• pacology@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    How much money would they want to skim to distribute the music? 33-66 split doesn’t sound so bad considered that they don’t produce the music, sign artist, promote them, etc

    They can always start their own label if they believe that vertical integration will be more profitable for them.

    They tried that with podcasts and it didn’t go as planned

    • echo64@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      33% is a massive amount for effectively just being a download service. massive

    • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Distributing the music is basically free these days - at least for the artist/label anyway. Artists can pay about ten bucks (per album) to various cloud services which will handle distribution - and that includes global physical CD distribution (via an online store, not retail stores). That cost is often $4 per disc and paid by the purchaser.

      Recording an album and music video can cost a fortune, and marketing the album can cost an infinite amount of money. That’s where the record label spends most of their money and it’s not a fixed figure - it gets negotiated for each album. AFAIK the split between the artist and label usually varies depending on wether the label’s investment has been paid for yet. And marketing is an ongoing expense, the label can keep spending money on that indefinitely (and the artist probably wants them to keep spending money on marketing).