Speaker 1: Welcome, Welcome, Welcome back to the Bob Left That's Podcast.
Speaker 1: My guest today is attorney done Passman, who literally wrote
Speaker 1: the book on the music business. Don hey, Pop, thanks
Speaker 1: for having me. Okay, now I can see you're in
Speaker 1: your home, although it looks like you're in the oval
Speaker 1: office here on the zoom screen. Uh, how has your
Speaker 1: practice changed since you've been at home. Well, interestingly, I
Speaker 1: can do what I do pretty seamlessly at home. Um,
Speaker 1: we're set up with computers, I'm set up as zoom.
Speaker 1: I'm set up with uh, you know, phones and so
Speaker 1: forth and emails, and I can get an awful lot done.
Speaker 1: I can access the files in the office. I can
Speaker 1: I can take care of whatever it needs to be done.
Speaker 1: It's changed in the sense that obviously there's no touring
Speaker 1: because everything is shut down. It's changed what the artists
Speaker 1: are doing in terms of what you just physically can
Speaker 1: do in this environment. Um, things that I at least
Speaker 1: wouldn't have intuitively thought about, Like, for example, you can't
Speaker 1: make videos in this environment, so you can't do the
Speaker 1: same kind of marketing. You can't do personal appearances, you
Speaker 1: can't do a lot of things that you would normally
Speaker 1: do to market and promote product. But other than that,
Speaker 1: people can still record, albeit remotely, and people can still
Speaker 1: make music, still write music, and uh, there's a lot
Speaker 1: of deals going on. Okay, since so much of the
Speaker 1: business is closed down, your particular business in work, is
Speaker 1: it any slower or as busy as ever? No, it's
Speaker 1: busy as ever. I was actually surprised by that and
Speaker 1: maybe even a little disappointed. Maybe there'll be a slowdown,
Speaker 1: but it's it's been extremely busy, and truthfully I like
Speaker 1: that better. It makes the days go by. Okay, So
Speaker 1: you said there are a bunch of deals in the offing.
Speaker 1: What kind of deals? Um, you know, buying and selling
Speaker 1: of catalogs for example, executive deals people are making, publishing
Speaker 1: songwright deals. People are still making record deals, management deals,
Speaker 1: you know, the sponsorship less so now perhaps, but still active. So.
Speaker 1: And then there's of course the whole situation with people
Speaker 1: who made deals during COVID that now aren't working that
Speaker 1: we have to sort out. Okay, can you address that
Speaker 1: about the deals that aren't working and whether insurance comes
Speaker 1: in and how amenable people are two changes and adjusting. Well,
Speaker 1: people are pretty amenable. I mean everybody recognizes this is
Speaker 1: something nobody could have contemplated. Um, everybody's businesses is challenged
Speaker 1: seriously and fundamentally, and I think for the most part,
Speaker 1: everybody has a long term view, which is that you know,
Speaker 1: we can't, we can't. I mean, just to pick an
Speaker 1: example of tours, because it's the most obvious if everyone
Speaker 1: got together and if they had the contractual right, which
Speaker 1: not everyone does to get paid during COVID, but they
Speaker 1: crushed the promoters for the you know, out of business
Speaker 1: when they have no income coming. Nobody thinks that's the
Speaker 1: right thing to do or the long term thing to do.
Speaker 1: So things are getting rescheduled, people are working together, people
Speaker 1: are taking discounts, people are deferring payments to the extent
Speaker 1: they can, and and for the most part it's it's
Speaker 1: worked out pretty amicably. Okay, Uh, Since you're doing these deals,
Speaker 1: when are your promoters wanting to start again, whether that
Speaker 1: happens or not. When are they trying to book for
Speaker 1: you know, I'm not on the front line of that
Speaker 1: because the agents are. But from the intel that I've gotten,
Speaker 1: nobody thinks anything is going to happen before summer of uh.
Speaker 1: And honestly, I think it could be more like the
Speaker 1: fall or even in it will directly depend on how
Speaker 1: quickly we have a medical breakthrough. Okay. The other thing is,
Speaker 1: have you uh been involved any issues of insurance people
Speaker 1: trying to claim whether companies are paying off whether you
Speaker 1: can get this insurance at this time? I have not
Speaker 1: recently been involved in that because nobody's putting up tours,
Speaker 1: so we're not dealing with the insurance issues. There are
Speaker 1: issues around whether insurance will cover it. It's very policy dependent. Okay,
Speaker 1: let's you know, let's break down some of the things
Speaker 1: you brought up. You said you're doing a lot of
Speaker 1: publishing deals. Everyone knows on the inside hypnosis is raising
Speaker 1: the value of catalogs. Uh. Do you think this is
Speaker 1: causing the action in the buying and selling of publishing catalogs.
