- This topic has 51 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 6 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Just a general question but was wondering why some libraries listed as royalty free ask for PRO info and or ask where to send royalty payments. Seems like I came across this thread elsewhere, maybe under the title when is royalty free not royalty free. COnfused. Thought royalty free meant no royalties, here’s your half, have a nice day :)……
Royalty free means a client pays once and can use the track however they want without ever paying a future royalty for a different use. If they happen to use the track in a broadcast situation, they certainly could file a cue sheet.
There are two types of royalties:
Mechanical and Performing.
Royalty free means no mechanical royalties to be paid. Mechanicals are needle drop, meaning each time you want to synchronise the track to a production you have to pay a license. Royalty free means you only have to pay once and you can synch it to as many productions as you like afterwards. This would be paid by the production company.
This is completely separate to performing royalties which are paid by networks.
I have a question about this as well. Is anyone here receiving pro royalties via royalty free sites? If so, is this common with royalty free sites in general or perhaps certain sites? Thanks!
Is anyone here receiving pro royalties via royalty free sites?
Yes.
Not all royalty free sites are buy it and use it as many times as you like never to pay again.. AJ is essentially needle drop, one sync per purchase. If they buyer wants to use the track on another project they need to buy it again..
AJ is essentially needle drop, one sync per purchase. If they buyer wants to use the track on another project they need to buy it again..
That explains the high sales figures, i.e. why some tracks sell so many times.
On the other hand, it’s a valid argument that AJ isn’t part of the race to the bottom, especially if someone is buying $85 licenses more than once. You could actually make more that way than the buy it once use it forever model.MichaelL,
They do somethings well at AJ apart from the fact you can’t upload any tracks registered with a PRO. So on one hand they probably have the best licencing terms in RF land yet on another won’t allow the composers their fair PRO royalities. It’s give and take really. Although there is aways re-titling 🙂AS also have different rates for different usages.
The question is though, do people really follow the rules? Once they have that broadcast quality wave file…are they really going to keep buying $85 licenses. I can say that AJ has been an eye opener. My research has shown that the top sellers have sold 20 to 25 thousand tracks (sales) which is about $300,000 to $400,000 in revenue for a few of these guys. Half goes to them. So It seems that these top guys are pulling down $3000 a month (since 2010) which is admittedly, quite impressive.
After reviewing my ASCAP statement where one sees royalties ranging from .04 cents to $200 or $300 (on the very high side) per drop, it does make one say…”hmmmm…what strategy should I utilize moving forward?”
The problem with RF is sales beget sales and the early birds got the worm. The top sellers are going to get more attention on these sites and to step in and compete is going to be a long road and tall mountain to climb. Most guys are just scraping a few bucks here and there on these sites, but the top 4 to 5 sellers really make a lot and get a lot of coverage.
I also find it strange that clients buy a “production music” track 3000 times. Don’t businesses want to differentiate themselves and have a different, unique track?
One of AJ’s statements states:
“Envato’s top authors make between $20,000 and $50,000 per month selling stock! Imagine creating what you want, when you want, from the comfort of your own home, making passive income whether you’re working or not.”
Sounds a bit like snake oil to me.
They do somethings well at AJ apart from the fact you can’t upload any tracks registered with a PRO.
I don’t like that.
The problem with RF is sales beget sales and the early birds got the worm. The top sellers are going to get more attention on these sites and to step in and compete is going to be a long road and tall mountain to climb. Most guys are just scraping a few bucks here and there on these sites, but the top 4 to 5 sellers really make a lot and get a lot of coverage.
I disagree. I’ve seen guys on this forum go from 30 track to 300 tracks, from nowhere to best seller in three years.
Horses for courses.
Art,
I have spoken to some writers who have credible, good music content, about 75 tracks or so on the site, but are pulling down only $100 a month.
What IS impressive is the top seller only having 58 tracks up today, but has sold 24,523 “licenses”. In fact, his latest release from 4 weeks ago has already been licensed 77 times in just about 30 days!
Something does seem odd about this. Are there really 77 productions happening worldwide in the last 4 weeks that REALLY need this track to enhance their image, spot, film….etc?
Something does seem odd about this. Are there really 77 productions happening worldwide in the last 4 weeks that REALLY need this track to enhance their image, spot, film….etc?
It all seems a bit odd but all we can do is speculate. A couple of years ago it was posted on MLR that the top seller on AS made about $20k annually. It was a fairly reliable source. That and others experiences, related here with RF sites, makes those AJ stats curious.