We are all talking about new ways of doing business, waiting for the overall business to reconstitute itself, staying afloat in the floodwaters while the top of the Capitol Records building goes floating by….
We are all talking about DOING SOMETHING to help the reiteration of the music industry. We are all talking about UNITING and SHARING our knowledge - and spreading more than a little HOPE.
I love all of that….
But with all this “new” stuff, there are still some basic elements to our business that don’t change: we need to do good deals with our artists. Good deals means, among other things, we need to get enough rights in our deals so that we can do business around the globe. And when we have those rights, we have to try like hell to exploit them. International exploitation almost always requires licensing our masters to another label, giving a record to a British label for outside North America, or licensing to different labels in any number of capitols around the globe.
Lately, an entirely different option has started to look pretty interesting: the worldwide indie distro option.
The indie distribution operations of the major label groups (Warner’s ADA, Universal’s Fontana, SonyBMG’s RED) are all racing to sort out a way to offer their US labels a worldwide solution. (I’m sure the UK branches of those companies are doing the same, but I can’t speak to that.) I’d love to see a legit turnkey alternative to the Olde Way of fishing the international license waters of London, Tokyo, Sydney and Toronto.
Some of what the major label indie distro operations are talking about is interesting - hell, at least they are now SET UP in the international capitols - and some of it is overly prohibitive to the repertoire owners. I have a wait-and-see view on this front. And here’s why….
Last week, I spoke with the UK head of one such American distribution operation. I explained my needs: that I would like to enter into a deal with his company where I could distribute my records, and have the option to, at any point in the life cycle of an album, pull the record and license it to another label. Up to the point where I laid out my needs and wants, the distribution exec was all ears. My label has a hit in the US, and, he thought, I might have more where that came from. But once I explained that I could not afford to pay the UK marketing and promotion and tour support for every release on my label, there was silence on the other end. And while I understand the explanation coming from Kensington, London, I don’t actually like it.
What I heard was that I had to do an exclusive deal, where each artist I release through the deal is tied to that distributor in the UK for the length of my contract with the artist. That only works to the benefit of the distributor, whose only risk in the situation is printing CDs and putting my sales sheet in their solicitation book.
My goal - and tell me if I’m crazy here - is to have the ability to heat up some of my records in the English market (call it UK limited release) under the Dangerbird banner, and get the attention of a fully-fledged British label to pick it up for a decent license.
Maybe I AM nuts, but something has to give.
A tiny US startup label can’t afford to put up the risk money on a secondary front. In the current currency market, America is expensive enough. (Of course, the currency exchange is EXACTLY why every successful UK label has a US office.)
So, we are faced with:
1. Shopping our releases in London ad nauseum, hoping someone will bite
2. Plowing part of our US operating budget into starting records in the UK, hoping we don’t lose our asses while building our assets
This leads me to the next step in this discussion. I can’t take credit for this part, cos a friend from London, a prominent manager who has a label and publishing company, proposed this structure to me. I have coined it “you show me yours, I’ll give you mine (for a short time).”
Here’s how it looks:
1. UK label wants to license a US label’s record - let’s call the band The Silverlake Reservoir Relay Swimmers
2. UK label details the costs for marketing, radio promo, press, retail and TV advertising to get the record to “X” shipments (the “YOU SHOW ME YOURS” part)
3. US label reviews the numbers, and agrees they look sensible, signs off on the budget, agreeing to up the budget based on performance/shipments
4. A deal is struck where the UK label pays $0 (£0) (the “I’LL GIVE YOU MINE” part) for the license, for a short term - three years (the “FOR A SHORT TIME” part)
5. The labels agree to a net 50/50 net profit split
6. The Silverlake Reservoir Relay Swimmers now have a record out in the UK
7. The UK label has much less risk money in the market, and, in fact, could recoup the entire M&P spend with one UK advertising license
8. The US label has fulfilled part of its international release commitment to The Silverlake Reservoir Relay Swimmers, and can now get on with
9. Continuing to break the band on its home front, and
10. Focus on signing another band, making another record, and breaking it
11. One year after UK release, a £35,000 royalty check is sent to the US label
Now, where this could get VERY interesting is if the UK and US labels EACH have a record that the other could put out. This kind of dual cooperative scenario could be amazing, easy and - get this - successful. And duplicatable.
You may have just read all the above and wonder “what the F is this guy talking about?” If you’re asking that, you probably haven’t been stuck with a stack of great records and a dearth of international licensees lately. Or, maybe you’ve been one of those lucky people who signs all your bands to major labels, and haven’t gotten iced in the international department.
The point is - we have to change our expectations about a lot of this stuff. Would I love to get a $50k advance from every major territory for each of my records? Of course. When is the last time that happened? Like David Bowie said in “The Man Who Sold The World”: A long long time ago.
Today, I am happy to just get another record company EXCITED to pick up one of my bands or records. And I am saying it here, in print: I’d be happy to license, for free and for a short term, one of my records to a reputable UK label - especially if we could put out one of theirs under the same terms.
Our masters are our assets. Our assets are only valuable to the extent that they are exploited. Great reward almost always requires great risk.
Someone please help.