Speaker 1: I think that's part of it. I think the other
Speaker 1: part of it is that we're seeing a lot of
Speaker 1: Wall Street money looking at publishing as a steady source
Speaker 1: of income with potential upside and uh and Wall Street
Speaker 1: like steady sources of income as an investment. So we're
Speaker 1: seeing all kinds of new players come into the marketplace
Speaker 1: that want to do this, and so there's not a
Speaker 1: lot of inventory and a lot of hound snapping at
Speaker 1: the door, and I think that's the reason we're seeing
Speaker 1: such a surge in that. What kind of Wall Street
Speaker 1: movement have you seen? Um? Well, I don't want to
Speaker 1: get specific, but a number of investment firms or people
Speaker 1: backed by investment type firms that are funds you know
Speaker 1: that are that are you know venture capital type funds. Okay,
Speaker 1: let's talk specifically about Hypnosis Merk's company. He wants to
Speaker 1: own the publishing entirely, and he's paying a huge multiple. Obviously,
Speaker 1: as an attorney, you listen to what your client wants.
Speaker 1: But assuming the client didn't have opinion and opinion, what
Speaker 1: would you say about selling all the rights? I generally
Speaker 1: advise against it. Historically, everybody who has sold their song
Speaker 1: has regretted it. If you look back through history to
Speaker 1: pick an example, Uh, you know, led Zeppelin sold all
Speaker 1: the royalties on their catalog for what was a good
Speaker 1: deal amount of money at the time, but over history
Speaker 1: proved to be not such a great deal. Same thing
Speaker 1: with Elvis Preshley. The people that have sold off have
Speaker 1: generally regretted it. People that sold songs, people that sold
Speaker 1: publishing companies. You know have seen them go for bigger
Speaker 1: multiples further down the road. UM. So my general bent
Speaker 1: is there is a saying in the publishing business never
Speaker 1: sell a song, and my general bent is against that.
Speaker 1: On the other hand, there are a few specific circumstances
Speaker 1: where it can make sense. There's some tax advantages to selling.
Speaker 1: You can get capital gains rather than ordinary income for
Speaker 1: the money that you get. If your need of money, uh,
Speaker 1: you can sell it in that. But if you're if
Speaker 1: you're able to hang onto it for one thing, tax wise,
Speaker 1: once you die, you get what's called a stepped up basis,
Speaker 1: which means that your errors will be able to sell
Speaker 1: the catalog for the value at the time of death
Speaker 1: and not pay any tax on the sale. Of course,
Speaker 1: you're gonna pay a state tax on it if your
Speaker 1: state's large enough. Um, but you wouldn't pay any income
Speaker 1: tax on the sale at that point. And really I
Speaker 1: like to u to keep it through the airs. Now,
Speaker 1: having said that, in a situation where someone passed away
Speaker 1: and the airs are squabbling with each other or they
Speaker 1: can't it's too cumbersome to get everybody to agree to
Speaker 1: license a song or someone. You know, different situations, it
Speaker 1: does make sense to sell. And by the way, someone
Speaker 1: who is sophisticated and not going to just squander the money,
Speaker 1: who wants to sell it and thinks they can make
Speaker 1: a better return than they're publishing is giving them by
Speaker 1: putting it into different kinds of investments, that can make
Speaker 1: sense too. But that's rare, and my general band is
Speaker 1: don't do it. But obviously I have people who want
Speaker 1: to do it, and and we we've certainly done a
Speaker 1: lot of it. Okay, what about some of your clients
Speaker 1: or people you might be aware of who are cash
Speaker 1: poor and make most of their money for touring. Uh,
Speaker 1: if we're down for another up to eighteen months, what
Speaker 1: options do these people have for income? Yeah, that's that's
Speaker 1: a good question. I mean it depends, of course on
Speaker 1: who they are. If they have good songwriting or record income,
Speaker 1: that's where it's going to come from. Possibly there's an endorsement. Uh,
Speaker 1: you know some of them have. There's been this situation
Speaker 1: which I haven't had highans involved in, but I've I've
Speaker 1: heard about tangentially where people are you know, getting tips
Speaker 1: or trying to you know, some pay per view, although
Speaker 1: a lot of that's for charity. That generates some amount
Speaker 1: of money, but nothing like touring would. But generally it's tough.
Speaker 1: I mean, if you don't have income from other sources,
Speaker 1: it's going to be a rough period of time. Okay,
Speaker 1: talking about income in the future. There are cases where
Speaker 1: people have an interest in a record. A well known
Speaker 1: cases Todd Rundgren produced Bad Out of Hell of the
Speaker 1: meat Loaf record. Now, in his particular case, he sold
Speaker 1: all the royalties. I could go down that path. I
Speaker 1: know more about it. But there are people who sold
Speaker 1: royalties in records because they say it's very difficult to collect.
Speaker 1: Is the years go by and never never mind collect
Speaker 1: a hundred cents on the dollar. What do you think
Speaker 1: about that whole situation. I'm not clear why they think
Speaker 1: it would be difficult to collect. I know a number
Speaker 1: of cases where the new regimes come in, Uh they
Speaker 1: people work gets screwed up. The new people say they're
Speaker 1: not owed the money, and especially someone who needs the
Speaker 1: money has a very hard time going through the process
Speaker 1: and then ultimately even lawsuits in order to collect what
Speaker 1: they deserve. As I say, if you haven't experience that,
Speaker 1: I've not experienced it, but I don't doubt it happens.
Speaker 1: Uh you know, and if it's not for a lot
Speaker 1: of money, it's not going to be worthwhile to file
Speaker 1: the litigation. As I say, there may be situations where
Speaker 1: selling makes sense. You don't get capital gains on an
Speaker 1: income stream. By the way, if you're a producer getting royalties,
Speaker 1: you can't sell it for capital gains. You can only
Speaker 1: sell capital gains for an asset, which would be a copyright.
Speaker 1: In fact, if you don't own the copyright and you're
Speaker 1: only selling your stream as a writer, you don't get
Speaker 1: capital games for that either. So there's no particular tax
Speaker 1: advantage to that. It's just a question of uh. And
Speaker 1: if you want to do a cold financial analysis, how
Speaker 1: much money will they give me? Now? What can I
Speaker 1: earn on that money? Uh? Am? I better off doing
Speaker 1: that than keeping it and getting the income as it
Speaker 1: comes in. You're certainly hedging against it going down over time,
Speaker 1: but you're also losing the benefit if it goes up
Speaker 1: over time. So these are very fact specific situations and
Speaker 1: you have to analyze it based on who they are
Speaker 1: and what their needs are. Generally speaking, the people who
Speaker 1: make all this money, who are performers, are not that
Speaker 1: good at business. So to what degree if someone does
Speaker 1: get a lump sum, do you advise them what to
Speaker 1: do with the money? Well, I don't advise on financial matters.
Speaker 1: It's not my expertise, and I try to stay in
Speaker 1: the lane that I know best and not not get
Speaker 1: out of it. Uh, the financial it depends. I mean,
Speaker 1: some artists don't know much about business, but they have
Speaker 1: smart people around them and they listen to them. And
Speaker 1: if those people know what they're doing and think it
Speaker 1: makes sense on a financial basis, and you're not going
Speaker 1: to run out and you know by jets and yachts
Speaker 1: with the proceeds um, then it might make some sense
Speaker 1: to do it. But it's very very fact dependent. Okay,
Speaker 1: let's go back to the royalty situation. You make a deal,
Speaker 1: and let's just assume for the sake of discussion, the
Speaker 1: act actually goes into profits into royalties. What has been
Speaker 1: your experience with those acts getting paid and getting what
Speaker 1: they deserve? Giving the example of UH high price, attorneys
Speaker 1: like yourself negotiate the deals, but frequently the people who
Speaker 1: are doing the splits or someone uneducated in the back room.
Speaker 1: So to what degree if you experienced a problem here
Speaker 1: and if you could address that. Sure. Uh, it's gotten
Speaker 1: much better over the time I've been practicing law. It
Speaker 1: used to be that things were very a sloppy and
Speaker 1: very difficult. And that was also in the days when
Speaker 1: royalties were computed with this incredibly complex formula which basically
Speaker 1: was the answer to how can I give the artist
Speaker 1: a high royalty rate and pay them as little as possible?
Speaker 1: And they go through all these complicated matching nations, and
Speaker 1: you know, starting maybe eight or ten years ago, they
Speaker 1: simplified it down to you get a percentage of what
Speaker 1: we get. So and the major labels I find are
Speaker 1: pretty straightforward, and the major publishers pretty straightforward because we
Speaker 1: audit them regularly to check and you know, we find
Speaker 1: something or sometimes there's a contractual dispute. Sometimes they're honest mistakes.
Speaker 1: But for the most part, they're pretty straightforward. And the
Speaker 1: size of the audits compared to the old days when
Speaker 1: the companies played games are I find, are much smaller.
Speaker 1: There's still significant money and there's still things to argue about, um,
Speaker 1: but but for the most part, I think they try
Speaker 1: pretty well. When you get an independent labels, it can
Speaker 1: be a different story. It just depends on how sophisticicated
Speaker 1: their back room is, or whether they've got somebody doing it. Um.
Speaker 1: You know, I don't find as many people intentionally playing
Speaker 1: games as we used to, but I do find honest mistakes.
Speaker 1: And you know, some of the smaller labels can just
Speaker 1: be sloppy or maybe have cash flow issues going back
Speaker 1: to the majors. So forget forgetting someone who's an Internet
Speaker 1: phenomenon like Little Nasax. If you're an act and the
Speaker 1: label wants you and there's no bidding war, all you're
Speaker 1: saying almost all of the deals or a percentage of net, Well,
Speaker 1: they're not a percentage of net directly, they're a percentage
Speaker 1: of the labels receipts. They're closer to a percentage of gross,
Speaker 1: although there's issues around what gross means, particularly when you
Speaker 1: come to foreign territories. But it's a percentage of what
Speaker 1: the label receives. Correct. Okay, so let's just talk about
Speaker 1: domestic money. We sign with one of the three major labels.
Speaker 1: What would be the rain of percentage that you would
Speaker 1: make a deal for both an established act and a
Speaker 1: developing act. Yeah, developing act would probably be in the
Speaker 1: fifteen to eighteen to twenty percent range, depending on bargaining
Speaker 1: power UH an established act, and sometimes you can get
Speaker 1: a little bit more on streaming. UH. An established act
Speaker 1: could be in the twenties, and again with a bit
Speaker 1: more on streaming. When you're getting into really superstar ranges,
Speaker 1: you can get into all kinds of different things like
Speaker 1: shares of profits. And indeed, some of the new artists
Speaker 1: that are hot with bidding wars can get you a
Speaker 1: share of profits and distribution type deal where they own
Speaker 1: the masters and they just allow the company to distribute
Speaker 1: it for a period of time. Uh. And you know
Speaker 1: all kinds of things in between. So let's just assume
Speaker 1: I have for the second numbers, I have deal. What
Speaker 1: would be taken out of the gross Traditionally, well, under
Speaker 1: today's formula nothing. Uh, it would just be of the
Speaker 1: company's gross. And in the United States, that's pretty straightforward.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's what they would uh. It's what they
Speaker 1: would get for a c D, what they would get
Speaker 1: for a download, what they would get for a stream. UH.
Speaker 1: Synchronization licenses or generally meaning the right to use this
Speaker 1: song and a film, or the right to use a
Speaker 1: song and a commercial. UH. That's that's a different split.
Speaker 1: When you get the foreign percentages. Uh, you know that
Speaker 1: that's when it's a bit more in the the gamesmanship
Speaker 1: on the on downloads and cd s, it's pretty straightforward
Speaker 1: about what the their affiliates going to get. But when
Speaker 1: you get the streaming, sometimes the companies will take a
Speaker 1: percentage in France, for example, before they send the money
Speaker 1: back to the US, and then you only get the
Speaker 1: percentage of the US. So one of the things we
Speaker 1: asked for in streaming deals now is that they have
Speaker 1: to be at source, and the words at source mean
Speaker 1: that that's where the money is generated. So if it's
Speaker 1: French money, it's it's in France. If it's German money,
Speaker 1: it's in Germany without any deductions before it gets back
Speaker 1: to the US and the company pays it to the artists. Now,
Speaker 1: in this particular case, unlike in decades past or certainly
Speaker 1: prior to nineteen seventy, where these companies own their worldwide outlets,
Speaker 1: they're not licensing to a third party. Is the reduction
Speaker 1: for foreign moneys just a negotiating ploy or do they
Speaker 1: give some kind of rationalization or they give a rationalization
Speaker 1: that the local company has marketing expenses and that they're
Speaker 1: putting actually effort and money into it and so forth.
