Music1234

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 121 through 135 (of 439 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: “Private Copying” Payment from ASCAP via GEMA #35018
    Music1234
    Participant

    LA Writer – USA PRO’s ARE 100% missing the point: Follow the money. Google invoices $15,000,000,000 Billion a year in “advertising sales”. This figure blows away CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX, CNN, Discovery.

    I am screaming as loud as I can from this pulpit to the PRO’s “What the Fu__ are you guys doing about this? and Why are you not knocking on their door for hundreds of millions of dollars in licensing fees to increase the royalty pot for your 750,000 members?

    Read:

    https://www.lsainsider.com/google-facebook-amazon-are-the-new-nbc-abc-and-cbs/archives

    It says the facts: YOUTUBE, FACEBOOK, AMAZON, GOOGLE, NETFLIX are the new ABC, CBS, NBC. That is where the puck is moving, so BMI, ASCAP, and SESAC skate toward the puck. I just do not see them handling this properly.

    The “advertising” money is with these companies. That is where the advertising spend is moving.

    Doesn’t everyone here realize that all the performance royalty money we get ultimately comes from advertising spend??

    Even if a track is a background cue on a tv show, well guess what? The show is supported by advertising spend. McDonald’s supports an NBA broadcast, So does a Beer company, or a financial services firm. The reality is that more ad spend is going to: Google, AMAZON, FACEBOOK, SPOTIFY, SNAP CHAT, INSTAGRAM, NETFLIX, HULU. Yet the PRO’s don’t seem to get this. Our statements should be showing a lot more royalty monies coming from these internet areas.

    If more ad spend is heading to FACEBOOK, GOOGLE, AMAZON, NETFLIX, SPOTIFY, SNAPCHAT, INSTAGRAM, then our PRO statements should reflect that. They Don’t! We often see line its of $2, or $5, $ 12 for facebook and yourtube….but we see big money for traditional broadcast TV. How does this make sense?

    Every Lawyer and Executive working for the 3 PRO’s should be hounding these companies for MORE MONEY to use PRO Registered music on their platforms.

    in reply to: “Private Copying” Payment from ASCAP via GEMA #35014
    Music1234
    Participant

    Also ASCAP board members and employees if you are reading the article. Notice how Germany’s GEMA aggressively gets after YOUTUBE/ GOOGLE and APPLE for music usage. Our domestic PRO’s really seem to not have a strategy to shake down youtube for performance royalty monies or streaming royalty monies to distribute to their members. It’s ironic that I am getting paid
    a “private copying” settlement from GEMA.

    Youtube earned 15 Billion in advertising revenue in 2019

    https://variety.com/2020/digital/news/alphabet-youtube-ad-revenue-first-time-15-billion-2019-1203491155/

    YouTube had $15.15 billion in ad revenue for 2019, up 36% from $11.16 billion the year prior, according to Alphabet. For Q4 2019, YouTube advertising sales were $4.72 billion, a 31% year-over-year increase. YouTube’s ad revenue was $8.15 billion in 2017.

    All this great news about how much profit YOUTUBE makes, but music content creators seem to make $5 a distribution from youtube or .0000000000000000000000000000001 per stream

    Can everyone see the disconnect? YOUTUBE earns more than every TV network each year, yet our statements show $5 a quarter in music royalty earnings for YOUTUBE.

    This is a good read:

    https://www.ascap.com/help/music-business-101/youtube-faq-uploaders

    What does ASCAP have to do with YouTube?
    ASCAP represents the public performance right for over 750,000 songwriters, composers and music publishers. YouTube pays ASCAP a licensing fee for the right to perform our members’ music in YouTube videos*. We then distribute those fees to ASCAP members as royalties. ASCAP operates on a not-for-profit basis, distributing all licensing fees we collect back to our songwriter, composer and publisher members, less only our operating expenses. We distribute 88 cents of every dollar we collect back to our members as royalties. If you added music that is in our musical repertory of over 11.5 works to your video, then you may get a notice indicating that we’re placing a copyright claim on your video on behalf of our members, so that they can earn their performance royalties.

    *This excludes ASCAP music controlled by entities or individuals who have entered into direct deals with YouTube.

    in reply to: Raising our voices does make a difference- BTN #34995
    Music1234
    Participant

    Hay Strat 56, If the initials of your name contain these 3 letters ( not in this order) P O A, I think I know who you are and I do see your name on hundreds of cue sheets I am on too.

