I'm being offered a buy-out or the usual writers share - what shall I go for?

[hubert]

Hey Taxi friends,

I got contacted by a library following a TAXI forward (yay!), and they are interested in 5 tracks.
They are asking me me to choose between two options. This is what they wrote:

Option 1)
*Library reps for placements and participates as 100% publisher
*you retain 100% of writers
*non-exclusive

Option 2)
*if you want to sell me the tracks publishing and master rights 100%
*i could offer you $200 per track ($100 for publishing & $100 for master rights)

Any advice on what would be the best option?
I'm tempted to go with option1), since I'm in this for the long run and it seems like a good idea to go for placement. Plus it's non-exclusive, which is great. However I thought I would ask the pros here.

Thanks a lot!

Hubert.

[superkons]

Myself, I would pick option 1

[hubert]

Thanks Marco, that's what I'm thinking of going for.

[VanderBoegh]

My personal preference in these situations is to always opt for the long game - thus, Option 1.

It's very likely that even a few minor placements of a single track will bring you in far more than $200 over the lifetime of the cue. The catch is, that might only amount to a mere $10-$20 on your quarterly royalty statements, and will dwindle with time if more placements don't accrue. $200 spread out over, let's say, 20 quarters, doesn't give you much money on each individual check, but does add up over time. However, it's also possible (if this library works with some bigger networks like MTV, Bravo, Discovery, or network TV) that a single placement will bring you $300 or so each quarter for a couple years.

So the question really is: how much do you need the money NOW? I've taken deals where I accepted an upfront payment in exchange for a portion of writer's share back in my early years. But back then, if I could make 10 tracks and get $150 each upfront for them, then that alone would cover my monthly mortgage. And back then, money was harder for me to come by, so I'd take those deals when they came along. Heck, it was better than missing my mortgage payment! And in those cases, I think I still retained 75% of writer's, so I'm still getting money on the backend all these years later.

I've never completely "sold" a track as a complete buy-out though, and I would only recommend you take that deal if it's absolutely necessary that you get a quick cash infusion to cover some imminent bills. BUT, one more catch (there's always a catch, amirite?!?!) some of these companies don't pay their "upfront buy-out" very quickly at all, and you might end up waiting 4-6 months to see that money. So if you take the deal due to an immediate need, there's still a chance that your bills will still go unpaid, and you cost yourself future royalties in the process.

You do you, though. You're the only one that knows your personal situation.

However, my 2 cents of advice would be to go with Option 1.

~~Matt

[hubert]

Thanks so much Matt for the thorough answer, that's much appreciated and a big help!

That echoes what I suspected (although I'm surprised to hear that a library might take 4 to 6 month to pay upfront fees!). I'm lucky that I don't urgently need the money, so option 1 is definitely the way to go. I also thought that if they offer a certain amount for a buy-out, it means they are probably confident that they can make it up with placements over time.

Alright, option 1 it is!

[Casey H]

I wouldn't take #2 because you give up your writer's share. Other buyout deals cover sync fee only but you keep the writer's. So, like MVB said, unless you desperately need $1000 right now, open Door #1.

[cosmicdolphin]

Interesting question — I don’t think there’s a universal “right” or “wrong” answer. It often gets wrapped up in emotion (especially in some of the Facebook composer groups), but I prefer to strip that out and look at cold, hard numbers.

Out of my 700 signed cues, around 300 have made air and generated backend. My top earner has brought in about $2.8k. Of those 300, only 45 have earned more than $200.

Do the math: that’s 400 tracks earning zero, and 255 earning less than the amount you’re being offered upfront.

If I’d taken $200 per track across my catalogue, that would be $140k in the bank. In reality, over nearly 10 years, I’ve earned around $35k through backend royalties, blanket splits, mechanicals, and the odd sync fee. (I also did a few $150 sync buyouts back in the early days.)

So would I sell my entire catalogue for an extra $100k right now? Honestly, yes — I could pay off my mortgage, and the interest saved would probably outweigh whatever those tracks might trickle in over the next five years.

