Re: Why do rock acts still rely on labels ?
Date: November 02, 2006 12:02PM
Just last night, I was having this very conversation via Skype with a high profile British musician with a finished album featuring people you will all know very well indeed - no names being mentioned here! - and I was advising him that, as he has recorded and produced this album, he would do well to trot off to a decent distributor and do a P&D (production and distribution) deal for himself and forget using a label. The 18-20% fee they will charge him will mean more money in his pocket if he can rid himself of the idea of an advance - and remember, advance means just that. They are paying you money that they will be taking back. See it now, you wonet be seeing it later.
It may seem odd me, the proprietor of a label, advising a musician considering signing his record over to me to do it himself. This is how the prevailing winds are blowing through the industry and our genre.
Everything is in stores - the HMV`s and Virgins of this world - on an SOR (sale or return) basis. There is no risk at all attached to the process for the big chains, they donft sell it then they return it for a full refund. Distributors usually hold 10-20% of what they owe labels back to cover this.
And herefs the big one. Listen very closely when I say this, itfs very, very important. ADVERTSING DOES NOT SELL MORE RECORDS. This is now a very widely accepted fact within the industry. In 95% of cases, itfs money - your money - down the drain. This is something I have learnt from bitter experience. The internet is now a far more effective way of letting people know your record is out there - and thatfs all advertising does, after all.