The manipulation behind "music briefs" for exclusive libs.

Home Forums Commentary The manipulation behind "music briefs" for exclusive libs.

Viewing 10 posts - 31 through 40 (of 48 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #28176 Reply
    Kubed
    Participant

    <The music business did find a way to combat piracy with spotify, Pandora, and other streaming services.>

    I think the music business found yet another way to pay less to the artists with Spotify,Pandora and other streaming services and certainly didn’t combat music piracy;

    #28182 Reply
    NY Composer
    Participant

    LA Writer and Music 1234,

    What do you guys think about the ever growing group of Sups who ONLY want Exclusive ques? It seems like this is a growing trend. Sure we can tell them no and they will just get Exclusive tracks from the 40,000 other composers that are down with their model.

    #28184 Reply
    LAwriter
    Participant

    LA Writer and Music 1234,

    What do you guys think about the ever growing group of Sups who ONLY want Exclusive ques? It seems like this is a growing trend. Sure we can tell them no and they will just get Exclusive tracks from the 40,000 other composers that are down with their model.

    Exclusive to what? ONLY being in the ONE project they are looking for? That’s not going to happen. I think you mean they don’t want to get hit with the same song 20X’s with different names?

    If they want to hear something I’ve done, they’re just going to have to get over it. If a song is great, it’s great. Sorry if you had to listen to it 3X’s.

    I believe they are mostly reacting to a few networks that have requested no NE songs due to the obvious problem of “who submitted what” when the song is in dozens of libs. Ultimately, this can be solved by WATERMARKING, but no one wants to watermark. It solves this entire “problem” though…

    Personally, I don’t oversell myself by putting my entire library in 20+ non-exclusive libraries like some do. I’m in very few NE libraries, and one is completely controlled and in-house only.

    #28185 Reply
    ChuckMott
    Participant

    Music1234 , I know you are right, BUT as some of us have said, they are best options to date. As in best earners, comparted to NE who aren’t paying up front either.

    But yes. good questions and good points. And I’m not arguing for that paradigm by any stretch.

    #28186 Reply
    Music1234
    Participant

    Chuck, we definitely can all learn from each others experiences. Please give examples of how your approach of signing cues over to an exclusive publisher for these terms:
    -$0 advance/ consideration fee/ work for hire fee
    -they control the cue perpetually
    -you get only back end or perhaps 50% of a sync licesnse (I hope!)

    What kind of back end numbers are you seeing?

    From my experience, when I have given a cue for a cattle call brief, I have seen these place and go on and print $50 to $300 in back end. (Ball Park range). I have always done this non-exclusively.

    Here is the problem with exc in perp under these parameters: While the cue eventually may reward a writer, you are losing potential and immediate income from that tune in other markets. So while it was nice to earn back end 1 to 2 years later from my submission for the brief, it is also a lot better when that same cue goes on and generates other license revenue, immediately, in other markets. Those royalties may also add up to another $300 to $1000 in “micro licensing” revenue.

    It just depends, some cues do great, some average, some nothing at all, but at least the cues are getting the opportunity to generate revenue in multiple markets, and markets that do not directly compete with each other. The direct licensing “add to cart’ scene is a completely different market than TV shows. That market is for Internet videos, low budget spots, student films, wedding videos, etc. There is nothing wrong with satisfying everyone!

    Now, if you are telling me that you are signing onto these exclusive deals and then 1 year later you see back end around $750 to $1500 for the cue you sent in for a brief, I certainly would not discourage you to embrace that relationship and business arrangement with the publisher who is getting these placements for your music. I just have my doubts that any of us can get that kind of back end return. From my perspective these people want exclusive cues, but the “performance royalty (PRO)” pay winds up being more in that $100 to $300 range.

    I prefer to shoot for $500 to $1000 and up earned on a cue within 6 to 12 months of releasing it.

    The exc for $0 model does a huge favor to the exclusive publisher: they get a free cue to service a client (and charge the client blanket fees or some fees), but writers in return, wait a long time to collect, and sacrifice other revenue streams. This is not a win/ win scenario. Only the publisher wins in this deal.

    #28187 Reply
    Music1234
    Participant

    LA Writer and Music 1234,

    What do you guys think about the ever growing group of Sups who ONLY want Exclusive ques? It seems like this is a growing trend. Sure we can tell them no and they will just get Exclusive tracks from the 40,000 other composers that are down with their model.

    If a music supervisor happens to listen to a song twice from 2 different sources, I just do not see how this can be a major inconvenience. Just credit the publisher where you heard it first on the cue sheet. When these buyers are swimming in lots of inexpensive options for their scenes, I think they should not be too concerned about maybe hearing a cue from 2 publishers. They should be concerned about 1 thing and 1 thing only: using music that works for the scene, spot, trailer, promo, internet video….whatever. I am speaking from the perspective of instrumental production music that sits in the background most of the time.

    #28188 Reply
    Dannyc
    Participant

    we can continue to argue this reality unitl we are blue in the face but at the end of the day the customer is king and this has become the new norm. its like video store owners complaining about the uptake of netflix and suggesting ways to stop it. its called progress and change and its going to keep happening.

    in this case the networks have told the libraries they will no longer be using their non-exclusive catelogues as they are tired of getting the same track 5 times from 5 different libraries with 5 slighly different titles.

    the libraries can either move with this market or go out of business. now we as the composer need to also change our strategy to stay in a job. the best way to do this imo is to diversify.

    compete in all markets, RF, non-exclusive and exclusive. complaining about one business model over another gets nobody anywhere and definitely does not bring in inome.

    #28189 Reply
    Alan
    Participant

    If a music supervisor happens to listen to a song twice from 2 different sources, I just do not see how this can be a major inconvenience.

    If a production company paid $XX to Library “A” for blanket license, plus $XX to Library “B” for blanket license, then heard the same music from both libraries, I think that would be a major inconvenience.

    I would be happy to submit to only one broadcast library plus RF world.

    #28190 Reply
    Alan
    Participant

    -$0 advance/ consideration fee/ work for hire fee
    -they control the cue perpetually
    -you get only back end or perhaps 50% of a sync licesnse (I hope!)

    The cattle call library I submit to has a 3 year reversion clause. My cues will go to RF world on their third birthday. I admit I did a few for one library that insisted on perpetuity. I have stopped.

    #28191 Reply
    Paolo
    Guest

    @Dannyc

    this has become the new norm …in this case the networks have told the libraries they will no longer be using their non-exclusive catelogues

    But (sometimes) after the library’s cattle-call brief doesn’t get them what they need they send a follow-up email saying that non-exclusive is okay 🙂

Viewing 10 posts - 31 through 40 (of 48 total)
Reply To: The manipulation behind "music briefs" for exclusive libs.
Your information: