ASCAP and their inadequate survey system

Home Forums PROs ASCAP and their inadequate survey system

This topic contains 100 replies, has 17 voices, and was last updated by  Dannyc 8 months, 3 weeks ago.

Viewing 11 posts - 91 through 101 (of 101 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #31113 Reply

    Alan
    Participant

    The MMA has nothing to do with Cable TV.

    Yeah, I get that. My point was that my inbox was slammed weekly about “Modernization” while my actual income relies on their archaic survey system, which they seem to have no plans to address.

    #31114 Reply

    Music1234
    Participant

    As a side note…I STILL after 10 years of collecting back end PRO royalties from TV shows and commercials can not make any definitive conclusions about the confusing payments from PRO’s. I have a big presence with both BMI and ASCAP and have been funneling a lot of my registration energy into BMI since 2015. The fact of the matter is that I still earn more from ASCAP. I actually think getting 8 checks a year verses 4 makes a difference.

    Additionally, I had a weird situation where I was paid $557 royalty for a “J” jingle on local “NBC news at 5” for just 1 play! , yet my BMI co writer was paid nothing. Was this a survey “get lucky” scenario? Why was my co writer not paid by BMI? He is going to protest this by the way.

    My point is that it really is hard to draw definitive conclusions as both pros have ways of not being transparent.

    Their bogus excuse about not honoring cue sheets is ridiculous. The money flow is real simple. Networks produce programs or “content” . Some of it is live sports and news, other programs are video recorded or filmed. All programs do the same thing, they sell ads during the shows. That ad revenue is paid to networks. Networks pay a portion of that revenue to PROS. So there should be money to pay writers for any and all cues used on EVERY show no matter what. The cue sheets should be honored period.

    Alan, don’t worry about a lawyer. Please do send in your complaint letter to ascaps board of directors and point them to this thread.

    I agree 100% that an archaic “survey” system is far from “modern”.

    When all is said and done though, I can not say that BMI will lead writers to the promised land of more money. We’re dealing with a never ending, non-transparent system from all pro’s. To add one more point why did the publisher “M” earlier this year issue checks to their writers with the memo stating “ASCAP BTN Settlement”? Sure I went right ahead and cashed that check but this leaves more questions then answers…? Why is my publisher sending a check as ASCAP settlement? Did ASCAP just say let’s get these guys off our backs and send one lump sum to the publisher to quiet this issue down? Why wasn’t ASCAP sending the royalties on their next domestic check run directly to writers? How did the publisher know how much to send each writer?

    The bottom line is that royalties seem to be distributed with a “winging it” type attitude and system of accounting. It should really just be black and white based on facts (as in which tracks actually aired)

    #31115 Reply

    LAwriter
    Participant

    If things were distributed ‘black and white” (as they should be) there would be no reason to obscure and hide the accounting methods as all PRO’s do.

    On that note, I had a previous post that got nuked into the netherworld. I think because I said that production music is the poor bas**rd stepchild of the PRO environment.

    Ridiculous that that was considered as swearing by the “filter” on this site. But…oh well….

    #31116 Reply

    Music1234
    Participant

    LAW, You need to save your mlr posts before you post! Make that a habit.

    But are we really the step child to star songwriters? I don’t know? I have heard folks at SESAC say that TV pays a heck of a lot more than pop songs on radio.

    If only we could get a tour of the accounting offices at these pros. That would be fun!

    #31117 Reply

    Art Munson
    Keymaster

    Ridiculous that that was considered as swearing by the “filter” on this site. But…oh well….

    Too bad. My sandbox, my rules!

    #31118 Reply

    LAwriter
    Participant

    LAW, You need to save your mlr posts before you post! Make that a habit.

    Old habits die hard, And as mentioned, it’s not my sandbox…..so others loss is not my problem.

    #31119 Reply

    LAwriter
    Participant

    Too bad. My sandbox, my rules!

    I;ve got no problems with that. And I’ve got no problems with a zero tolerance to swearing.

    But the phrase “poor bas**** stepchild” I didn’t consider “swearing”. It’s a phrase in common use. But whatever. I’ll try to be more careful, or I’ll just not post anything remotely controversial in that respect.

    #31120 Reply

    MichaelL
    Participant

    Yeah, I get that. My point was that my inbox was slammed weekly about “Modernization” while my actual income relies on their archaic survey system, which they seem to have no plans to address.

    That’s because their focus is on traditional pop songwriters. We’re at the bottom of their food chain.

    #31121 Reply

    Art Munson
    Keymaster

    But the phrase “poor bas**** stepchild” I didn’t consider “swearing”. It’s a phrase in common use.

    If you wrote “poor bas**** stepchild” exactly as typed (no quotes) then the filter would never pick that up as that is not in the black list. In fact there is nothing in the moderation queue from you. As Music1234 said, make a copy if you are having problems posting.

    99% of post go through but I always type long posts, e-mails, comments FB messages in Notepad before I post, just in case something goes wrong.

    #31122 Reply

    LAwriter
    Participant

    well…..bast*** (without ***) is actually a legitimate word in the english language describing :

    : something that is spurious (see SPURIOUS sense 3a), irregular, inferior, or of questionable origin

    Didn’t seem like swearing to me – it seemed appropriate for my post, but whatever. I’m used to posting all over the internet without losing posts. Except here where I’m batting roughly .600 or so – which I guess is pretty good. (It would be good if a Dodger could bat that well….). But please, forgive my petulance. I’ll take 100% responsibility for not using a secondary app to assemble my posts.

    #31412 Reply

    Dannyc
    Participant

    well i also fell foul to ASCAP’s survey system. i’m not long doing this but i have not been paid for multiple placements on CBS sports, BTN, Life and more. i resigned from them in the window in October and will be moving to BMI in April. initially i was gonna move all my tracks across but for now i think i’m just going to leave them there with ASCAP and write new tracks to register with BMI. over time it will be interesting to see how things pan out over time.

Viewing 11 posts - 91 through 101 (of 101 total)
Reply To: ASCAP and their inadequate survey system
Your information: