English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

A CD costs the shop £6 from music company but they sell it for £12. The £6 is devided between the record company, the band, the producers, label,Engineers, Packaging artwork etc etc. all the rest goes to the retailer. If the retailer is the same as the label(eg.Virgin records) they take most of the profit. If the wholesaler is different to the retailer, the retailer get half of the profit and the rest gets divided up.

2007-07-21 03:45:55 · 9 answers · asked by Shironeko 1 in Entertainment & Music Music Rock and Pop

9 answers

Yes the artists royalties is probably too small record sales, plus they are forced to work hard and tour to promote the record..alas, there in lies another dilemma, if they tour efficiently? The band can make of 50% of their money doing that, but If they live in excess as they tour and don't make anything, because they partied through the whole tour, then they only have the record sales and those are the ones that say they are being ripped off.. Led Zeppelin did that, they did not make anything touring and went in the negative most of the time...except for "John Paul Jones" who traveled seperately from the band, was married and arrived and performed every show and did not squander his share! He may still be the richest former member of "Led Zeppelin" and did'nt have to have a solo career afterwards!

WS

2007-07-21 03:57:33 · answer #1 · answered by Boy Blue 5 · 7 0

Many record companies invest a lot more than 'the cost of the CD' - you have to pay producers, engineers, musicians, caterers, amp rental, transportation, hotel rooms, etc. etc.

The musician actually gets a very small percentage (sometimes less than 1%) on the album sales because they are essentially paying back this "loan" that the record companies gave them.
It sometimes requires several albums and tours for an artist to see aqctual wealth from their art.

Many one hit wonder groups end up at your local music store working for $7 an hour because they spent their meager portion of the return and the record company chose not to produce any more music from the artist.

When a record label chooses not to produce music, the artist remains under contract and is forbidden to produce music through other avenues using, and many cases from even using their band name for monetary gain - this is why Prince changed his name to the symbol a few years back - he was in dispute with the record label over the direction of his music and could not release music under the name Prince.

Musicians say they are ripped off because they do not understand that by signing a record deal, they are entering into a contract for a loan that they are required to pay off - therefore, the more an album costs to produce, the more the record label needs to recoup. Even when a single sells million of units, the artist may only see a few thousand dollars on the return.

2007-07-21 04:22:31 · answer #2 · answered by nunya b 2 · 0 0

The ones complaining obviously signed a crappy deal and gave away their royalties in exchange for an up-front payment, which is still recoupable from album sales. Funny thing is you NEVER hear them complaining about the money they make from merchandising and concert ticket sales ( unless they're Pearl Jam). If they would at least keep their own publishing rights you would hear far less complaining because that's around 50% of THEIR cut. The fact is most bands know little to nothing about music business because they concentrate only on performing and writing. They really owe it to themselves to be educated before entering ANY contract negotiation, be it with a label, management or otherwise.

2007-07-21 17:25:22 · answer #3 · answered by Niknud 2 · 0 0

Just because the shops rip the music industry off too it doesn't mean the industry doesn't rip off the artists. Of that £6 the artists might only see 10p - or less. If the artists were independent of the music industry they could sell their CDs for £10 and make £7 or 8 profit. You tell me which is a rip off.

2007-07-21 03:54:14 · answer #4 · answered by Mordent 7 · 0 0

The musicians that sign these contracts don't understand the ramifications of what they are doing. They sign the dotted line but often times end up getting screwed in the process because all they are thinking about is getting paid. The record labels have attorneys working for them and are in a far better position to exploit naive and hungry musicians.

2007-07-21 03:56:01 · answer #5 · answered by Rckets 7 · 0 0

also their production is a loan usually from the recording company that they have topay back off the sales of the cd and tour. so the label always comes out on top at the beginning. eventually the band can have enought to pay upfront for the costs and not ahve to do the loan from the company.

2007-07-21 04:21:42 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Chris Brown, Justin Bieber, Ke$ha, MILEY CYRUS, Britney Spears, and greater. And all you haters won't be in a position to truly say woman Gaga. because of the fact at the start she's extremely proficient. She does not use autotune stay or something. She's classically knowledgeable and could play piano like a beast. She donates worldwide extensive and enables globally. have you ever seen her in stay overall performance? She supplies a hell of a teach. She's no longer your properly-known popstar.

2016-09-30 10:18:53 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Recording artists often see little profit for their work.

George Harrison wrote the song 'Taxman' in response to the fact that 90p of every £1.00 they got was taken in tax. {pounds/shillings/pence equivalent}.

So, for every £100.00 they were paid, £90.00 of that went to the Inland Revenue.

2007-07-21 04:13:31 · answer #8 · answered by Lady Silver Rose * Wolf 7 · 0 0

OK! now, whats your next question? You obviously have the answer to this one.

2007-07-21 03:52:13 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers