BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Radio & Music >

Well and Truly Going Down the Swanny

  
 
Scrambled Password Bogus Email
14:56 / 11.02.04
Sam & Mark are looking likely to get number 1 this week with even less sales than LMC vs U2, which achieved those giddy heights with around 35,000 sales.

An A&R pal at a rather well known major label lost money with a track which debuted at number 11, and may just claw his way to breaking even on compilations. Maybe.

Number 20 in the midweeks has achieved this luminous accolade (well, top 20, just, so far) with the quite staggering sales figure of....wait for it....1301 records (ok, CD's).

Yes, thirteen hundred. And one. Number 20 in the national charts. Sales figures last week for singles were the lowest on record for 35 years, with just 10 records managing to sell more than 10,000 copies.

At the risk of sounding like a smug cunt, I only got to number fucking 13 3 years ago with 65,000 first week sales, ferchrissakes. Time was about 6-7 years ago that 20,000 would only get you to about the high fifties.

The single in the UK is well and truly fucked. Kaput. These numbers cannot turn a profit for practically any record label, however large or small, the cost of marketing and promoting new material and distributing it for a return of just pence simply cannot go on...

Albums are fairly healthy, but still, export is low, with very few artists having broad enough appeal to transport to other territories. Meanwhile, Coldplay, possibly the only British band to have any foreign currency at all, are almost universally derided for being, er, 'boring' and 'uncool', depsite beating off tracks like 'Crazy In Love' and 'Hey Ya' to scoop record of the year at the Grammy's. What the fuck is wrong with the British mentality towards success in this game?

Ah fuck it. I should have been a fucking lawyer. This land needs a serious enema, fast.

Bollox, I'm off to get pissed and consider my career options.
 
 
rizla mission
11:04 / 12.02.04
thoughts in random order;

1.The only singles I tend to buy are cutesy looking 7"s by bands with names like Anorak Girl that probably sell about 8 copies, so, er, shrug, whatever. I remember reading somewhere that 7" singles make up something like 0.0002% of total music sales, which is a crime as they're the coolest format in the history of recorded music..

2.Actually, thinking about it, the worst thing about the huge drop in singles sales is that it suggests kids are maybe buying entire albums by artists who blatantly only have one hit song - this is pretty bad, not only cos they're wasting their money, but because !POP! music is traditionally driven by the "One Killer Song!" idea, and, with a few notable exceptions, albums released by artists who have a hit with their One Killer Song are little more than cash-ins filled with godawful filler and diluted ripoffs of the hit song, which leads to a world with a lot less BANG!CRASH!POW! !POP! hits, and a lot more sloppy time-wasting shit.

3.Are you seriously suggesting we should beam with patriotic pride cos some losers in America decided to give Coldplay an award?? Dude, I don't care whether Coldplay come from Barnstable or the Republic of Tonga - they fucking suck therefore I don't care, end of story.

I mean, as a wider issue, I'm staggered by the idea that where a band comes from matters at all, other than in terms of cultural context I suppose.. I certainly don't care about supporting "British Music" or "American Music" or the music of any other particular nation, I prefer to devote my efforts to "Music I Like"... and as has been proved time and time again, the amount of quality music being made at any given time has zero connection to record sales..

4.You got to no.13 in the charts?? tell us more!
 
 
doc
12:29 / 12.02.04


I thought singles were like the lost leaders for the album,merely an advertising gimmick ,I dont think labels expect to make any money on them....so isn't the "chart" thing just some outdated throwback to the black and white tv days
 
 
gergsnickle
13:37 / 12.02.04
Actually, thinking about it, the worst thing about the huge drop in singles sales is that it suggests kids are maybe buying entire albums by artists who blatantly only have one hit song

Or they're grabbing those songs off the internet and have no need to buy them.

And, yes, do tell us more about this #13 in the charts.
 
 
No star here laces
01:56 / 13.02.04
On the flip I think people like Wiley can easily shift 5,000 copies of a white label 12" only release with zero marketing and that has to equal a tidy profit...
 
 
Scrambled Password Bogus Email
09:21 / 13.02.04
.but because !POP! music is traditionally driven by the "One Killer Song!" idea, and, with a few notable exceptions, albums released by artists who have a hit with their One Killer Song are little more than cash-ins filled with godawful filler and diluted ripoffs of the hit song, which leads to a world with a lot less BANG!CRASH!POW! !POP! hits, and a lot more sloppy time-wasting shit.

Exactly...The death of the single is a terrible state of affairs for all manner of independent operators and producers, 'cos it leads the industry back to marketing and huge investment requirements to get a sniff of being heard...If radio has to resort to picking tracks of albums for content, then only album artists are going to have a look-in, and albums don't come fucking cheap or easy, surely two words are seminally important in !POP! music...It costs around £1 million quid to create, manufacture and market a typical album at the level likely to translate into exposure enough to give the creativity a chance to shine, if you factor in videos, remixes for various markets, distribution etc...

Are you seriously suggesting we should beam with patriotic pride cos some losers in America decided to give Coldplay an award?? Dude, I don't care whether Coldplay come from Barnstable or the Republic of Tonga - they fucking suck therefore I don't care, end of story.

No, not you, you can say and do what you like, but the British Music Press have a certain amount of responsibility to keep their fickle serendipity under control...Coldplay were lauded when they arrived, have become popular and more in the public eye, Chris Martin's relationship with the Strumpet is in all the papers, and lo and behold they are now 'Boring' and 'Not rock'n'roll...'...Regardless of opinions, the songs are of the highest quality from a pure hooks and structure POV, unlike the sad hype-a-thon imitations of fucking Snow Patrol and Keane, who are being Bigged Up way beyond their talent, and set up for a fall because of it...I dunno, I see your point entirely, I'm just saying from the industry's perspective, Coldplay are flying the flag for export to traditionally tough markets, and getting scant support from their own native press, who are too busy fawning over American R&B stars and Jam clones...

I also agree that the nationality of a band is irrelevant to a music fan, but clearly it is relevant to the health and prospects of an industry...

The only way out I can see (which ain't ever gonna happen), is for the record labels to split from their parent multinational conglomerates and delist from the Stock Exchange...Quarterly reports on profit and loss to shareholders just don't hold truck with the older model of 5 album deals expexting return on investment during or after album 3, when a solid fanbase has (hopefully) been established and creativity given a chance to flourish and grow...The demands of shareholders requiring swift yield on investments just doesn't jibe with the demands of a healthy and flourishing creative pool...
 
 
Scrambled Password Bogus Email
09:26 / 13.02.04
My fifteen minutes was a little recognised punk rock classic clad in the camouflage of a novelty record, made in 24 hours after a weeknd in Amsterdam, and without exception the funniest day in a studio I've ever spent...Nepalese hash, you rock...of which I refuse to say anymore! HAH!

But it was profitable for all concerned, which just ain't gonna happen again in the present, and worsening, climate...

Humbug.
 
 
Scrambled Password Bogus Email
09:33 / 13.02.04
Jefe, who's Wiley??

5,000 whites, if barcoded and sold through a chart-returns shop, would definitely score a Top 30 at the moment, maybe even creeping towards the 20's...

Manufacturing and distribution costs probably equate to about £2500-£3000.

Price to dealer most likely about £2.85-£3.00 depending on how much they want the vinyl on sale in the racks (usually around £5.99 for whites), so 5,000x2.85-2750 = about 9-10k profit, which is pretty good if you can turn them around swiftly and regularly.

Of course, that ignores the studio costs and mastering, engineer, whoever else, but if we're talking bedroom special, pretty healthy...Especially if you can go on to license to compilations etc., but that's a sagging market as well...

Anyway, who Wiley??
 
 
illmatic
10:41 / 13.02.04
Wiley is an East London garage MC. This scene he's out of is the successor is the of the whole "speed garage" thing of a couple of year, which in turn came out of drum n' bass with a extra few influences chuked in. Dizzee Rascal has been the only commercial success so far. Think of all those pirate radio stations filled with excitable shouting on that you tune past when your trying to find Radio 4 and you have the right idea. (By which I don't mean you personally, I mean me as well). Woebot and various other blogs have been writing about it for some time now under the name of "grime". Interesting music 'cos it represents a kind of indigenous UK Hip Hop sound. It's somethign new and different anyhow.

I actually read though that it's quite a underacheiveing music in terms of sales, with most singles rarely topping a thousand. Which of course means it's all thse tunes are going to be going for silly money in a few months time.

Agree with Rizla about the sanctity of the 7". Another reason why I love reggae - all the new JA pre's are still on 7", and you can walk into any reggae shop worth it's salt and pick up a handful of classic 7" represses.
 
 
illmatic
10:45 / 13.02.04
jefe's moe ya man for a critical beatdown on this sort of stuff. Anything to say sunshine? You still getting it over there in Sinapore?
 
