Mariah did say, the one thing she held onto was her master's. All her written and produced works. She said she'd never sell. She also predicted all this back in the early 2000's. No one listened. They destroyed Michael for his.
@@sequoia1171 Not just the Beatles in Catalog but also a lot of black artists publishing rights. It's actually an interesting tale as it was first offered to McCartney and Ono. McCartney thought the ATV Publishing was too expensive while Ono gave her blessing to Michael rathern than being owned by a corporation.
@@myuudee yeah in truth Michael purchasing that catalog saved us from the overcommercialization of The Beatles music for a good couple decades.. you still don't hear much of it in ads but it's definitely out there
@@XAVIER-xz4qn having publishing rights is principally and legally the same thing as having intellectual property rights over the Masters and any other media associated with that album publication. Sometimes a studio will put a lien on a project or as part of their contract they hold and possess the physical masters, but they are not permitted to use them in any kind of public way without the permission of the artist if the artist retains the intellectual property rights and songwriting and production credits. It's all pretty convoluted and there's a lot of different combinations of these production deals that are signed by artists, and they get thinner and lamer all the time. I can tell you this, because I've signed several production deals and produced many albums over several decades, the music industry is the God damn devil
This is actually truly worrying for the future at hand. We have already seen a plethora of albums that were released after the artist has passed that felt incomplete and not in-line with the artists vision. I also do agree that I would have a hard time saying “No” if the check was just that substantial. Regardless, great video about a pretty saddening trend!
@@333-y5j it's not against integrity to sell your music after your career is done especially if you only owned a portion of it anyway. building and selling business is commonplace & totally fine, sacrificing integrity would be taking the money to decide what the records you make are or what you stand for, not selling your music that's just business.
@Long Legged Larry You’re actually right with those points, I didn’t see it that way. I’d say it’s somewhere in the middle then, 3-7. A lot can change after 7 years I think. Who knows, maybe something could replace current streaming?
Huh? Any logical person would take 100,000,000,000 who cares what they can make off you. They are corporations, they havee multiple things going on. A singular person would have to put in alot of their time to make that happen forever.
@@blackestboy6871 Tell 'im again, like there are hundreds of thousands of folks in position to sell for $100mm. Folks get goofy over other folks' money.
@@blackestboy6871 Because whatever the corporation decides to do with the masters to make money off of, the artist can do themselves. Why do you think artist like Prince & Michael Jackson fought so hard to own their music. When you have talented artist like that who compose, write and create their music it is almost like their baby and they do not want to sell their baby.
Kanye was also having a feud with his label regarding the ownership of his masters. The Weeknd is one of the artists who owns rights to his masters and has talked openly about ever not selling them.
Being a musician doesn’t always pay well. Some artists are never able to stop touring. Many of them, I imagine, are happy to finally get a real payday and are able to stop focusing on the record/tour/repeat cycle. Good for them.
Once I found that Jay-Z catalog only amasses less than 10% of his wealth, I realized how much money music is actually worth. Once you've reached peak notoriety you can use that leverage the rest of your life fr. I am interested to see how this Taylor Swift thing plays out though.
Take the 10 mil, make it 20 mil through investments. Real estate, shares in a company, build your own business, stock market, etc. The point of a long lasting music career is to gain enough wealth to be able to build something else out of it. Something artist like most rappers don't do but instead rely on the musical income alone
Thankfully, Taylor has the contractual rights to control her publishing, so she can veto any use in TV, films, commercials, video games, etc. Also, her first rerecorded album did really well on sales and consumption, at least for now her fans and listeners are streaming the re-recordings more than the original release, so the company that owns her masters might loose money instead of making profit as she continues to re-release her catalogue.
Re releasing does nothing but make her pay to sample her own music.. in turn she will get more percentage now but scooter will still get paid off of each new stream since he owns the original work
Another point is the lack of new music with staying power. There might be one or two memorable modern pop songs per year at most. TV and movies are using older songs and sometimes even the same song in multiple projects. I'm guessing the cream catalogs number less than two dozen as I don't hear that much variety in TV and movies.
This is just completely untrue, there are way more than 2 iconic songs each year. There is not more or less ionic music now, you only think so either just the fact it’s easier to overlook a decade in hindsight to see how much “iconic” music is made or plain blind dumb nostalgia. Also media uses a lot of new songs along side older songs, but using older songs is not a new thing and says nothing about how good music is for a certain decade. People who claim music now lacks staying power are plainly just ignorant of modern popular music.
@@Andor. In the pop world, the last iconic song was either an Adele song or a Taylor Swift song. I believe staying power is the best criteria for an iconic song. Pop modern songs don't last very long. There are modern songs that have lasting power such songs by Beth hart who has had a few songs repeatedly show up in high level skating contests.
@@orlock20 Everythinf you’ve said is on point. Staying power is truly where you win as an artist. Can’t tell you how many 80’s stadium rock songs I hear at ball games. These past 3 years in popular music haven’t been great, there hasn’t been a decent tune that I really remember liking or wanting to hear again. No staying power.
Little known fact: In the early 90's Steve Jobs company Pixar was broke but he didn't want to let his employees go so he kept borrowing money to keep it afloat, Disney offered to pay for Jobs' idea of a full length computer generated feature film, after much push and shove they agreed on the production of the mega blockbuster Toy Story, Steve later sold Pixar to Disney for a pretty penny
@@jgv2699 lol right … money 💰 “ contracts “ brains 🧠 to formulate and funnel ideas 💡- peasants are needed to fuel the 👑 crown -/ & if the peasants refuse ,, bring God and Fear into play -
Very important video. People who want to learn about the problems of ownership in the music industry should learn about the role that the capitalist ownership structure plays
do/can independent artists sell their catalogues too? i mean if they’re independent they own their music and if they’re really successful i doubt they’ll sell their albums right?
look at griselda for instance they have distribution deals with empire for youtube but as far as physical releases go they have full control under their fashion label Griselda however they make so much limiting the media they sell like to 500 vinyls and promising no represses they would never sell the rights to distribution. other people like the now cancelled bassnectar made millions off live shows as an underground act they would never sell out.
@@Swagtildawn - Prince was not a "pill popper"; he was a very healthy guy who suffered a bad injury & had to use some powerful medicine to treat the pain. He supposedly took too much of that pain medicine that 1 night & ended up having cardiac arrest, ending in death.... wait a minute, that is the same thing that happened to MJ.... burned scalp (Pepsi commercial), back injury (concert), another back injury in 2005 (slipped & fell when stepping out of shower), & chronic pain from Lupus... he was using some really strong medicine to treat the pain, especially from the Lupus... he was given too much propofol to help him sleep... ended up having cardiac arrest, ending in death... WOW, that is really bonkers.
People who are making independent be it Russ to Brent Faiyaz and distribution companies such as United masters are showing that doing it yourself and without the help of a record company can be possible and a successful method. I think the future of music is still in good hands and i can see music moving away from corporations and fans preferring the underground and non showbiz artist.
Corps are going to want an ROI on all this which means we'll get stuck with the same music for decades longer in everything (movies, radio, tv shows, commercials, etc etc etc etc). We'll be so sick of these songs but can't escape them. Truly hell.
Thanks for your comment. If you'd like to make huge money Investing in cryptocurrency with little capital I will refer you to Garry Williams T. For more guidance.
I used to watch at least one movie a day and got a different story or vibe nearly every time. I stopped watching movies over the past few years because now there are millions of the same movie, with the same vibe, all made by the same companies. Trash. Indy movies have gotten worse as well. But eh.
virtual tours, virtual revivals, animated artists. Recycle refurbish and rebrand. As long as they own the actual songwriting they could be eating off it.
It’s not capitalism that’s the problem it’s human nature of greed. Socialism and other economic would have the same results with someone else besides these artists pocketing this money.
Lol you’re literally using a platform created via capitalism to complain about capitalism. The business is just corrupt like any other and human nature will never go away, people naturally seek out their own self interest.
Domali Draws ah, the good old “you live under capitalism so you can’t argue for a better system” argument. Have you ever considered that all the businesses that are “corrupt as any other” might be a byproduct of capitalism? Or that human greed is a byproduct of capitalism, colonialism, and imperialism? Come back when you graduate high school and get some perspective
@@domalistudios94 you don’t know how capitalism works firstly. Capitalism, (the Economic system of which the means of production are privately owned) doesn’t create your iPhone for Gods sake, human labor does, our economic system simply just dictates who reaps the profits and value from the prices we humans put on the product created by the workers. Without the workers there would be no product, no product = no iPhone, no iphone = no profits, no profits = no capitalism. Similarly in the music industry, the workers (the music artists) creates the commodity built for human needs, wants, etc. The capitalist (the record label/ CEO) reaps the benefits from the laborer because they decide how to put that commodity out towards the masses.
Also part of the reason artist like Weezer started to join a management group. I remember back in 2008 Universal music HQ got caught in a fire and lots of Weezer's (and other artists signed) masters were burned to the ground. It was a crazy reset button and tons of complex contract to obtain their masters (found out recently that pre white album all of their masters are owned by Universal, thus putting some demos to a redundant state of incompletion and copying it will cause a fiery lawsuit). Then via acquaintances they ended up signing to CRUSH music, housing artist like Lorde, Fall Out Boys, Kurt Cobain Estate, it comes with a fee but at least you are able to keep your masters and having modern producers like Suzy Shinn to aid your style for a newer generations.
As far as I know Dylan sold his recordings AND publishing for 400 million. This is different from Taylor Swift who only lost control of the of her recordings. It’d be great to get a part 2 video which goes in depth about the difference between mechanical (recordings) and publishing (melody/lyrics) rights.
Just discovered your work through your pusha t video. I just want to take a moment to tell you that your AE editing and journalistic approach is insanely good. You’ve earned a new fan. Subbing now!
I actually work in music publishing and I have been watching all these catalog sales like a hawk its insane! The amount Merck is spending!!! I always thought artists would want to keep their catalog in their families. Yes it may earn 100 million over twenty years but what about 50-100 years? How much are you leaving on the table. Then again, your catalog may be worthless 100 years from now - not likely but always a possibility. I think Mariah Carey said she wasn’t gonna sell her publishing and was gonna hand it to her kids, I don’t blame artists for cashing out though.
@@Alex-hz2xg that's about jacko and his plastic surgeries and what he did with little boys, Madonna always was and will be in charge of her personal life and career
Just to clarify; capital gains taxes are taxes on income from property sales or an investment (stocks, bonds). It’s not taxes of ANY income over a million dollars, only investment profits over a million dollars. 💸💸💸
Yeah Yeah Yeah BUT, we are in an underground renaissance anyone who goes to fests know that the industry artists aren't it unless its a rare case like anderson .paak. But we are going through an underground revolution with artists like freddie gibbs, madlib, alchemist, flying lotus, griselda who churn out art despite the industry griselda makes millions off vinyl sold on bandcamp and they don compromise any artistic integrity.
Really liked this one! I wonder if the buyouts of all these catalogues will diminish the value of the music even more than streaming has done but time will tell. Perhaps this is the best way to go about things unless the artist owns their own label or something
Crosby has been making music since 1964, he is now 80 yrs old. In 2021 says he is broke, still has a Mortgage and Family at home. David nobody will ever accuse you of being a Financial Genius.
I think the title is a bit misleading. Cooperations are not suddenly buying the music industry. They have always owned it. It's just that before the streaming, and to a certain extent even the digital era, albums and songs didn't not sell very much years after their release (unless you were a legend like The Beatles) so masters were not that valuable. Companies had other ways of exploiting artists as artists generally had less financial freedom back in the day.
Artists, especially back in the old days, generally don't have that much business acumen. Which is not a knock agains them in any way, but it leads to them being exploited to hell and back by corporations. Take The Beatles for example, John Lennon and Paul Mccartney were lead to believe that making their publishing company public was a good idea, after they lost the shares majority they no longer owned their own songs. It's crazy how much shady shit happens behind the scenes.
This is the type of content the consumers need is real raw look into how bad the industry is. Please do videos on how bad corps own their artists music and why selective it is to be a singer.
1:45 how do you even read this plot? "% of income from touring: Ed Sheeran: 70," but the bar goes to approx. 17.....17 what? And why are the intermediate lines at weird numbers like 11.7 and 9.4?! Ah I guess this is in USD millions. Still a strange way of presenting info
Nice video but there are a few key points missing with regards to why these big investments firms are interested in music IP. 1 - Music royalty income is consistent and measurable due to streaming data, thus easier to valuate. 2 - Music royalties are an alternative asset class that are uncorrelated to traditional markets (aka when the market is volatile or crashes, music income stays more or less consistent). 3 - The asset pays out cash at least 4 times per year and once the 10x-20x multiple is reached, you still own the principal. 4 - Because interest rates are low, it is very reasonable to borrow money (vs later with the potential inflation and higher rates).
I’m so glad you are talking about this. Your favourite band sucks brought this up months ago and was urging people to please learn about this awful awful thing we have on our hands
As long as they can keep playing their own music... imagine the corporation issuing a DMCA on a live performance of your own music cause you sold it :P
Only problem for artist owning their songs from start is nobody (Music Label ) knows who the next big star is , contracts based on advancement to owning rights by 4th or 5th album , will certanily be advantageous to both parties.
If she was aware of Disney buying her catalog, it’s interesting that Taylor Swift did her in studio performance with Disney +. She must be playing some kind of chess game here. She probably wants to be on Disney’s good side, have Disney become indebted to her , so that in return, she can get at least ome amount of ownership, or say on how the music is used.
Shamrock holdings were not allowed by Scooter to contact Taylor before the deal was done so they contacted her after they bought her records and asked her if she wants to own her records in part but she refused because the deal Scooter made with Shamrock means that he still gets a good portion off of the music and Taylor did not want to be in any tie-up with Scooter. She shared Shamrock's email to her and her email to them on instagram with her fans. As the writer of all her songs, she always held the rights of publishing her music. That's why you can't hear any of Taylor's music before 2019 anywhere and after the re-recordings she will licence her new music to whoever wants to use it and not the original ones.
I don’t feel sorry for many of these artists, they’re still multi millionaires who got to those positions by networking and investment done by these same companies they complain about. They’re only mad now because they have to uphold their side of the bargain which means less income once their career starts to slow down.
When artists re-record their songs due to this, like Taylor swift, it often doesn't hit the same (not that I've specifically heard hers) as they're not in that same space and their voice grows/wears and tears. It's like a unquantifiable magic that that artist in that mind state, time and place can create.
LOL at your label for Chris Cornell being Charles Cornell (the youtuber). Didn't comprehensively read every comment but I didn't see anyone else call it out. Pretty funny slip of the tongue (flip of the text?)
I was born at the start of the 1960s, it mattered to the young people making music that they didn't sell out to faceless, heartless, greedy big business, it mattered for quite a while, but over time, the more commercial ity won, and the dumbing down of culture agenda increased, the less it mattered. I'm 60 years old now and I see a terrible dystopia they have planned, and I see that the heartfelt art of the great popular musicians is just going to end up as psychological programme reinforcement and nothing else. In the future the past doesn't have the same meaning. What if you have made a great work of art, what happens to it? It gets massed produced, prostituted around, and lots of other people make lots of money from it. I haven't got much time left on Earth, and some people will be exploiting my art when I'm gone, should I take the big pay out and enjoy my slow retirement? What does it mean to leave a song on the universal jukebox? I hate this life.
felt like pointing out the fact you seem very poetic in the way you illustrated your words there. You have many years on me so it’s expected but idk, just felt like saying that.
How on Earth are Imagine Dragons and Lil Wayne worth just as much as Stevie Nicks and almost as much as Neil Young?? That’s more concerning to me than the artists selling their rights.
Shamrock Holdings was Roy E. Disney's and NOT Walt Disney Company. Shamrock only owned Disney stock and run by the estate of Roy after his death. Sorry don't like to hear lies about the Disney company like that was.
Thanks for your comment. If you'd like to make huge money Investing in cryptocurrency with little capital I will refer you to Garry Williams T. For more guidance..
I meaaaaaan, I guess this is the story of how in 60 years our fav songs and artist are gonna be repetitively used as thematic soundtrack music in films like classical music is now 😆 ( it's already starting to happen a little)
This gives us evidence to support my belief that every artist should aggressively invest their music earnings into a plethora of different income streams
![[LIVE] นาทีนี้ต้องพี่ทนาย | ทนายแก้ว vs ทนายไพศาล | #คุยให้เด็กมันฟัง EP.47 (02/11/67)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HmquaO-PL_M/mqdefault.jpg)
Get a free trial of Skillshare and take MY CLASS on 2D animation! skl.sh/volksgeist04211
ok
ok
ok
ok
Ok
Mariah did say, the one thing she held onto was her master's. All her written and produced works. She said she'd never sell. She also predicted all this back in the early 2000's. No one listened. They destroyed Michael for his.
Ironically, Michael was among the first to pull this move when he bought the entire Beatles catalog in the '80s
Mariah doenst own her masters tho. Maybe you meant her publishing.
@@sequoia1171 Not just the Beatles in Catalog but also a lot of black artists publishing rights. It's actually an interesting tale as it was first offered to McCartney and Ono. McCartney thought the ATV Publishing was too expensive while Ono gave her blessing to Michael rathern than being owned by a corporation.
@@myuudee yeah in truth Michael purchasing that catalog saved us from the overcommercialization of The Beatles music for a good couple decades.. you still don't hear much of it in ads but it's definitely out there
@@XAVIER-xz4qn having publishing rights is principally and legally the same thing as having intellectual property rights over the Masters and any other media associated with that album publication. Sometimes a studio will put a lien on a project or as part of their contract they hold and possess the physical masters, but they are not permitted to use them in any kind of public way without the permission of the artist if the artist retains the intellectual property rights and songwriting and production credits. It's all pretty convoluted and there's a lot of different combinations of these production deals that are signed by artists, and they get thinner and lamer all the time. I can tell you this, because I've signed several production deals and produced many albums over several decades, the music industry is the God damn devil
This is actually truly worrying for the future at hand. We have already seen a plethora of albums that were released after the artist has passed that felt incomplete and not in-line with the artists vision.
I also do agree that I would have a hard time saying “No” if the check was just that substantial. Regardless, great video about a pretty saddening trend!
Thanks for watching!
I think it would take a lot to un-cement the legacy of someone like a Bob Dylan but in general yes it could get ugly
This is the reason michael jackson was in a dispute with sony.
integrity over riches.
@@333-y5j it's not against integrity to sell your music after your career is done especially if you only owned a portion of it anyway. building and selling business is commonplace & totally fine, sacrificing integrity would be taking the money to decide what the records you make are or what you stand for, not selling your music that's just business.
The most damning thing is this video is the fact imagine dragons music is actually worth £100,000,000. We’re all doomed.
They're a bunch of marketing majors who teamed up to to make songs for advertising purposes. Seems they've succeeded.
@@selanryn5849 Ahhhh makes sense now!
Someone paying that much doesn’t necessarily mean it’s worth that much.
@@e13kid That’s subjective. The company who bought the rights clearly thought it was worth that.
@@RD-jr8nv That’s what I just said.
Disney will likely buy Spotify to box out Apple and offer a Disney +, Hulu, Spotify ultimate bundle with a student discount
how long until this happens. ill comment when it happens. hi future me. how's the new Star Wars and gravity falls reboot
This seems too close to reality it almost feels like you travelled from the future
I bet it’ll happen in the next 1-2 years.
@Long Legged Larry You’re actually right with those points, I didn’t see it that way. I’d say it’s somewhere in the middle then, 3-7. A lot can change after 7 years I think. Who knows, maybe something could replace current streaming?
@@jpegson_g the clues have always been there, it’s not like Disney started all of a sudden
Disney’s gonna own everything in the future
ong they already completely ruined the movie industry I genuinely cant explain how sick I am of still seeing marvel and star wars everywhere
fr, and they ruin everything they touch
@@chrishiebert4375 I see Mickey Mouse on celery now
And Im gonna own Disney and make it a fair and optimistic corporation.
Imagine Disney owning Griseldas catalogue
If corporations can pay you $ 100,000,000,000 for your catalogue then just imagine what they'll make off you.
Exactly
Yup
Huh? Any logical person would take 100,000,000,000 who cares what they can make off you. They are corporations, they havee multiple things going on. A singular person would have to put in alot of their time to make that happen forever.
@@blackestboy6871 Tell 'im again, like there are hundreds of thousands of folks in position to sell for $100mm. Folks get goofy over other folks' money.
@@blackestboy6871 Because whatever the corporation decides to do with the masters to make money off of, the artist can do themselves. Why do you think artist like Prince & Michael Jackson fought so hard to own their music. When you have talented artist like that who compose, write and create their music it is almost like their baby and they do not want to sell their baby.
Kanye was also having a feud with his label regarding the ownership of his masters.
The Weeknd is one of the artists who owns rights to his masters and has talked openly about ever not selling them.
All the more reason why i love the weeknd
@@BATOMNI in 5-10 years when his catalog is worth $500M+ cash will tell him to change his mind
@@tence_6965 i dont think he should. because he can use that to help his posterity stay rich because his catalog but thats my opinion.
@@BATOMNI well when that much $$ is in your face hard to say no
@@BATOMNI you don't what his deal is
Being a musician doesn’t always pay well. Some artists are never able to stop touring. Many of them, I imagine, are happy to finally get a real payday and are able to stop focusing on the record/tour/repeat cycle. Good for them.
The vast majority of musicians don't make enough money to survive off their work.
Once I found that Jay-Z catalog only amasses less than 10% of his wealth, I realized how much money music is actually worth. Once you've reached peak notoriety you can use that leverage the rest of your life fr. I am interested to see how this Taylor Swift thing plays out though.
This. This is why I don’t see Rihanna rushing back to music again. Music business is low ROI compared to her other business ventures.
@@lincolnacrux he’s making that because he’s independent…it’s different if you were on a label
@@414MILboy exactly.
@@414MILboy The guy who commented on this was talking about music as a whole I think....Thats why I brought Russ up
Take the 10 mil, make it 20 mil through investments. Real estate, shares in a company, build your own business, stock market, etc.
The point of a long lasting music career is to gain enough wealth to be able to build something else out of it. Something artist like most rappers don't do but instead rely on the musical income alone
0:02 imagine dragon these nuts across your forehead
😭
Nice
69 likes
you entered the video just to spot imagine dragons and comment the joke, right? 😭
yoooooo
Thankfully, Taylor has the contractual rights to control her publishing, so she can veto any use in TV, films, commercials, video games, etc. Also, her first rerecorded album did really well on sales and consumption, at least for now her fans and listeners are streaming the re-recordings more than the original release, so the company that owns her masters might loose money instead of making profit as she continues to re-release her catalogue.
Re releasing does nothing but make her pay to sample her own music.. in turn she will get more percentage now but scooter will still get paid off of each new stream since he owns the original work
Another point is the lack of new music with staying power. There might be one or two memorable modern pop songs per year at most. TV and movies are using older songs and sometimes even the same song in multiple projects. I'm guessing the cream catalogs number less than two dozen as I don't hear that much variety in TV and movies.
I think Rick Beato said something similar to this…
No real incentive to develop musical skills when one can get away with rapping over a $200 beat
This is just completely untrue, there are way more than 2 iconic songs each year. There is not more or less ionic music now, you only think so either just the fact it’s easier to overlook a decade in hindsight to see how much “iconic” music is made or plain blind dumb nostalgia. Also media uses a lot of new songs along side older songs, but using older songs is not a new thing and says nothing about how good music is for a certain decade. People who claim music now lacks staying power are plainly just ignorant of modern popular music.
@@Andor. In the pop world, the last iconic song was either an Adele song or a Taylor Swift song. I believe staying power is the best criteria for an iconic song. Pop modern songs don't last very long. There are modern songs that have lasting power such songs by Beth hart who has had a few songs repeatedly show up in high level skating contests.
@@orlock20 Everythinf you’ve said is on point. Staying power is truly where you win as an artist. Can’t tell you how many 80’s stadium rock songs I hear at ball games. These past 3 years in popular music haven’t been great, there hasn’t been a decent tune that I really remember liking or wanting to hear again. No staying power.
Little known fact: In the early 90's Steve Jobs company Pixar was broke but he didn't want to let his employees go so he kept borrowing money to keep it afloat, Disney offered to pay for Jobs' idea of a full length computer generated feature film, after much push and shove they agreed on the production of the mega blockbuster Toy Story, Steve later sold Pixar to Disney for a pretty penny
"Could I run away from 50 Mill like Dave Chappelle?"
That lyric is about to become a whole lot more relevant.
J Cole - Runaway
Very relevant, good work bringing that up. Amazing for J Cole and even more amazing that Dave Chappelle was so solid in his morals
I'm pretty sure Drake too made a line about this in Mob Ties.
th-cam.com/video/_JkcYjABDus/w-d-xo.html
It is relevant now
Interesting, but record companies were always finding ways to screw over artists. This just seems to be the new way
Yup even michael jackson had a fude with the corporation sony.
Yes just a new way of getting over on them time will reveal it
Lil Wayne was sold out for 100mill
His masters were actually in the billions...
th-cam.com/video/_JkcYjABDus/w-d-xo.html
True. I agree with you
all i got from this is that major artists need to downgrade their lifestyles. like how do they burn through millions and millions so easily?
Taxes, fee's for all the key people in the artist's career, and a bunch of other expenses.
Not to mention bad investments, shady deals done behind the artist's back, and crooked managers, accountants, lawyers, and etc.
@@jgv2699 things they can all get rid of. maybe it’s their 50 million dollar mansion with the mortgage. they could easily downgrade but they won’t 😂😂
@@JayySonataWTF You can't get rid of these people, you need them if you want to have a career.
@@jgv2699 lol right … money 💰 “ contracts “ brains 🧠 to formulate and funnel ideas 💡- peasants are needed to fuel the 👑 crown -/ & if the peasants refuse ,, bring God and Fear into play -
Very important video. People who want to learn about the problems of ownership in the music industry should learn about the role that the capitalist ownership structure plays
do/can independent artists sell their catalogues too? i mean if they’re independent they own their music and if they’re really successful i doubt they’ll sell their albums right?
They can but I cna't imagine why they would
look at griselda for instance they have distribution deals with empire for youtube but as far as physical releases go they have full control under their fashion label Griselda however they make so much limiting the media they sell like to 500 vinyls and promising no represses they would never sell the rights to distribution. other people like the now cancelled bassnectar made millions off live shows as an underground act they would never sell out.
I've had to retrain my brain to recognize the beauty and value of every Fleetwood Mac song that has been featured on car commercials over the years.
I think warner bros killed prince to finally win the war over his music that have fought for many years. Soon as he died all his "vault" got released
True.
What a dumbass conspiracy. Hahahahaha. He was a pill popper and died. It's the most basic cut and dry case and people still wanna make up dumb shit.
@@Swagtildawn Because you believe everything MSM, tells you right?
@@Swagtildawn they Killed MJ and other artists, dude
@@Swagtildawn - Prince was not a "pill popper"; he was a very healthy guy who suffered a bad injury & had to use some powerful medicine to treat the pain. He supposedly took too much of that pain medicine that 1 night & ended up having cardiac arrest, ending in death....
wait a minute, that is the same thing that happened to MJ....
burned scalp (Pepsi commercial), back injury (concert), another back injury in 2005 (slipped & fell when stepping out of shower), & chronic pain from Lupus... he was using some really strong medicine to treat the pain, especially from the Lupus... he was given too much propofol to help him sleep... ended up having cardiac arrest, ending in death...
WOW, that is really bonkers.
This is a very interesting topic.
People who are making independent be it Russ to Brent Faiyaz and distribution companies such as United masters are showing that doing it yourself and without the help of a record company can be possible and a successful method. I think the future of music is still in good hands and i can see music moving away from corporations and fans preferring the underground and non showbiz artist.
@Ophelià Rose Come on I'm pretty sure it can work for everyone if they put in the work.
Well independent artists still need a team of businessmen that can help them gain success without a major label deal......
6:08 Shamrock Holdings is owned by the family of Roy E. Disney, NOT the Walt Disney Company.
andrew same family, really
Great video, man. This is a very important aspect of this industry that artists often forget about. Ownership is vital.
Corps are going to want an ROI on all this which means we'll get stuck with the same music for decades longer in everything (movies, radio, tv shows, commercials, etc etc etc etc). We'll be so sick of these songs but can't escape them. Truly hell.
Shit.
I love your videos where you get in depth with the music industry! Keep em coming!
Thanks for your comment.
If you'd like to make huge money Investing in cryptocurrency with little capital I will refer you to Garry Williams T.
For more guidance.
W•H•A•T•S•A•P•√
+=1= 9= 4 =9 =3= 1 =7 =1= 4= 2= 1.
One minute into the video, and I am not even really paying attention to the content. The video and audio quality is top-notch brother! Well done!
Disney and Amazon will be our entertainment and music overlords in the future.
kinda scary
And pornhub*
Amazon is also doing groceries and going into cosmetics and space just to name a few, All this shit screams buyinlarge
I hate it
I used to watch at least one movie a day and got a different story or vibe nearly every time. I stopped watching movies over the past few years because now there are millions of the same movie, with the same vibe, all made by the same companies. Trash. Indy movies have gotten worse as well. But eh.
Imagine being sued because you wrote a song that sounds like a song that you already wrote.
John Fogarty. Yes that was insane.
virtual tours, virtual revivals, animated artists. Recycle refurbish and rebrand. As long as they own the actual songwriting they could be eating off it.
Great content as usual
Frank Zappa was right. Music is going straight to the accountants
Sounds like it's not an issue that's within the music industry, its sounds like an issue within our economic system of capitalism.
It’s not capitalism that’s the problem it’s human nature of greed. Socialism and other economic would have the same results with someone else besides these artists pocketing this money.
Domali Draws keep telling yourself that
Lol you’re literally using a platform created via capitalism to complain about capitalism. The business is just corrupt like any other and human nature will never go away, people naturally seek out their own self interest.
Domali Draws ah, the good old “you live under capitalism so you can’t argue for a better system” argument. Have you ever considered that all the businesses that are “corrupt as any other” might be a byproduct of capitalism? Or that human greed is a byproduct of capitalism, colonialism, and imperialism? Come back when you graduate high school and get some perspective
@@domalistudios94 you don’t know how capitalism works firstly. Capitalism, (the Economic system of which the means of production are privately owned) doesn’t create your iPhone for Gods sake, human labor does, our economic system simply just dictates who reaps the profits and value from the prices we humans put on the product created by the workers. Without the workers there would be no product, no product = no iPhone, no iphone = no profits, no profits = no capitalism. Similarly in the music industry, the workers (the music artists) creates the commodity built for human needs, wants, etc. The capitalist (the record label/ CEO) reaps the benefits from the laborer because they decide how to put that commodity out towards the masses.
Also part of the reason artist like Weezer started to join a management group. I remember back in 2008 Universal music HQ got caught in a fire and lots of Weezer's (and other artists signed) masters were burned to the ground. It was a crazy reset button and tons of complex contract to obtain their masters (found out recently that pre white album all of their masters are owned by Universal, thus putting some demos to a redundant state of incompletion and copying it will cause a fiery lawsuit). Then via acquaintances they ended up signing to CRUSH music, housing artist like Lorde, Fall Out Boys, Kurt Cobain Estate, it comes with a fee but at least you are able to keep your masters and having modern producers like Suzy Shinn to aid your style for a newer generations.
Disney better have yung mickey as features if they decide to buy out corporations
As far as I know Dylan sold his recordings AND publishing for 400 million. This is different from Taylor Swift who only lost control of the of her recordings. It’d be great to get a part 2 video which goes in depth about the difference between mechanical (recordings) and publishing (melody/lyrics) rights.