    Is this issue you guys have down there with SCRIPPS just an ASCAP thing or is it BMI also ?

    Seems to be both, but more importantly it’s libraries selling “direct blanket licensing” deals to them who are the grand enablers of that deal. My hunch is that the retransmissions happening in Canada have a different set of rules. There are two things at work here in my opinion as I see it:

    1. SCRIPPS does not want to deal with the labor of creating cue sheets, nor the inconvenience of paying USA PRO’s annual license fees, who in turn would pay writers and publishers based on filed cue sheets.

    2. Libraries like JP, M, and SK, and a few others see an opportunity to do business by selling a “DIRECT BLANKET LICENSE” to SCRIPPS because..well…profits are profits and afetr all, it cost them nothing to compose the music, and willing composers supplied the music to them…for free of course.

    So how is this a corrupt scheme? Well, SCRIPPS is getting PRO Registered music supplied to them, but gee…they don’t have to pay the PROS! how convenient and what great cost savings. Secondly, the libraries peddling this PRO registered music are sending them an invoice, getting paid the direct license fees and then hide behind the excuse “by contract we don’t have to pay writers.”

    But, what about the other episodes during that time where I had placements ?

    ASCAP survey method is simply ignoring this network and hide behind the excuse that BTN is too small, part of a cable package add on….blah blah blah…Normally though this network is broadcasting games and talk shows in every sports bar across the country as well as inside homes for those who want to watch that content.

    But, what about the other episodes during that time where I had placements ? So I’m wondering if it was a lump payment that includes them too and they just put them all under one banner, which would be a very strange thing to do, I can’t think of any else ?

    We are all wondering the same thing, and ASCAP writers hope that the cue will be picked up in the ancient “survey” method. At the end of the day ASCAP has 750,000 songwriters and publishers to pay. I guess even in 2020 that can’t figure out how to match up cue sheets to rightsholders to administer payment. I have the same questions, why are we not getting paid for so many shows broadcast where cue sheets are filed? and why is the network filing cue sheets at ascap and why is ascap displaying them to us only to not pay us?

    Finally, I never see SCRIPPS cue sheets filed at ascap.

    in reply to: Raising our voices does make a difference- BTN #34988
    Music1234
    Participant

    @ Strat56…I was never impolite, but the tone needs to be firm, slightly challenging in my honest opinion. I still to this day do not understand how the evidence of a cue sheet filed at ASCAP is not enough evidence. Otherwise, why is ASCAP even presenting the cue sheets in our PRO accounts? Additionally, an ASCAP contact did say to me “we are aware of this and many members have been contacting us about BTN cue sheets.” So yes, when we all collectively raise awareness and speak out or really just write e-mails asking why we’re not getting paid, that does help!

    We should not give up on the SCRIPPS issue because that too is just disgustingly flawed and wrong. I just do not understand how libraries and SCRIPPS can live with themselves and actually think they are doing business with integrity when they know the writers are not getting paid a single penny. The music is being “direct blanket licensed” and the writers are not part of the deal. JP, SK, and M are most likely a few of the culprits in the SCRIPPS music distribution scheme and it’s just shameful that they can not find a way to compensate us.

    I see SCRIPPS tunesat detections every day and it is very disheartening. No Cable TV network supported by major advertising funding should be exempt from performance royalties. SCRIPPS does sell advertising space to big brands, fortune 500 companies. That is what supports their shows and their network. Here is their stock…clearly they are suffering a bit during the covid 19 crisis, but as you can see their stock has been fairly steady 2015 to 2019 .

    https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/?symbol=ssp&qsearchterm=ssp

    in reply to: Promos – Who gets paid? #34717
    Music1234
    Participant

    If not getting paid and you have proof it’s being used, consider taking legal action.

    Against whom? ASCAP.

    And @ Scott R, I completely agree with you about the soundmouse issue. It does seem a bit ridiculous that ACSAP contracted soundmouse to be a detection service partner, but the catch is that publishers/ composers need to upload all the files to soundmouse only to not get a detection report to study.

    My experience with soundmouse has been very frustrating. They seem to be based in Europe for starters. They did confirm that I’d never see a report for my tracks. Their upload and metadata entry process is far from simple. I currently have 700 tracks uploaded but no one can help me credit writer and publisher PRO information within their “add track details” ecosystem.

    I contacted customer support asking if it was possible to do a batch edit to all tracks because the writer is the same for each track and so is the publisher. Sound mouse replied “I will look into this and get back to you soon.” about week has passed and no one has responded.

