Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
The only way to draw conclusions is to collect from all 3. I’ve given this tip before: if you are well tapped into the jingle/ TV spot scoring scene and typically get 2 to 10 spots a year running (national USA spots) Switch to SESAC! They DEFINITELY pay SUBSTANTIALLY more than ASCAP for TV spots (My point of reference is national bigger brand advertising campaigns…not the local furniture store spots). I have never processed a spot through BMI, so I can not say what the BMI payouts are. It literally seems like SESAC pays 10 times more money than ASCAP for TV spots. Both PROS have paid me Performance royalties for TV spots.
When I processed/ claimed TV spots through SESAC, The SESAC statements showed a sea of $1 $4, $7, $15, $25, $40…Occasionally $65 – $85 royalties.
Whereas ascap seemed to be lots of $0.03 cents $1’s and $2’s $3’s (at most $9 or $10) for TV spots and also subject to the “survey”. Most royalties were under $1.
SESAC seems to pay for literally every time the spot airs. ASCAP does not seem to pay for every airing.I have also been keen to notice a very well known and successful music house (aka jingle production company) that has been in business for 40 years (sons now running the show at this company) and they are suddenly SESAC writers (but to my knowledge do not really write music!…imagine that?). I have a feeling they got in bed with SESAC because they probably have dozens of spots running every year that others “ghost write” as work for hires.
If your sweet spot is background TV cues, I can actually argue that ASCAP and BMI are better for Background Instrumentals on TV shows.
Anyway, I will keep monitoring my statement and cue sheet data as it continues to flow in throughout 2018, and I will gladly continue to offer my perspective.
I’d be very interested in hearing others experiences too. Example: Does BMI pay well for national TV spots? Any BMI writers out there have an experience of a track running for a long time on a national tv ad campaign? and then what kind of royalties were you seeing?
How about trailers for TV shows and films? Does anyone have experience collecting performance royalties for trailers and through which PRO?
From my perspective, it is almost impossible to draw definitive conclusions about which of the 3 American PRO’s is the best one to be a writer/member of. I received a BMI statement today and was …well….not satisfied. I expected a lot of growth because I have been consistently feeding their machine for 3 years now. The numbers I saw on today’s statement were not impressive. It definitely gives one the impression that somehow, some way, behind the scenes there really is no objective and transparent manner of distributing performance royalties! At times we just feel like numbers are picked from a hat.
At least at ASCAP I CAN see SOME data like cue sheets to give me some sense of how, when, where, and who is using my music. ASCAP IS the most transparent PRO from my perspective simply because they do display cue sheets in writers and publishers accounts. BMI does not display cue sheets. the question now here in 2018…9 years after ASCAP DID start displaying them is why not? What does BMI have to hide? The only data I get from BMI is statements. Was anything missed? I have no idea because I can not see cue sheets in my account login.
Indeed, ASCAP does miss or not pay for cues filed on cue sheets at times probably due to the “survey” issue. The Big 10 Network is a good example. Major League Baseball, local broadcasts is another that did not pay. I can probably point out more examples…but gentlemen, BMI and SESAC show nothing! Zero. We simply do not see cue sheets when we login and therefore have no idea about what is going on or what we can anticipate in future payouts.
I still argue that the grass is not really greener on the BMI or SESAC side. I DO get statements from all 3. I am very pleased that I get cue sheets displayed when I log into ASCAP.
All of them are undoubtedly imperfect and unfortunately, most likely “mildly” corrupt organizations. (This is the music business after all!) Whenever you have revenue of 1 billion dollars a year, there will be corruption when it comes to decisions about how all that money will be distributed and how much will be held in for “other people and purposes”.
Until SESAC and BMI start displaying cue sheets on line, I still stand by my conclusion: the grass is not greener (for writers) at BMI and SESAC. I base my conclusions on 10 years of data, receiving statements from all 3 for the last 5 years, ASCAP for the last 18, and many discussions with many writers involved with all 3. I am certainly willing to listen to others experiences to maybe be convinced that ASCAP is “problematic”…I am just not seeing it that way and i am very happy to be an ASCAP writer quite frankly.
@ Michael…From Today’s BMI Statement:
NBA TV
NBA GAME TIME JUNE 27 2017
19 “Track Title Here” BI 00:32 20172 100.00% $54.07 $0.00 $54.07
NBA TV Total $54.07
One thing I have learned as fact is this: Ownership, control, and flexibility is always lucrative and empowering. My advice to new and young writers (and really everyone) is this: never give your music to exclusive library’s for $0. In fact, it’s really hard to do even for a $2000 advance in all honesty. Why? because we just never know when one of our tracks is going to take off and become your best seller and sell 100, 1000, 5000 times. I have seen guys license 1 track 15,000 times in this past decade. It literally is possible that 1 “hit” production track can net you 100 to 150K or more over a 3 to 7 year period. Is everyone aware of this reality?
Additionally, 1 track can (out of nowhere) command a 4 to 5 figure license fee in a big ad campaign enabling the writer to collect BOTH publishing and writers share on the back end.
For all of these reasons, I now say “No Thanks” to handing control and copyright of a cue over to someone else.
Do not get caught up in that “well I am just starting out so I have to get “in” some how some way, I’ll just go ahead and give ownership and control of my intellectual property to someone else.” Start out in direct licensing and see how your music performs while YOU control it… if that does not work so well, then think about other distribution channels.
It’s a basic concept: The best and most lucrative asset you have is your own music catalog. Think hard about that.
@LA Writer, I still get network placements with my NE cues. NBC, MTV, History, Discovery, TLC, Nickelodeon, BRAVO, USA Network, CBS, etc… has never bothered calling me to complain. They’r just background instrumentals folks! These are not themes and themes are probably commissioned work for hires 99% of the time.
just concerned if the ROI is worth the effort,
Not really for reality TV or Sports Programming. My experience is that you are just giving them another cue. That cue has just as good of a chance of becoming a background instrumental on a show as any other cue. Exclusive or Non-Excusive. TV show editors simply use what they use and need what they need for a scene, bumper, transition, etc. Often these libraries that you speak of state that the cues written for the brief will receive “extra attention”. They may, but all other cues currently sitting in their search engine have the same shot at getting used.
Finally, these types of background Inst uses on reality rarely pay performance royalties over say…$50…These types of drops will yield a lot $1 to $15 royalties on your statement. Nothing wrong with that, but certainly do not expect to see a $500 performance royalty from these cattle call briefs from the kinds of libraries I think you are talking about.
If I were to put a number on it, I’d say you are writing an exclusive cue to hopefully generate $200 to $300 in cumulative back-end royalties over a period of say 8 to 12 statements. So for example, it makes it on a domestic reality show as BI (Background Inst)…Perhaps you’ll make $30 to $50 initially. Then the re-runs come into play and the overseas airplays from European and Australian cable stations. You may start seeing a bunch of $1 royalties on future statements for the “re-run” plays. Sometimes these royalties are literally pennies. You basically hope it all adds up to $200 to $300 “over time”. Again, my numbers are based solely on cattle call briefs where the library is building up new music in a specific genre for a new season of a new Reality show.
Again, I have said this a thousand times, you CAN make a livable wage at the game of writing production music if you have multiple distribution channels generating multiple revenue streams. You CAN NOT make a livable wage writing for 1 or 2 exclusive library’s where they pay $0 advances and focus on back end only from mostly reality TV, sports content, etc….What amazes me is how every library owner must understand this fact by now, yet they still, seemingly, want to oppress and exploit writers, and limit a cues real earning potential. If you want EXCLUSIVE, SOLE perpetual control of the cue (the copyright) Mr. publisher, you need to buy it for $3000. If you do not want to pay, then you have to stay up late and write the cues.
I still don’t understand the harm…It’s like here…takes these cues that we wrote for free for the new show, use them, and credit us on cue sheets. Everyone is happy. Everyone wins. BUT just let us sell those same tunes on other markets that don’t interfere with your TV cue feeding business. Why is that complicated?
Writing for “exclusive briefs” for “exclusive librarys” is just a con man trying to convince you that cassette decks are making a come back and therefore you should buy a used one for $200.
What LA Writer said.
“Exclusive Briefs” are just cattle calls to round up music in a style that the library is lacking in. Or perhaps they have early info on a new show that will soon be seeking music in ______genre…such as Crimes and Investigations or “Light creepy tension cues.”
Or “Hip Hop Tension”. There is nothing truly special or unique in these “briefs’…there done to manipulate young and uninformed writers into writing music to fill up their stock of a genre they may not have.
We are 100% in a a mature phase of the digital music licensing world.
I would not send music to a new company with 0 reputation ever. They are the VERY LATE ADOPTERS to digital music licensing and will be crushed. Unless they personally know and have guarantees from Big time clients that their catalog will be tapped into, (usually in exchange for kickbacks like shared publishing) They do not stand a chance!
On the other hand if “New Library” talks to you on the phone and says My best friend is director of Production Music selection and curation or “Music Editor” at MTV or ABC and he told me that he’s going to use all of my catalogs music on 10 new shows starting now.” Then it would make sense to write to the brief.
A bit sarcastic I am yes, but in all seriousness, every time I sent music in for a brief over the last 9 years, I only did it under NON EXCLUSIVE circumstances. You have to take a hard arse stance and just say “Sorry bro, this music property that I created belongs to me, and only me…you can shop it around, but ultimately I own it because I put in the time creating it. If you want it exclusively for your catalog, pay me $3000 now and then You can own and control it.”
The facts are in gents…after 10 years…and at the “mature” phase of this business. You make more money by having several outlets selling your music. You LIMIT your income greatly by allowing only one place to represent your music.
The more “stores” your “product” is in, the greater chance for discovery, purchase, and revenue. That is a fact that can not be denied.
If anyone here on MLR can say they spent the last 10 years funneling music to one exclusive library and consistently have made a full time living with that approach…I’d love to hear about that!
Generally speaking I get paid on all cue sheets I see in my account for TV shows, but have not collected any performance royalties from Big Ten Network cue sheets that are on file. Probably a good 400 episodes of Big Ten Network programming and $0 paid over a 2 year period. Some examples that have never paid:
BTN FOOTBALL
26
ASCAP Series Code: 75662
BTN LIVE
111
ASCAP Series Code: 68006
BTN MEN S BASKETBALL
2
ASCAP Series Code: 82595
BTN MEN S ICE HOCKEY
1
ASCAP Series Code: 82598
BTN MENS BASKETBALL
3
ASCAP Series Code: 81667
BTN MENS ICE HOCKEY
6
ASCAP Series Code: 81668
BTN SATURDAY KICKOFF
11
ASCAP Series Code: 87923
BTN TAILGATE
3
ASCAP Series Code: 88387
BTN WOMEN S BASKETBALL
6
ASCAP Series Code: 82603
BTN WOMEN S ICE HOCKEY
2
ASCAP Series Code: 91775
BTN WOMENS BASKETBALL
11
ASCAP Series Code: 81670Additionally, Local baseball broadcasts have not paid.
BREWERS LIVE POSTGAME
8
ASCAP Series Code: 74805
BREWERS LIVE PREGAME
99
ASCAP Series Code: 74806
BREWERS SQUEEZE PLAY
2
ASCAP Series Code: 75262I guess ASCAP does not seem to think Sports content is worthy of surveying, nor royalties….I suppose the viewing audience may only be 250,000 to 500,000 folks so ratings are pretty low on these broadcasts, but still…ASCAP should pay us 10 cents every now and again…LOL!!!!
I like them all. Just keep sending that green money to my bank account and I’m happy.
SESAC is “FOR PROFIT” and that is a good thing. I do not want to email my rep to ask for cue sheets. Just up-date that buggy SESAC site and show the darn cue sheets (as ASCAP does).Beatslinger, tell your “rep (here to make you smile) at any time” guy/ gal to display all cue sheets for every writer and publisher at all times.
Why do we have to send an e-mail asking “Hey baby cakes, can you hook me up wityh some data, like cue sheets?’ That is ridiculously annoying. Just Big Data them out so we can all see what is happening with our music!
With BMI I now get this garbage when I click on “works catalog”.
“This catalog is too large to display. Please enter your search criteria.”
Everyone wants to beach and moan about their PRO’s…I have logins in all 3. In all honesty, ASCAP IS the most impressive in terms of what I can see.
1. I want to see my titles! Every single one of them. I don’t care if there are 2 milllion of them, I want to scroll through all of them when I click on “my Catalog”. @BMI…Why are you becoming less transparent? I don’t even know what is going on especially when you have catalogs/ publishers on steroids desperately retitling songs 3 or 4 times to make all their clients “publishers”. When is this BS practice going to end SK? Why is the client now the publisher. Weak handed and paranoid publishers should just close up shop and go find a new job. Giving away your blood sweat and tears to the client is NOT THE ANSWER. Bribery and kickbacks are illegal are they not?
2. I want to see cue sheets for EVERY show. I see them all at ASCAP, I do not see cue sheets at SESAC or BMI. At those PRO’s, I wait for statements to see the action. This is not good enough in an era of Big Data.
SESAC and BMI need to display the cue sheets when their members have cues on filed cue sheets. If that web development is too laborious, then hire some freak from google to manage your big data dilemma. It is 2018 after all. If ASCAP can show our cue sheets, so can you. What do you have to hide anyway?
3. I like 8 checks a year from ASCAP. I get 4 form the other two. I like the separation of “Domestic” (USA) royalties and “international” Royalties when it comes to statements.
None of the PROS are really taking streaming or on line music streams very seriously. It seems like they all said ‘Well let’s throw these writers a penny for each title, each statement…we just don’t know how to deal with “streams” so let’s go ahead and pay these folks $0.01 cent per title that may appear “somewhere” on the internet….What a Joke!
The “which PRO is better debate” is really getting old and boring. All I can say is this, if you have a knack for landing a lot of Prime Time TV spots with Big Brands airing nationally in the USA….definitely get in bed with SESAC. They really pay a lot more for TV commercials. Not sure why, but they do. On the flip side…I sometimes feel like they (SESAC) pay WAY LESS for background TV cues on TV shows. At BMI and SESAC, there are no cue sheets displayed (Archived for viewing) in my account, so I don’t know what is going on in TV show land.
That’s all I have for now…
Cheers
@David, I forgot to ask…are you on 600 “Series” or 600 “Episodes”?
@ David, 10 years since my first upload to a music library that feeds tv shows, I now have 3000 cues sheets. 5 times what you have and NO, I STILL could not make a living from just that back end PRO money!
I am not sure getting upset and switching PRO’s is the answer to your woes. I see data from all 3 as writer and publisher.
Patience and consistency and quality music is the only answer. More importantly, diversification into different distribution channels that enable multiple revenue streams for your music. Not one “exclusive” distributor. The exclusive representation model will lead you into no man’s land, frustration, despair, and not wealthy enough to justify making cues for a living!
Your music needs to be “out there” working for YOU and only YOU….Not the greedy publisher trying to build up his exclusive catalog to sell to Universal Music Group so he can go and retire a rich man. OWNERSHIP OWNERSHIP OWNERSHIP, OWN your music asetts. CONTROL your music assets. You won’t regret it.
For TV cue (Cue Sheet generating libraries) that mostly pay back end PRO royalties, It really does take 3 years to come to a conclusion.
For the “Direct Licensing” business models, i.e. self uploading and you input your own meta data and descriptions to market the songs to end customers, you can actually start seeing sales results in 1 to 2 months.
After almost a decade into my adventures with various digital music licensing platforms, yes indeed, I only send music to those who send me checks. Send me money, I will keep sending you tracks. If you are not sending me money consistently, I will stop sending you tracks.
This is why the exclusive model for a new writer is so risky. There are predators out there, trying to get you to sign cues in where they take ownership and control for $0…then you wait 3 years to see if your “experiment” worked out. BEWARE! In fact, no writer should ever sign a cue over exclusively. If everyone just stopped doing it and we all constantly wrote articles and blogs and tweeted about it and talked about it…the practice may just disappear forever. My price tag for an exclusive cue (in perpetuity) is $3000. Yes, that is what you’d have to pay me for the cue I just wrote today.
I agree no one would ever advance that to me, but still…that is the only price I’d be willing to accept to sacrifice flexibility, ownership, and control over the asset I just created.
I am not coming up with a figure by drawing numbers out of a hat. From my many years of experience, it is very easy to pull down $3000 from a track (Over time) when you have ownership and flexibility on your side.
Needless to say, I absolutely detest the exclusive music model for $0 advance, and the petty $50 and $75 “consideration fees”.
Gee, you are so considerate by giving me $50 for the track!
That bogus and predatory business model should be demolished forever.
$50 Consideration fee? Ha Ha Ha! To Mr. greedy publisher, did you know that I can make that in 1 month or less selling it on a do it yourself style, direct licensing to end customer platform?
Then with some patience, a different customer may come along and license it for 1K, 3K, 5K, 10K…you just never know…Ownership, Ownership, Ownership 100% ownership of the assets YOU create, is where the future lies.
I could not imagine how awful it would feel knowing that another company has 100% control over my music. What a nightmare. Yet, on youtube you hear so many guys saying “Hey I just go and write another cue.” REALLY? WOW!
I am having the exact opposite experience. I write tracks, release them myself on sites I chose, and then frankly watch many of them go on and earn me 1K to 10K over a few years. This is just front end sync fees (licenses sold) too. I am not even talking about the inclusion of Back end PRO royalties. If you bring those into the mix tracks can go on and earn 5, 10, 30, 50K over time (5 to 10 years)So to all you publishers out there (and new writers or young writers) If you do want exclusive ownership of cues, I am sorry but you better be offering $3000 a track advance. If you give me 3K, I would consider making you the exclusive publisher and copyright owner of the cue where you can dump it into content ID and earn ad revenue, sell sync fees, and so on.
It’s just amazing how people do not see long term value in their own music assets.
As far as end clients and “exclusivity” goes. I could not agree more La writer, just hire someone to score the project and get original music.
We’re in a time when media companies are swimming in massive profits and cash, yet there still seems to be this cheap talk of “we don’t have a big budget for music” crap that still persists. BS!For the record, I have not been adding much music to Content ID anymore. I tested it out, but the money one can earn just does not seem worth the hassle.
I did like the article and I do like the music in the catalog he reps or writes for. While we must try to write a smash hit every time we sit in front of the piano, keyboard, or guitar, the bottom line is that the market always decides. More often than not, I am finding that rather simple, unsophisticated music sells better. The production does have to be stellar, but by no means do you need to sound like John Williams, Thomas Newman, and others like them to be successful. You’d be surprised at how many tunes sell without the melody. Only “the market” decides…not the gatekeepers of PMA libraries.
If you send tracks that sound like everyone else then you will be put in the category of “everyone else.” You’d be surprised how similar all of the playlists we listen to actually are. Ignore the trends and showcase your abilities. We all have Action Strings fellas. Stop sending Action Strings. Just bleepin’ stop it and stay stop it.
This kind of quote is coming from someone who is listening to way too much production music! He’s bored… So let the general market decide. I take issue with gate keeping libraries from “experts”. How many times have we all heard “not quite a good fit for us” or “not exactly what we’re looking for.” And then the track or tracks go on and sell like crazy.
Just my 2 cents on this article.