I don't know about his recordings. I thought Sony Music owns the masters to his recordings, especially the ones from the 1960's.
Hits different when Bruce Springsteen sold his entire catalog to Sony for $500 million...
Just discovered your work through your pusha t video. I just want to take a moment to tell you that your AE editing and journalistic approach is insanely good. You’ve earned a new fan. Subbing now!
I’m really glad that I found this channel. Keep up the quality content!
I actually work in music publishing and I have been watching all these catalog sales like a hawk its insane! The amount Merck is spending!!! I always thought artists would want to keep their catalog in their families. Yes it may earn 100 million over twenty years but what about 50-100 years? How much are you leaving on the table. Then again, your catalog may be worthless 100 years from now - not likely but always a possibility. I think Mariah Carey said she wasn’t gonna sell her publishing and was gonna hand it to her kids, I don’t blame artists for cashing out though.
And that's why MADONNA is still standing! Young artist should learn from her
Still standing all of her last projects flopped
@@anes_jade2x7p73define flop
Madonna is the Mother of Pop music, no one ever will come close to her impact and her genius
@@Alex-hz2xg that's about jacko and his plastic surgeries and what he did with little boys, Madonna always was and will be in charge of her personal life and career
@@anes_jade2x7p73 talk about jacko who was sick and anorexic before his death and didn't make it to his 50s lol
People don’t realize these huge artists wouldn’t be making nearly as much without the labels
It's all about the distribution
These are the channels on TH-cam I love. Very informative and entertaining. First time watching your channel. Great job . You have a new subscriber.
Great video man. Seriously strange situation this music industry is in, especially for us independent artists.
As the great Frank Zappa said when asked for advice to young aspiring musicians, "own your publishing."
Just to clarify; capital gains taxes are taxes on income from property sales or an investment (stocks, bonds). It’s not taxes of ANY income over a million dollars, only investment profits over a million dollars. 💸💸💸
Rihanna owns her Masters and what a great decision she made
Yeah Yeah Yeah BUT, we are in an underground renaissance anyone who goes to fests know that the industry artists aren't it unless its a rare case like anderson .paak. But we are going through an underground revolution with artists like freddie gibbs, madlib, alchemist, flying lotus, griselda who churn out art despite the industry griselda makes millions off vinyl sold on bandcamp and they don compromise any artistic integrity.
bandcamp is the future
This is so important, thank you for sharing the info!!
Really liked this one! I wonder if the buyouts of all these catalogues will diminish the value of the music even more than streaming has done but time will tell. Perhaps this is the best way to go about things unless the artist owns their own label or something
Saw a Budweiser advert the other day with a Bob Dylan song featured in it!
Crosby has been making music since 1964, he is now 80 yrs old. In 2021 says he is broke, still has a Mortgage and Family at home. David nobody will ever accuse you of being a Financial Genius.
Kid Rock sold his catalog for $3.68 and a 2016 MAGA hat.
damn bro your videos have really improved, they were always dope, but the new set and lighting is fire
Well thought out, researched and great insight. Subscribed
you make good videos. A lot of informal videos on youtube are bullshit fluff that don't say anything. Yours are pretty good.
I think the title is a bit misleading. Cooperations are not suddenly buying the music industry. They have always owned it. It's just that before the streaming, and to a certain extent even the digital era, albums and songs didn't not sell very much years after their release (unless you were a legend like The Beatles) so masters were not that valuable. Companies had other ways of exploiting artists as artists generally had less financial freedom back in the day.
Artists, especially back in the old days, generally don't have that much business acumen. Which is not a knock agains them in any way, but it leads to them being exploited to hell and back by corporations. Take The Beatles for example, John Lennon and Paul Mccartney were lead to believe that making their publishing company public was a good idea, after they lost the shares majority they no longer owned their own songs. It's crazy how much shady shit happens behind the scenes.
Government wanting 40% of everything we make. Even passing along a house and some money to your kids get taxed. That's messed up.
This is the type of content the consumers need is real raw look into how bad the industry is. Please do videos on how bad corps own their artists music and why selective it is to be a singer.
1:45 how do you even read this plot? "% of income from touring: Ed Sheeran: 70," but the bar goes to approx. 17.....17 what? And why are the intermediate lines at weird numbers like 11.7 and 9.4?! Ah I guess this is in USD millions. Still a strange way of presenting info
How Ed Sheeran makes a penny from his music is beyond me .
Nice video but there are a few key points missing with regards to why these big investments firms are interested in music IP. 1 - Music royalty income is consistent and measurable due to streaming data, thus easier to valuate. 2 - Music royalties are an alternative asset class that are uncorrelated to traditional markets (aka when the market is volatile or crashes, music income stays more or less consistent). 3 - The asset pays out cash at least 4 times per year and once the 10x-20x multiple is reached, you still own the principal. 4 - Because interest rates are low, it is very reasonable to borrow money (vs later with the potential inflation and higher rates).
We've gone from once upon a time where artists proudly owned their art to a sad time when every art and artist has a price.
I’m so glad you are talking about this. Your favourite band sucks brought this up months ago and was urging people to please learn about this awful awful thing we have on our hands
As long as they can keep playing their own music... imagine the corporation issuing a DMCA on a live performance of your own music cause you sold it :P
The future.
Damon albarn is never going to sell out his or gorillaz music
I’m going to try and buy it
We live in an ever growing oligarchy, mega corporations owning every sector of our lives isn’t a possibility, it’s inevitable.
Its not inevitable its happened before where one artist became a billionaire and got some artist masters back.
It's more than inevitable. it's a done deal!
get rid of copyright law. only real ones know
incredible video on a interesting topic
Artist vs Masters has been a thing for years.
The devil is making offers the artists can't refuse.
The crossroads where an artist sold his soul to the devil is now the access to the highway to hell.
To make a point, the artists didn't have to sell their publishing rights. But that much money is a very coercive force. Commodification kills.
The irony of implying that mega corporations at some point weren't the music industry 😏
Amazing video, thank you 🙏🏼🙏🏼
Only problem for artist owning their songs from start is nobody (Music Label ) knows who the next big star is , contracts based on advancement to owning rights by 4th or 5th album , will certanily be advantageous to both parties.
If she was aware of Disney buying her catalog, it’s interesting that Taylor Swift did her in studio performance with Disney +. She must be playing some kind of chess game here. She probably wants to be on Disney’s good side, have Disney become indebted to her , so that in return, she can get at least ome amount of ownership, or say on how the music is used.
Shamrock holdings were not allowed by Scooter to contact Taylor before the deal was done so they contacted her after they bought her records and asked her if she wants to own her records in part but she refused because the deal Scooter made with Shamrock means that he still gets a good portion off of the music and Taylor did not want to be in any tie-up with Scooter. She shared Shamrock's email to her and her email to them on instagram with her fans.
As the writer of all her songs, she always held the rights of publishing her music. That's why you can't hear any of Taylor's music before 2019 anywhere and after the re-recordings she will licence her new music to whoever wants to use it and not the original ones.
I don’t feel sorry for many of these artists, they’re still multi millionaires who got to those positions by networking and investment done by these same companies they complain about. They’re only mad now because they have to uphold their side of the bargain which means less income once their career starts to slow down.
Agree, its just the card weren't in their favor anymore and they would need to make a choice
Same here👏👏
0:02 it’s a classic
"Music sells...but whos buying?"
When artists re-record their songs due to this, like Taylor swift, it often doesn't hit the same (not that I've specifically heard hers) as they're not in that same space and their voice grows/wears and tears.
It's like a unquantifiable magic that that artist in that mind state, time and place can create.
Thank you for making this.
Music streaming will become very similar to VoD streaming, if big artists continue on like this
great info, thanks!
LOL at your label for Chris Cornell being Charles Cornell (the youtuber). Didn't comprehensively read every comment but I didn't see anyone else call it out. Pretty funny slip of the tongue (flip of the text?)
4:18 it says Charles Cornell under a picture of Chris Cornell
I remember this was talked about years ago and now I see why
Man you really need to do a video about Fugazi tbh
The only band that matters.
@@ultimadum7785 The only band that matters.
I was born at the start of the 1960s, it mattered to the young people making music that they didn't sell out to faceless, heartless, greedy big business, it mattered for quite a while, but over time, the more commercial ity won, and the dumbing down of culture agenda increased, the less it mattered.
I'm 60 years old now and I see a terrible dystopia they have planned, and I see that the heartfelt art of the great popular musicians is just going to end up as psychological programme reinforcement and nothing else. In the future the past doesn't have the same meaning.
What if you have made a great work of art, what happens to it? It gets massed produced, prostituted around, and lots of other people make lots of money from it. I haven't got much time left on Earth, and some people will be exploiting my art when I'm gone, should I take the big pay out and enjoy my slow retirement?
What does it mean to leave a song on the universal jukebox?
I hate this life.
You're a creative genius. Be proud of that...
@@danielraju4458 How did you know?
That's very kind of you, to say so.
Hidden between the lines that you've written, is a creative urge to express in words that which appeals to the imagination.
Psychological programme reinforcement. Very few people are aware that this condition exists in the sphere of the 'arts' today.
felt like pointing out the fact you seem very poetic in the way you illustrated your words there. You have many years on me so it’s expected but idk, just felt like saying that.
How on Earth are Imagine Dragons and Lil Wayne worth just as much as Stevie Nicks and almost as much as Neil Young?? That’s more concerning to me than the artists selling their rights.
Garbage music is worth considerably more these days.
Shamrock Holdings was Roy E. Disney's and NOT Walt Disney Company. Shamrock only owned Disney stock and run by the estate of Roy after his death. Sorry don't like to hear lies about the Disney company like that was.
Next video: How Skillshare bought the TH-cam industry
There is a brilliant but difficult to find documentary called The Day the music died, it's probably 15 years old..
Unrelated but i could've sworn i saw u in a record store
Thanks for your comment.
If you'd like to make huge money Investing in cryptocurrency with little capital I will refer you to Garry Williams T.
For more guidance..
W•H•A•T•S•A•P•√
+=1= 9= 4 =9 =3= 1 =7 =1= 4= 2= 1..
"Imagine no possessions. I wonder if you can." - John Lennon
I see you, Logic
Record labels have always owned the masters. It’s a question of what they pay the artist in royalties in exchange for them.
I meaaaaaan, I guess this is the story of how in 60 years our fav songs and artist are gonna be repetitively used as thematic soundtrack music in films like classical music is now 😆 ( it's already starting to happen a little)
This gives us evidence to support my belief that every artist should aggressively invest their music earnings into a plethora of different income streams
"U 2, would probably have a hard time saying no" BARS!!!!!!!!
4:21 Hipgnosis bought out _Charles_ Cornell? ohh snap {jazz hands}