One-time Buyout FEE of $125, no sync or master- SERIOUSLY?!

[mhazani]

Hi all!

A bit of background - I've been a member for a year now. I love TAXI and feel fortunate to be a Passenger; there was no question whether to renew my membership or not, as it's totally worth it. In the past year I've received my share of fantastic critiques (and some lucky forwards), had an amazing time at the Rally, and I'm more pumped to be a Taxi member than ever before. I'm definitely playing on the "passengers" team.


Having said that, I was a pretty shocked to see that several listings in the new batch contain language along the lines of:

"The company's publishing deal is Exclusive. You'll receive a one-time Buyout FEE of $125 per instrumental cue and keep 100% of the writer's share of Performance Royalties, but receive no sync or master fee when placed. (As in all buyout deals, the publisher retains the copyright.) "

Now, I'm relatively new to the game, and granted - my focus is on songs rather than inst. cues. But even with relatively little experience, this type of deal seems closer to a musical sweatshop, or sheer prostitution, than a legitimate business transaction. I'm aware of the fact the writers still keep the writer's share (and get the subsequent royalties, small as they may be), but $125 is, in my opinion, simply ridiculous. With these types of sweatshop deals, I can't see how one could hope to make an honest living at this profession.

I feel blessed to be in this line of work and I know how though and competitive it is out there - but I find a $125 buyout to be inappropriately degrading, even in music library rates. I'm sure TAXI has a professional bar for the companies they work with; and I certainly can't see how this kind of deal meets it.


Not trying to burn any bridges here; as I said, I'm a big fan of TAXI and have no intention of changing my MO of writing, submitting, moving on (and attending the Rallies, of course!). But I do feel a need to share my frustration about these particular listings; I feel that they are astonishingly unprofessional, and I can't see why any writer should choose to acquiesce to such a deal, other than due to sheer professional desperation. I spend a lot of time explaining to friends how TAXI is a legitimate, awesome opportunity and not a scam - but if I was asked about listings such as these, I'd have a hard time defending them.

Thanks for your time and attention. I'd be very interested to hear people's thoughts, both passengers (perhaps Mazz?) and from within the company.

Best,
Michael

[musicalweather]

Michael,

It looks like there's been a bit of discussion about this already, although it doesn't really address the question of the value of the buyout payment:

http://forums.taxi.com/topic29172.html

Hope this helps.

[mhazani]

Thanks, musicalweather. I did notice that post before writing this one. Mazz's answer was (indeed, as always) illuminating, clear and to-the-point.

However, my issue doesn't stem from confusion about the different rates, but rather from the horrifyingly cheap price tag some companies put on music creation. And even more so, from the fact that they'll get away with it, because plenty of composers are hungry enough to acquiesce - in addition to supply vs. demand and market saturation issues, etc.

Again, I know how grim things are - or at least I thought I knew - but to me, a $125 buyout from a major library is a redefinition of "Rock Bottom".

[mazz]

Further on down the listing it says that this is a company that is very active and has generated a lot of placements for taxi members.

I agree, on the surface 125 seems low for a commissioned piece, but considering that folks are doing custom work for no up front but knowing the music is going directly to the edit bay, it doesn't sound that bad if one could write and produce this stuff fast. Plus if they get great placements, the backend will swamp any sync fees (which are rather rare these days anyway, it seems). So Instead of throwing the baby out with the bath water, it might be fun to try to get forwarded and see who this company is and make a decision from a position of more knowledge. After all, it will cost you 5 bucks to play and if you do get forwarded and offered a deal, you aren't obligated to take it.

Sometimes thinking changes when the opportunity becomes real.

Just my 2c

Mazz

[Mark Crozer]

From my understanding this is more and more the way the industry is going. I write for a music library (a deal I secured from a Taxi forward) that pays no upfront fee of any kind ever. But... as everybody says... it's the PRO royalties that are where the money is anyway. I haven't seen a penny yet but two pieces I wrote did go directly to the edit bay on one show earlier this year so I guess I'll be getting a couple of bucks somewhere down the line.

I would say this $125 thing is worth pursuing. If you do end up with a track making the show then you'll definitely make more dollars than if you decide not to go for it! And if it ends up being an episode that is rerun you'll get paid every time it airs.

[rnrmachine]

I haven't seen the listing yet, but a one time $125 buyout could be good for some people, and horrible for others. It all depends on where you stand in the industry. Like Mazz said, if you can turn out quality instrumentals like an assembly line but don't have many placements yet. Maybe it's not such a bad deal on the surface. When a band starts performing live, they usually start out in the crap clubs passing the hat or playing for free. I remember my first paid gig was.. we opened for a band and they were gonna pay us $50. We never got paid from them, BUT we landed a gig with that club/bar that booked us once a month for a weekend (Friday and Saturday) for $500. So the band immediately became successful (successful in the sense we immediately started generating an income) because we were willing to bite the bullet and get crap pay for the more important thing... a connection to a better gig. That opened many doors for us. All because we took the beginner job.