 
No star here laces
08:05 / 18.02.04
yeah, I get monthly shipments from juno.co.uk which has a passable but far from complete selection of garage 12s. Also the wonders of soulseek.

Anyhow, whether it's 1k or 5k, they're mostly sold through places like Rhythm Syndicate which assuredly aren't barcoded.

It's true about the collectibility btw - copies of Eskimo are already changing hands on eBay for over a tenner which is pretty extraordinary since it was only released 18 months ago, or something like.
 
 
Goodness Gracious Meme
09:52 / 18.02.04
On the barcoding thing. There have for at least the last ten years, probably more (?) been singles that sold enough to get into the charts, but they're from specialist scenes, sold thru' non-barcoded distributors. Happened with jungle in the early days...Reggae, as Ill points out, also slips through the net...

Bhangra is another obvious example. There are UK-based people who can *easily* sell a few thousand records via community connections/pirate/non-pirate radio airplay but are never going to show up on the charts. Have massive coverage within a specific subculture...

And again, probably make decent profits as they're small scale/based within a community/often fly on word of mouth. (and something more specific to bhangra, have another vast ready-made market. Doesn't apply to all by any means, but alot of UK bhangra turns up in India these days...)
 
 
Scrambled Password Bogus Email
11:59 / 18.02.04
As great as selling 1-5 thousand white labels can be for an individual, if they can pull it off at least 3 times a year, and be reliably accounted to with speed and regularity, none of that really changes the fact that the wider Industry in this country is, well, going down the swanny.

Did you watch the Brits?
 
 
suds
12:49 / 18.02.04
I'm not surprised by this.... if they expect us to spend £3.99 on a CD single when you can just get the album for less than a tenner more, let alone downloading it, they're fucking stupid. I only buy singles if they are less than £2.00 and have a free poster or good B-side (not just a remix) or a video. Thats why I always get Blazin Squad singles.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
13:18 / 18.02.04
So what do the Brits prove, Money $hot? Haven't they always been a shoddy affair?

I have to say I'm not very convinced by this "Coldplay aren't getting the respect they deserve!" schtick. Coldplay's album came out a while ago, and at the time got an awful lot of favourably coverage, including topping many end of the year lists. At this point, not so many people are writing about them, because it's (in pop terms) a while since they did anything. The album came out later in America, dude, that's why they got a Grammy at a time when comparatively less attention was being paid to them here.

(Although I have to add, whilst there are people who feel more hostility to Coldplay than I do, I find it an absurd suggestion that even if I personally don't like them, they should be given some kind of special credit because of their international success, or because of some pseudo-objective, muso idea of "pure" song quality. If preferring 'Crazy In Love' over 'The Scientist' is "fawning over American R&B stars" - oh no! - then glue horns on my head, hooves on my feet, and call me Mr Tumnus.)
 
 
Scrambled Password Bogus Email
17:15 / 18.02.04
The problem with the Brits is that it was utterly swamped with American acts doing the same routines they did with amillion times more gusto a couple of weeks ago at the Grammys...

The rationale behind this is that it makes it easier to sell the show to foreign territories and hence give exposure to British acts - a blinding oversight, given the fact that very few British acts actually performed, and foreign territories are more than likely to edit them out in favour of the crowd pulling American talent.

Only 6 million viewers at it's peak - the fucking Bafta's had more, and that entails people who pretend to be other people wearing suits and frocks walking to a stage, speaking, and sitting back down again. It's a fairly shitty indication that is considered a bigger TV draw than live music, supposedly the Best that GB has to offer, as a showcase to the world.

It was fucking embarrassing. The US acts outperformed everyone there, cause the choice of acts from these shores playing had nothing to offer in terms of the type of innovation we are actually good at (taking nothing away from the inherent brilliance of Outkast et al)...We have far more unique and genre busting musical output to offer which should be on displaay at an event like this regardlless of who the gongs are going to...Where was Goldfrapp? Coldplay? Stereophonics? Joss Stone? Franz Ferdinand? Sugababes? They arew all invited to wear pretty clothes and sit at fucking tables!

Know how much a table was at the Brits. 10k!! That's a fair slice of fucking budget for a new or developing band, considering all the apparent 'belt tightening' required at majors right now...

On top of this they scrapped significant awards, like best producer, and a few others.

