose a joint-venture business partnership with a corporate music publisher. You will pay at least half of all the costs of getting your song ready to market. Demos run around $1,000 each, and if one out of 10 of those songs gets picked up by an artist, you're doing great, so you should demo a lot of them. Like some, you might want to lease your own office, build a studio in your home and hire someone to hit the streets to get those songs heard. You'll have to pay promotion costs to radio to get the song heard if one gets recorded.
After writing hundreds of songs and working for years to build your publishing company with your corporate partner, you each both decide to sell the business. Your corporate partner pays the capital gains tax rate of 15 percent. The songwriter-publisher will pay the top tax rate, somewhere north of 35 percent. Don't forget to add in 15 percent or more self-employment tax.
Rep. Ron Lewis thinks this is unfair. It is also important to note that nearly 10 percent of the entire Congress, Democrats and Republicans alike, co-sponsored this important legislation -- not just one
America's very first professional songwriter, Stephen Foster, who after visiting the commonwealth as a child wrote "My Old Kentucky Home," died, literally, with 39 cents in his pocket. These lawmakers know this is valid legislation that songwriters have deserved for decades. They just want to ensure that future Stephen Fosters are treated as well as corporations.
Member, the
RON HELLARD
JAMES DEAN HICKS
LISA PALAS
Friday, June 03, 2005
Bob Gatewood - http://www.bobgatewoord.com - the sensation from the island, no not that island, the one somewhere off cleveland. over the many years of downloading and listening, downloading and listening X52, I've never heard a more well produced sound than his, I find myself singing his tunes months after I last listened to them and his song "Blades on the water" is probably one of my top 10 songs of ALL time.
slackshop - http://slackshop.us - I've known BillyB since '91 when my band opened up for his former band, they're an alumni of 52's '99 Harvest webcast and he's a great songwriter and marketing whizz. His songs are constantly played on 40+ radio stations throughout the southeast. They stripped down many of their hits for this acoustic EP that they recently released which we're proud to release on 52media. I like their sound. I feel its very accessable, like DMB meets REM with a bit of Roger Waters weirdness thrown in for good measure.
Wednesday, May 18, 2005
Thursday, October 28, 2004
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)