Shocking revelation about royalties

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- Shocking revelation about royalties

Posted by extepan on Nov-22-2003 16:49:

Shocking revelation about royalties

I accidentaly stumbled onto a website that explains who royalties get paid to the artists.

http://entertainment.howstuffworks....-royalties6.htm

I was shocked by the way that the record companies control everything. And how the artists are exploited to make money for the company. First the copyright belongs to the record company, and then thre royalties have to be subtracted by this and that, and then the artists have to pay for the recording of the album, the video production costs, the promotional guy, the badnd, the crew members, the lawyers.....in the end they end up in red even though they sold millions. Totally shocking.

There was also a link on the Courtney Love's battle with the record company. I spent one hour reading the whole of her very long article. I was shocked. TLC made $175m for the record company and yet that get less than 2% of the earnings. Toni Braxton sold $188 million worth of CDs and yet she only gets 35 cents for each cd. That's truly evil!!!

http://www.indie-music.com/article.php?sid=820

So next time you shout: "go and buy the cd, support the artist', think hard who you are really supporting.

Posted by Anno Domino on Nov-22-2003 17:20:

dude ocourse the evil company is gonna take money... think about all the artists that dont make it... someone gotta pay!!!

its a shame really everyone is just trying to be a leech

Posted by Mr.Mystery on Nov-22-2003 17:25:

And what is the shocking revelation, exactly?

Posted by Ian on Nov-22-2003 17:29:

quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Mystery
And what is the shocking revelation, exactly?

I'm a man

Posted by Mr.Mystery on Nov-22-2003 17:39:

quote:
Originally posted by Ian^
I'm a man

Posted by sleepydragon on Nov-22-2003 17:46:

most people knew most of that anyway

Posted by Psionic on Nov-22-2003 20:27:

This is true, I read somewhere that out of all record sales, artists make only about 2% (that's like 20 cents per $20 CD).

Posted by DarkFall01 on Nov-22-2003 20:57:

Yeah, it's def. true, isn't that also one of the major reasons why artists open up their own labels?

Posted by doof doofer on Nov-23-2003 12:35:

quote:
Originally posted by Galapidate
This is true, I read somewhere that out of all record sales, artists make only about 2% (that's like 20 cents per $20 CD).

Back to school for you. $20 x 2% = 40c.

Posted by ratz on Nov-23-2003 13:02:

i heard some where that sony muzic makes artists sing these insane record deals saying they have to come out with something like 20 to 50 albums... not sure of the exact number but its some insanely high number... and pearl jam "my all time favorite band" went against that by releasing live cds... they released something like 50 of there whole european and american tours in 2000/2001... something only obsessive fans would buy... but each 1 counts as a album

Posted by ratz on Nov-23-2003 15:34:

smashing pumpkins did the same thing as well when they released there machina 2 album... they only released 12 copies on vinyl for around $10 and then set it up to d/l off the web... so that way they still did release a album lol... only that theres no profit to be made... good way to stick it to those corperate whores

Posted by A.J. on Nov-23-2003 15:50:

Let me ask you this question:

If you download a song that you would not have otherwise listened to or bought the CD, is it still classed as "immoral"??

What i mean, is, say there is this artist that i have never heard before and i just want to check out a couple of their tunes, is this still wrong ???

Just a thought

Posted by extepan on Nov-23-2003 16:03:

quote:
Originally posted by Vigilante
If you download a song that you would not have otherwise listened to or bought the CD, is it still classed as "immoral"??
Just a thought

That's the whole point RIAA is missing. People download things that they otherwise would not have bought anyway.

Well the thread is about how evil the record companies are trying to rip money off the artists. not about downloading.

Posted by ratz on Nov-23-2003 16:04:

quote:
Originally posted by Vigilante
Let me ask you this question:

If you download a song that you would not have otherwise listened to or bought the CD, is it still classed as "immoral"??

wel ya ill admit that i have a few tracks on my comp... but the way i do it is i only d/l shit that a. is impossible to find in a local muzic store b. live dj sets and c. trance singles cause i have cd dj tables and i use the tracks for practice...

i will not rip/download a cd that you can buy at the local muzic store... no matter how much i may want it...

but thats just me and many ppl dont understand that