I agree, it's always been a bit of a farce, but is being touted more and more as 'The British answer to the Grammy's'...Heaven forbid it should get so bloated, but there is a middle ground. And for fucks sake take it back to the Royal Albert Hall and leave Earls Court for the all night laundromats and youth hostels.

The Coldplay thing is more to do with industry fickle and journalism fickle than puinter opinion as I explained somewhere above...Not sure about your assertion that the reason they won a Grammy was due to the late release date of their album Stateside, but perhaps you know more about the judges rationale than I.

On a lighter note, I found the hilarious camp of the Fiddy Cent intro so fucking funny I actually thought he was going to burst into a bootleg of 'In Da Club' with 'YMCA'...

For a good wheeze, in case you missed the TV thread, this is a fairly amusing summary of the evening.

The best thing in music last night was undoubtedly the huge welcome roar that Dizzee Rascal got when he cameod on stage at the N*E*R*D gig for a rendition of 'Lapdance'...a bigger reception, for less performance, than even Justin Timberlake, who did Senorita with them...The Boy from Bow done Good.
 
 
Scrambled Password Bogus Email
17:25 / 18.02.04
Correction - The Brits was watched by just under 1 million more than the BAFTAS - which was broadcast aginst the Terrestrial premiere of 'Unbreakable' over on ITV and, as mentioned, involves nowt but speeches.

Still pretty dire. Even when it was an utter shambles (maybe because?) it had figures topping 10 million.

It's a world gone mad when rock'n'roll award shows are utterly boring and you have to tune in to the fucking Superbowl to get rockstars being naughty.
 
 
haus of fraser
16:01 / 10.04.06
Ok so i thought i'd bump this thread as it seems to cover a few things that i wanted to discuss and helps get the ball rolling.

Much has been reported of the various states of the music industry- either dying on its feet- or rejuvenated by itunes depending on who you believe.

I work for a company that makes music videos as an editor - they also represent me as a young director. From where i'm standing things aren't great- budgets have been slashed - and very few people are actually making money or even a living from videos.

The current music video industry is supported by commercials- ie you don't make much more than cost on a music video but if your crew work on the cheap music job they get the well paid commercial the following week.

The latest things i've been asked to write treatments on (as a director) seem to be taking the piss slightly- about two weeks ago i was sent an album by a well known band- they want to release a DVD of the album with a video for every track- they will however only play costs of around £1000 per video (it may sound like a lot but it really isn't- this means a crew working for free with super deals on any kit hired/ film proccessed). I thought long and hard about whether i wanted to be involved as it could mean some great exposure- buuut i'm also setting a precident for myself and my crew that we can and will work for nothing. I decided not to write on it in the end, as i wasn't that keen and had never been a big fan of the band (which is important if you're working for nothing).

Today I got sent 4 tracks by another band which is definitely more interesting and is much more in the vein i'd like to work in. However for this project there is literally no budget- ie i would finance anything i make myself- which will then be distributed by a record label for money on a DVD.

For an unknown band this would be vaguely understandable- however the people in this band are well known and seemlingly using their status to gain favours.

What do you think Barbelith, am i right to be slightly worried/ pissed off about this? It seems labels are finally taking advantage of an over crowded market place with directors queuing to make a video- thinking it an easy industry to break.

It's kind of interesting that people think more money is spent on videos- when actually people are just working for less money and a big love of music. Its always cooler to shoot/ edit/ make CG for a cool band than a work on a churchill ad or something- and it looks better on a showreel.

Has anybody else got experience with label budget slashes/ redundancies etc etc that are actually effecting those of us that work in the industry?
 
 
PatrickMM
20:10 / 10.04.06
I'm actually just starting doing music videos, with pretty much unknown bands, for no pay. I'm trying to build up a reel, so doing a video where the artist will pay the cost of producing it is actually easier than doing short films of my own, and it's a good way to get contacts.

But, I could definitely see problems moving from this into paying work. I'd imagine a large part of why the budget for videos is down is the fact that, at least in America, they're not shown on TV that much, so it's only fans of the band who will seek out the video. DVD might make some money, but generally speaking, it's not as strong a promotional tool as it used to be.

And Rivets, do you have a link to your videography? I'd love to check out some of your stuff.
 
 
haus of fraser
21:29 / 10.04.06
Yup sadly the acts involved are all name bands with bona fide UK chart positions and MTV2 airplay. The free job is essentially a side project for a number of known musicians in the UK- they want directors to have a 'creative experience' - but (and here's my objection) they want to release a DVD of the videos- from which they will make sales- i will make nothing.

Its one thing to make a video for a band you like to help get them started and a leg up on MTV/ for the website- its another thing to ask for freebee's when there is already a market in place.
 
 
Scrambled Password Bogus Email
07:29 / 11.04.06
My tuppence from my experience : Never (Ever) Work For Free.

It's a total fucking mockery. Advertising, funny enough, are the worst of the bunch by a long shot for us.

Here's why : The people asking you to work for nothing wouldn't. Simple as that. Plus, and this is the really important bit, you think that by doing someone 'a favour' and working for nothing, you are banking 'a favour' in return, and when selfsame client actually has a budget, you'll be at the top of their minds and programmed into the one-button dial on the phone.

'Hey, remember the great job Copey did last time? And, man, didn't ze, like, do it for scraps, man? Yeah, let's hir on it, we owe hir one, big time!'

Not so.

You are 'the cheap option' and 'the guy that does free demos/reels/videos/whatever'. If they ever have no budget again, if they are 'in research' and don't want to spend any of someone elses money, in case the auditors scald them afterwards, then, and only then, will they call you. Now that a budget is in place, there is no way you are going to get it. It's going to go to the shiny, hitherto unaffordable (and hence superior quality) West End company who have always been admired and oh my, we just love your work, didn't you do the award winning blah warrah warrah fishpaste.

The production teams who allocate budgets always assume higher cost=better quality. They are usually deaf, and often blind, and incredibly nervous about their own vacuum where their opinions are supposed to be, so the only indicator they have is the braille on the bottom line. Expensive=good, Cheap=bad, but necessary sometimes, and Free=who?

Don't do it.

On the other hand, sometimes it may be worth it. Makes great PR if it does. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

My own hard earned spiel on this now is thus:

Free? Hmm. Brief me up and I'll consider it.

(Get the brief. Consider it. Assuming you think it's worth investing in...)

'OK, I'll do it. It looks great, I like it. So, all of my creativity and skills I'm going to invest in your project for nothing, in lieu of payment in the future. Speculate to accumulate and all that. However, obviously all equipment, facility hire and third-party technical personnel need to be paid. I assume you meant that anyway. So, on a job like this, I'll need $x since it's going to take y days and z hours in the edit suite, and we'll need a b and c oojamewotsits. That's not including tax. Is that cool?'

You'll be amazed how miraculously there actually is budget for this type of reasoning. And if not, then stick by your guns and don't do it. You'll also be amazed by how the phone rings again from that client when they have money, but not anymore when they are taking the living piss out of of a highly specialised technician and asking them to work for nothing.

Wow, do I sound bitter, much?

I dunno, maybe quit altogether, and work in a bank?

They won't expect you to work for free, at least.
 
 
kidninjah
08:31 / 11.04.06
How about proposing new deals with the musicians/distributers?

If they're asking you to work for free/little money, but hoping to make ca$h themselves from the sales of the finished product, why notask for a slice of that sales action?

a) image: it shows you're professional (ie you want to be paid for work)
b) image: it shows you're creative/free-thinking in terms of _how_ you make your money. and not only does it show that to others, it also provides you with income (if they go for the deal). Plus it'll get u into the habit of striking such deals.
c) justification: you're an equal partner in the creative stakes. they made the tunes, you made the films. The DVD sells on the strength of the combination of the two, and wouldn't sell half as well if one or other componant was missing.
d) for fun: why not make a DVD of silent music videos yourself. has anyone done that yet? i'll be in it, but i require a cut of the royalties and a brandy glass of brown m&ms.
e) anecdote: allegedly Alec Guinness was asked to work 3 extra days on Star Wars for free. He didn't want to work for no money and they had no budget to pay him, so an agreement was made for 1% on royalties. Sure, they could have made no money if the film had flopped, but it didn't. 1% on starwars??? That's got to be a couple of houses in the south of france, a rolex and Moet for bathwater. The moral: be Alec Guinness.
 
 
haus of fraser
09:40 / 11.04.06
Sadly its not as clear cut as being the only person asked- there will probably be literally- 50- 100+ directors asked to write ideas- then they choose the ideas they like and make the videos- I'm tempted to reveal who the band is because you will almost certainly know them.

The more i think about it the shitter it sounds- the band won't appear in the video, i work for nothing, and i get to make a film using their music- I can make a spec video for nothing without the band- any day of the week! Why would i want to be involved?