But for a few Taxi members that are quite successful it'd be a ripoff considering they already make good money at this and locking into a one time fee could screw them out of a large sync fee in the future, IF the library ever was handed one for their song.

Obviously someone like Hans Zimmer would treat this deal as junk mail... HAHA So it all depends on WHO and WHERE (where on the ladder of success) you are.

Good Luck!!!

Rob

EDIT: Digging in the "What IF barrel"; IF you do submit, get forwarded, sign the deal and one day see your song in a nationwide TV AD that would have obviously generated you a nice chunk of change in upfront sync fees. At least you know the owner of the library is absolutely in love with you as he goes and takes that fat check to put a down payment on his new Lexus. ROFL So long as it wasn't an "All in" deal you'll get nice royalties. "All in" would still get you a check on your writers share though.

The up side to that is.... there MAYBE a number of people that ask... who did that music?? So your sacrifice MAY NOT be in vein. The first thing you need to do though is.... make quality music... for any of that scenario come to pass.

[mhazani]

Thanks Mazz, Mark and Rob!

I guess it's more normal than it had seemed to me - and as I mentioned, writing for libraries isn't my main aim and I'm not that well-versed in that world.

I still think the state of that particular industry is unfair to composers, but your comments convinced me that it's not extraordinary by any means. Also, you made a great point about the back end royalties being the main incentive in the first place.

I really appreciate your input - way to turn a vent into a learning opportunity!:)

Have a great weekend,

Michael

[matto]

Michael,

I hear what you're saying and it's hard to disagree with you.
In an ideal world we would all get paid $1000 or more for each track we write for a deal like this. And in an ideal world everybody would get paid what they are worth and nobody would have to work for minimum wage.
Unfortunately we don't live in such a world...

Think about it this way: If it takes you ten hours to produce an instrumental for this company, you will earn $12.50 an hour which is over 150% minimum wage (in CA). Even if it takes you 15 hours, you still make above minimum wage. And you are NOT doing a job you hate such as cleaning toilets or whatever, you are doing something you truly love. And if this company is good at their job, you can expect to make another, say $75 average in royalties per track per year for the next 10 years at least, bring your total you made for the track to $875, or $87.5/hour ($58 plus change if it took you 15 hours).
All for doing something you love and which fulfils you, and something that's arguably not as "essential" to society as, say, trash collection or sewer maintenance.

I'm definitely NOT one to dispute that there has been an erosion of the perceived value of music in society over the last 20 years, and I definitely agree that it's something we have to fight against. But ultimately, in the economic system we live in the music business is subject to supply and demand, just like any other business. So I think it helps to occasionally put things in perspective.

I'm fortunate enough to do music for a living and to be making a very nice living at it. It's something I'm grateful for every day.
Because there are many people in this country who are doing back breaking (but very essential) labor every day of the week, for a wage that makes these $125/track look almost regal by comparison.

Just my 2c...

matto

[guitarhacker]

getting a song placed and making $125 upfront.... you could look at it as resume building. It builds the list of placements and as time goes on and you get more placements, you can be a bit more selective about what you sign to where.

I am not making money from music, but in my (daytime) business, I am now in a position to be very selective about the type of jobs I choose to take. One day, perhaps I will be able to do that in music as well.

Right now I would sign 100% away for $125 all day long as long as I kept writers credits and performance royalties...... you can bet I would!

[admin]

Hi All,

I've got to say that I personally debated for two weeks as to whether or not we should run listings for that company. After calling some members who work with the company, I decided to go ahead and run them. All the members reported that they are very happy to be in that company's catalog and get quite a few placements as a result. My bottom line is ALWAYS the $$$ that members can make. One member told me that just one track of his has netted more than $1,000 over the last 16 months from a placement through that company. While that might be exceptional, I know that the company does have a good track record.

Also taken into consideration when I was making the decision is that we are running more and more listings that pay 100% to our members. We've got many top ad agencies using TAXI now, as well as several VERY top end music supervisors running listings with us. On those deals the members get 100% of the license fee (as opposed to splitting it with a publisher), and they keep 100% of the publishing (as opposed to splitting it with a publisher), and they keep 100% of their writer's share.

So, in the end, I decided that running some listings from a fruitful company that offers a seemingly skinny deal would be at one end of the spectrum, while the increasing number of deals that nobody else in the industry can match felt balanced.

If our members tell me otherwise, I'll drop the skinny deal company.

Also worth mentioning is that we routinely turn away LOTS of listings from companies that I don't think are worthy. I often refer them to our competitors because they hold their bar lower than we do. I know for a fact that one of our competitors runs "listings" from a screener we fired for approaching another one of our screeners about fabricating a "publishing" company name and running listings with that company just to get the 50% split of the submission fees the company pays to the listing "company." To the best of my knowledge, the former screener has never placed anything anywhere, yet the competitor continues to run listings for him on a ongoing basis.

All this to let you know that we give much consideration before we run a listing for any company. I think we've been wrong twice in nearly 20 years, and if memory serves, one of those companies offered a good deal a the time they ran the listing, then changed the deal without telling us after the fact.

HTH,
Michael