At the end of the day though, these are just my numbers and circumstances. Someone else might have a completely different experience — like Matt said, one or two strong placements can easily outpace any buyout fee. It really comes down to whether you value the guaranteed cash now or are prepared to gamble on the long game. Some of it is down to luck as much as anything, landing in the right library at the right time with the right music can make or break it for you.

I don't think $200 is bad for a few hours enjoyable work personally, and I could easily write a bunch more ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ...I think there's a certain amount of attachment amongst composers too in those facebook groups - even the ones that would be better off don't want to 'let go' of their share of their creation. I guess I can't blame them for that but I am far more pragmatic about it. For me, it’s about weighing the maths, the opportunity cost, and what I personally need at the time.

[VanderBoegh]

Very good points, Mark - and something to definitely consider as you weigh your two options, Hubert.

Full disclosure: I also have a TON of tracks that are all signed to libraries that have made zilch. Nada. Not one penny. I don't even know HOW many tracks I have of these, as my spreadsheets got too unruly to track it all. But I know it's got to be in the high hundreds, and perhaps even well north of a thousand. That's a CRAP TON of hours spent making music for free. Ugh.... If I would have taken $200 per track as a buy-out on those.... sheesh, like Mark, my mortgage would be paid off and I'd just be hoarding cash like a dragon.

I also agree with Mark that a lot of composers are perhaps too emotionally attached to the idea of keeping 100% of writers share. That's never been a major factor in my own decision making, and I've taken plenty of deals where I sacrifice a portion of writer's for either an upfront payment, or just the knowledge that the company is such a home-run hitter that I know that even a reduced percentage will add up to a substantial amount of money which is almost nearly guaranteed due to their track record with my music. And just saying THAT will probably cause an uproar in certain circles, ha!

You'll read & hear lots of comments around the internet about how giving away your writer's share is akin to a "race to the bottom". I've personally never thought that way.

I also know - even though I've never taken a 100% buy-out - that the "hourly rate" on our work would be tremendously high if you're an efficient composer / producer. If a track takes you 2 hours to put together, and you get offered $200 for it, you're essentially making $100 per hour. That's a damn good rate, as far as I'm concerned (unless you're a lawyer!), and who here wouldn't be willing to go out and make sandwiches or mow some lawns or clean someone's house for $100 per hour? If you look at music-making as something along the lines of just hourly work, then $100 per hour seems pretty good. I mean, heck, when I occasionally mix other people's music, I typically charge $75 per hour and I retain NO writer's share or anything.... it's just time spent in my chair doing what I'm good at. You could look at the music creation process the same way, and I for one surely wouldn't fault you.

All that said, I'd probably still go with Option 1 if I were you, but I'm a degenerate gambler by nature, lol. However, with the benefit of hindsight, I could easily look back on my catalog and find hundreds of tracks that I WISH I'd taken a $200 buy-out for. The problem is, when you're making the music you never know what that music's results are going to be through the years. So, in the end, you just gotta pick a path, complete the task, then make more music.

~~Matt

[hubert]

Thanks Mark and Matt for sharing your experience and the various approaches.

I think Matt nailed it when he said "The problem is, when you're making the music you never know what that music's results are going to be through the years".

It's really my first year of sync, so I have no prior reference. And definitely no idea how to plan things other than to keep writing!

For this one I will go with option 1 and see what happens.

Thanks again guys for sharing your experiences!

[cosmicdolphin]

but I'm a degenerate gambler by nature, lol.

That's interesting as I'm an anti-gambler

A few years back to make money, I did a thing called "matched betting" where you basically abuse the promotions offered by bookies — you back one outcome with the bookie and lay the opposite on an exchange, so whichever way it goes you profit from the free bet afterwards. I made about £6k in a year before they banned me from all the offers.

Some people can't do it though, they get hooked in by the thrill of the gamble and end up punting the free bets instead of sticking to the system.

I'd never had a bet before and I've never had one since I stopped.