I'm tempted to try and run a boycott of this project- alerting the likes of shooting people and MVPA (music video producers association) and trying to get other directors to hold off contributing- but there will always be one production company that say yes- and they'll get the exposure in the end.

its a bit shit really.
 
 
haus of fraser
09:56 / 11.04.06
The company MD has got wind of this project and is asking directors not to contribute for obvious reasons- i feel a bit better about this.

Out of curiousity how much does a songwriter/ band make from PRS - honey pot this is probably your area? Cos you can be sure someone is making something- its not a charity record.
 
 
Scrambled Password Bogus Email
10:10 / 11.04.06
Whoever has the publishing (usually split between writers and publishing companies and PRS) makes the wedge. How much depends on where it's played and how much. A Radio 1 broadcast is about £45 per play (from memory) all other stations diminishing returns on this...all adds up to a big pile of cash if the tune is crossover specialist and mainstream national and local radio...

TV is different...ITV pay £60 / minute, all others much less (esp. the Beeb, who have 'special arrangements' being PSB and all...) except pay per view channels...MUTV is £150/minute, so getting your music on football trailers=stinking rich in no time...

For you, though, it's VPL that's imortant, surely?
 
 
haus of fraser
10:13 / 11.04.06
VPL?
 
 
haus of fraser
10:31 / 11.04.06
i've just been told that i'm not allowed to publicly voice my disapproval at this project- ie i can't open it up for debate on Shooting People under my real name- for fear of damaging relationships with the company. (i thought something like this may happen- a reason why i won't post links to our website/ my work- nasty repercussions from my big mouth!)
 
 
_Boboss
10:32 / 11.04.06
'visible panty line'
 
 
haus of fraser
10:52 / 11.04.06
Gahh, fell into that one with my grumbling righteous head on!
 
 
Scrambled Password Bogus Email
13:16 / 11.04.06
No, not visible panty line.

VPL!

Like PPL, but for videos.

You need to know these things if you ever hope to get paid properly...although usually it would belong to whoever funded the production of the video...so mostly the record label, maybe the band (if they have any negotiating smarts, seeing as the label are going to bill them for it anyway)...but in this instance, since nuttin' ain't for nuttin', you.
 
 
Scrambled Password Bogus Email
13:21 / 11.04.06
If you can own it, or some of it, then do, 'cos it pays hefty. If I'm not mistaken (I may be, this may be the total not per minute) then VPL broadcast royalties are £300 / minute.

So a typical video broadcast generates about £900 for the VPL rights holder...that may be wrong though, it may be less. Still a sizeable sum.

If you consider the global daily play of a succesful video, then you are deafened by the almighty KER-CHING, even allowing for lots of different (and much lower) royalty rates from obscure territories.

(If you consider it, this still makes Music TV channels the cheapest possible broadcasts by far...every ten minutes or so of airtime costs just, assuming I'm right about the figures (will check later) £3000 in broadcast royalties) plus broadcast technology and about 4 hours on FCP in an edit suite. Consider the frequency and length of the ad breaks, and they are all quids in compared to hiring a big studio and paying big egos and celebrity fees and crew costs and equipment hire and so on for other daytime broadcasts.)
 
 
haus of fraser
15:03 / 11.04.06
Yup- sadly NO video directors take a cut of PRS/ VPL or anything- we get paid on a job by job basis- (this is everyone from me to Michel Gondry) normally 10% of total budget- although this isn't always adhered to with the recent dramatic cut in budgets- hence me not knowing about royalties. Many of us wish we got paid like that - and in France I believe the director is entitled to a royalty- but not over here (UK)- although with the introduction of Ipod video/ PSP's and charging a royalty is something that's been talked about, but the labels are being pretty stubborn on...
 
 
Scrambled Password Bogus Email
15:30 / 11.04.06
Sure, but if someone asks you to do what you do for free, the ball is in your court on the negotiations. If you think (or they think, and you agree) they are going to profit on the finished work, be it from performance royalties (VPL) or mechanical royalties (MCPS), then get in on the act.

But, in the final analysis, all of this notwithstanding, just don't work for free. It cheapens you and the industry you are in, and is the bane of the creative minded (or walleted, more to the point).
 
 
haus of fraser
15:39 / 11.04.06
The approach that i'm taking is if I come up with a treatment that i can reasonably make with minimal costs- then do exactly that- renegotiate my contract so i get a share of any profits if they want it- we'll see- i probably won't write on it as i have other paying tracks in at the mo...
 
  
Add Your Reply