    If anyone reading here has had an easy process uploading production tracks to Soundmouse, I’d love to hear your thoughts. PRS uses them too.

    in reply to: ASCAP payouts April 2020 #34693
    Music1234
    Participant

    Yep, Down about 30 to 40% from what I’d typically earn from a domestic quarterly distribution. This PRO is a corrupt organization. I can just sense it by various communications I’ve had with them regarding very high profile projects that aired tens of thousands of times. As suspected, they are most likely democratizing the distribution of TV and advertising earnings. Us TV and advertising writers clearly had monies “borrowed from us” to send to indie and pop artists who normally get royalties from live performances of their songs at concert venues, clubs, bars, restaurants, sports stadiums, theme parks and so on. That’s the only thing I can think of. Either that, or their finance people had hundreds of millions invested in the stock market and were caught off guard when the market tanked in March.

    ASCAP, if you need more revenue look no further than right here:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/28/alphabet-googl-earnings-q1-2020.html

    The money this “TV Network” is making from advertising revenue blows away tv and cable networks, yet our statements indicate pennies paid to us from YOUTUBE. Google had $33 BILLION in advertising revenue in Q1, 2020 alone! Why are we not getting streaming royalties at a much higher rate from this source?

    in reply to: Promos – Who gets paid? #34674
    Music1234
    Participant

    What I find so bizarre too is how PROMO’s, which are generally speaking – advertisements, are just looked at as pieces of sheet in the eyes of our industry.

    These tracks are extremely important. They PROMOTE and ADVERTISE a TV show just like a trailer advertises a film and a commercial advertises a product. I had one promoting “So You Think You Can Dance” which is a hit Prime Time Disney show. Sorry but to my eyes, and in my ears as I watched it one night on TV (I had no idea it was about to air but it came on), that Big Band track was a BIG TIME, PRIME TIME drop promoting DISNEY, the biggest player in the business. At 8PM on a Thursday with millions of viewers. That PROMO should be worth a $500 performance royalty based on the time of day and the number of eyes on that show. I immediately contacted the publisher who replied “We need to see if the network sends us the PROMO logs.”

    I hope to be paid on the 3rd domestic distribution in 2020. We shall see……..

    If anyone from the PRO’s and library owners are reading this, please lobby hard to change the Policy and demand that PROMOS be treated like cue sheets.

    Yes it is criminal and a breach of copyright to just use a track, and not pay a composer a royalty. It’s sickening!

    Oh and while the rant is on….sorry, but our music for media business is kicking out TONS of new ads during this COVID 19 crisis and more people than ever are watching TV. Disney crossed the 50 Million subscribers for their streaming service. NETFLIX’s stock is well above $400 a share and they are crushing it with more subscribers and revenue!

    So ASCAP if you need more revenue, you better pick up the phone and shake down:

    1. NETFLIX
    2. DISNEY
    3. GOOGLE
    4. NBC UNIVERSAL

    Follow the money and get your head out of your A$$…and quit making excuses about declining revenue. Go get our money from these companies and increase your bottom line.

    in reply to: Promos – Who gets paid? #34667
    Music1234
    Participant

    I wonder how many loopholes a network can find in order to avoid paying royalties to the composers…

    Not sure it is the network finding a “loophole” to avoid paying. They already paid! TV Networks pay annual blanket license fees to BMI to cover music usage of the BMI catalog in
    1. TV shows as themes, background cues, featured cues
    2. Jingles, advertising, promos
    3. Infomercials
    4. Live news and sports bumpers, featured cues, background cues

    The money is already at BMI, but BMI makes the convenient excuse “the network never turned in the Promo logs”. It’s simply an excuse by a PRO to not pay performance royalties for PROMO usage. It’s shameful and wrong. It’s also publishers fault for not pressuring their clients to file copies of these logs on a weekly basis back to them and to the PRO’s. They make writers whole when it comes to cue sheets, but neglect PROMO’s? Why?

    I am trying to collect on a Promo that was in heavy rotation in Jan 2020 and into February…I have Tunesat data to back my case. We’ll see how that shakes out. MYPRO requested the Tunesat data too. Art, I’d pass your TUNESAT data on regardless. You have nothing to lose by submitting your proof/ data.

    in reply to: Sold All Rights to Song- Royalty Question #34644
    Music1234
    Participant

    You need to ask them to clarify your concerns about sync license fees and mechanical royalties. The PRO issue is clear: You get the writers share.

    in reply to: Sold All Rights to Song- Royalty Question #34640
    Music1234
    Participant

    Candela, selling your publishing rights as well as your sync license rights to a publisher is not a good deal.
    From my experience, shared sync license revenue is a far better deal because sync fees can often hit $200 to $5000 for projects ranging from corporate youtube videos to TV spots. Even if a publisher were to offer me $1500 per track (with no sync fees shared ever as part of the deal), I’d be reluctant to accept that deal because I know that tracks can earn repeated sync fees over a 20 year period and the result is earnings far higher than $1500.

    You will always get your writers share back end royalties from BMI if the music is performed on broadcast TV and cue sheets are filed. Ideally you want 50% of future sync fees and writers share royalties. How much did they buy the cue for?

    in reply to: What are your predictions for the impact on library music? #34616
    Music1234
    Participant

    Hi Unique Place – Glad this is coming up you made me do a study. Here is a result of my data for TV spots from the last statement for 15 and 30 second TV ads:

    Major Network performances paid $ 9.77 each on average – ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC are the 4 major networks in most homes in the USA.

    Local Television performances paid $4.20 each (on average) broadcast – This seems to be skewed because I had a couple of line items that showed “lump sum” payments of $200 or so, the majority of the payouts were $1. I have a feeling the $200 line item may represent a few hundred broadcasts on one local channel. I just don’t know, but I doubt one local broadcast would ever pay $200 for a 15 second ad.

    Cable TV performances paid $1.12 (on average) per broadcast.

    So even if you had say 50 air plays, your royalties should have been around $200 to $350. But again, it does not make sense for any advertiser to buy just 50 TV spots. They usually buy thousands of them. No , it makes no sense that you were paid $2. Study the statement again.

    in reply to: What are your predictions for the impact on library music? #34608
    Music1234
    Participant

    @ uniqueplace – We need a lot more details. So far you calculate 50 air dates, but TV commercials often run well over 1000 times in order to have an impact at all. What brand/ service/ product was being advertised on this TV spot?
    Can you post a link to the ad if it’s on youtube? or I-spot TV?

    Music1234
    Participant

    @ unique place – The Majority of USA TV Netwoks and Cable TV Networks do pay PRO’s who in turn do pay writers back end “performance royalties”. In the USA we have a lot obscure networks that barely anyone watches. Who Pays?
    Fox, Fox Sports, Fox College Sports, Fox News
    ABC
    NBC
    CBS
    CW
    A&E
    CNN
    CNBC
    MSNBC
    Animal Planet
    National Geographic
    Bravo
    Cartoon Network
    Nickelodeon
    MTV, VH1, Comedy Central, VICELAND, BET, Spike, TV Land (all VIACOM Properties)
    Discovery
    TLC Networks
    Superstation
    History Channel
    Lifetime
    Motor Trend
    NBA TV
    OWN
    SCIENCE
    Teen Nick
    TRUTV
    Hallmark

    TV Networks that do not result in back end performance royalties (again from from my experience looking at statements)?

    Big Ten Network (Owned by Fox)
    ESPN (Owned by DISNEY – SHAMEFUL!!!!!)
    SCRIPPS Networks
    NFL cable networks – perhaps BMI pays for these networks
    Univision – A Spanish language TV Network
    Telemundo – A Spanish language TV Network

    Here is a good list that breaks down each network into categories; news, sports, scripted tv, premium movies, lifestyle, variety, factual, kids, etc….

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_pay_television_channels

    Keep in mind that there are “conglomerates” controlling the majority of TV networks – Disney, Viacom/CBS, NBC Universal, ATT/Time Warner, Discovery, Hallmark, FOX Corporation, Sony – These behemoths typically pay.

    There are a lot of religious/ faith based, random local networks that are small and obscure and not really “on the radar’ that do not pay as they have tiny viewing audiences.

    Music1234
    Participant

    Wow! What a contrast between these two PRO’s. Indeed BMI has planned better and I like their accounting approach much better. I am astonished that ASCAP pays Q3, 2019 royalties with Q 1, 2020 revenue (cash basis). BMI clearly does not do this. They are not going to pay late, and are being 100% honest as to how only bars, concerts, clubs, hotels, etc. etc….businesses we do NOT participate in at all from aroyalty earning perspective, is where the revenue decline will come from. The other positive is that streaming revenue is up for them. I see this as great news below. ASCAP clearly was up to something with the money they took in. Hmmmm…. were they invested in the SP 500 and caught totally off guard? I can totally see their New York Lawyers/ consultants/ accountants/ and financial folks taking that kind of risk which caused the delay.

    Dear BMI Songwriters, Composers & Publishers,

    I hope you and your loved ones are staying safe and healthy. Here at BMI, we’re continuing to ensure that we can deliver your royalty payments efficiently, accurately, and on time, as always. To that end, I’m writing today to reassure you that while BMI expects to feel the effects of the COVID-19 crisis like everybody else in the industry, our goal is to minimize its financial impact on you.

    As I’ve already shared, BMI’s royalty distributions will not be affected by the pandemic in the near future. However, we do anticipate an impact in January 2021, when today’s performances and corresponding licensing dollars (2nd quarter 2020) will be reflected in your royalty distributions. While you may see a lower distribution that quarter than you might typically receive under ordinary circumstances, given BMI’s business model, we have the time and ability to plan for this outcome. We’re taking a number of steps to mitigate the situation.

    First, we’re expecting retroactive payments from BMI’s recent settlement with the Radio Industry. Since it benefits all of us that radio remains a strong and vital platform for your music, we will be working with radio stations over the coming months to help them spread out their settlement fees owed to BMI. Not only will this help lessen the impact of COVID-19 on their business, but it also allows us to spread those payments out and deliver them to you beginning in early 2021.

    Secondly, we’re seeing growth in domestic revenue generated from subscription streaming services that feature TV shows, movies and music. As more and more people are following the recommendations and staying home, they are turning to indoor entertainment and that is translating to increases in viewers and listeners. Keep in mind that thanks to the diversification of BMI’s revenue portfolio, 30% of BMI’s domestic revenue now comes from digital sources.

    We expect that both of these avenues, Radio and Digital, will help offset some of the current downturn in areas like General Licensing, where concerts, bars, restaurants, gyms, hotels and other local businesses are taking a hit, as well as International income, which is being impacted by COVID-19 shutdowns.

    So, while we will see an impact to our revenue and your royalties, we hope it assures you to know that we anticipate BMI’s Fiscal Year 2021 will be similar to BMI’s revenues and distributions from 2019, which was a record-setting year for us at the time. We’re also taking steps to ensure that our expenses for FY 2021 are in keeping with 2019 levels. We’ve already put cost-cutting measures in place to get us to that number.

    As you know, we sent out our March royalty distribution early this year to offer you a small measure of comfort, and while the next distribution is scheduled for June 19, we’re aiming once again to send it out slightly earlier. Please know that we do not expect any delays in your royalty distributions going forward.

    We hope that this advance notice of what’s to come is helpful and that you also take the time to plan and prepare.

    Together, we will be ready for this and manage through. What truly inspires me and all the people working at BMI during this challenging time is how creative and resilient all of you are, and I know that we will come through this stronger than before.

    Be well,

    Mike O’Neill
    President and CEO
    BMI

    Music1234
    Participant

    Key takeaways:

    1. ASCAP calculates distributions based on current revenues, not past revenues. – crazy because we are supposed to be paid for performances that occurred July 1 through October 30, 2019

    2. We can no longer provide you with a date certain in advance of each distribution. – Why? The entire world is working from home with computers and software. Major TV networks are broadcasting live TV from home.

    3. Our licensing revenue will become increasingly variable as businesses remain closed, and the advertising market which drives revenues from television, radio and cable continues to be negatively impacted. – Variety anticipates a 12% decline in ad revenue in 2020, all of us TV and ad writers do not participate in the bar, restaurant, retail store, hotel, airlines, concert venue, theme park revenue stream. So I see this as ASCAP borrowing money from TV writers, to pay songwriters and touring artists/ bands.

    4. While everyone is streaming music and movies at home, not everyone in this country will be able to afford a subscription to entertainment services and that shift will impact revenue. – We were only getting paid fractions of pennies from streaming anyway so how is this even relevant for TV writers?

    5. For those of us who work at ASCAP, our duty is to ensure that ASCAP survives to serve the next generation of creators and publishers. – BMI and SESAC have not sent letters worrying about “survival”. Sure, hotels, airlines, bars, restaurants, theme parks, concert venues, clubs, retail stores, etc…will not pay what they paid in 2019, but I still do not see total destruction to TV networks ability to generate meaningful advertising revenue.

    I just have to wonder if ASCAP management had a ton of money invested in stock equities this first qtr 2020.

Viewing 15 posts - 121 through 135 (of 439 total)
X

Forgot Password?

Join Us