Speaker 1: But the reality is is that if you have enough cloud,
Speaker 1: you can get your money its source. Maybe a lower
Speaker 1: royalty for them, but you can get it as source. Okay,
Speaker 1: let's pull back the lens because we've talked previously that
Speaker 1: you know, used to be a lot of your time
Speaker 1: was spent negotiating record deals, but it shifted to a
Speaker 1: great degree to live business. Can you comment on that please? Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean in terms of our personal time, you know,
Speaker 1: we will as more and more of these deals are
Speaker 1: done with one single promoter will do it in some
Speaker 1: ount of work on that promoter deal. But we also
Speaker 1: tours are very labor intensive. Tours require contracts for things
Speaker 1: you don't normally think about, like, uh, somebody to build
Speaker 1: the stage, the trucks, the buses, the crew, the band,
Speaker 1: the dancers. I mean, there are all kinds of things
Speaker 1: that go into it, insurance issues. So tours are actually
Speaker 1: quite a bit of work. Um. But you know, I
Speaker 1: wouldn't want to say that it shifted the majority of
Speaker 1: what we do. I just say it's just a big
Speaker 1: part of it. Okay. Uh, So let's assume I make
Speaker 1: an overall deal with live nation or concerts West. You
Speaker 1: mentioned all those things. Those are the responsibility of the act.
Speaker 1: Where does the line between the responsibility the act and
Speaker 1: the promoter lay for life? I'm not sure what you
Speaker 1: mean by responsibility. Okay, you're talking about hiring people, insurance, etcetera. Okay, No, No,
Speaker 1: the act, the act does all of that that. The
Speaker 1: promoters deal is just simply we're gonna pay you X
Speaker 1: to show up and do y concerts. I mean, there's
Speaker 1: a lot more to it than that, obviously, but that's
Speaker 1: that's the essence of what the contract is. Uh. Every Then,
Speaker 1: the act is responsible for delivering the show. So they're
Speaker 1: hiring the band, they're hiring the the crew, they're hiring
Speaker 1: the buses, they're hiring the trucks. Okay, and let's just
Speaker 1: assume the venue is not owned by the promoter and
Speaker 1: there is an accident, I would assume the act gets
Speaker 1: sued in addition to the promoter. Yeah, there's an age
Speaker 1: I legal theory. If you're going to throw a party,
Speaker 1: you invite everybody, So anybody who is anywhere near what
Speaker 1: happened is going to be sued along with it. Okay, Now,
Speaker 1: you know, let's talk about a superstar act might go
Speaker 1: out with twenty trucks, uh, crew of dozens, etcetera. To
Speaker 1: what degree are you involved in the micro management? What
Speaker 1: I mean by that is someone gets five A or
Speaker 1: a a roadie gets, you know, their ankle broken. Do
Speaker 1: they call the attorney or their layers before it gets
Speaker 1: to you? Um? Both? I mean, yes, there's layers before
Speaker 1: it get to us. But anybody being fired or any
Speaker 1: kind of injury or insurance issue, we're going to be
Speaker 1: involved in it as well. Okay, And let's just talk
Speaker 1: an overall deal with one of those international promoters. Who
Speaker 1: ultimately comes up with the price and who does the negotiation? Um,
Speaker 1: Usually it's the agent that does the negotiation of the
Speaker 1: major terms, uh and the prices you know a marketplace mitting.
Speaker 1: You know, they'll look at their history, they'll project what
Speaker 1: they think they can do, they'll figure out a percentage
Speaker 1: of it, they'll want to guarantee of a certain amount
Speaker 1: of it. And it's just part of the back and forth. Okay. Now,
Speaker 1: a certain number of superstar is don't have an agent
Speaker 1: at all. Do you see what do you see the
Speaker 1: future of the agency business being? Well, I think the
Speaker 1: agencies bring value. I'm mean, I think they have a
Speaker 1: lot of knowledge that even I mean, there's a few
Speaker 1: managers that are perfectly capable of doing everything, but for
Speaker 1: the most part, the agents have a depth of knowledge
Speaker 1: and relationships and knowledge of other deals, knowledge of routing,
Speaker 1: knowledge of UH you know, what the marketplace is like
Speaker 1: in different places that I think makes invaluable and particularly
Speaker 1: for managers without that expertise, I think they're an important
Speaker 1: part of the team. Okay, let's talk because you're on
Speaker 1: the artist team. Uh. In the old days, everybody paid
Speaker 1: ten percent, but a very successful artist usually does not
Speaker 1: pay his agent ten percent. What is your experience there
Speaker 1: and what's the negotiation like. Well, if you're bringing in,
Speaker 1: you know, a tour that's you know, a hundred million
Speaker 1: dollars there, it's unlikely they're going to pay ten percent
Speaker 1: for it. But it's negotiated very specifically in each instance. Uh,
Speaker 1: you know, it can be a very low percentage. It
Speaker 1: can even in a few cases not so much anymore,
Speaker 1: be a flat fee. Oh kay. In the old day,
Speaker 1: certainly prior to there were six major UH international companies
Speaker 1: in some very large independence distributed by them. So in
Speaker 1: terms of getting record deals, how is the landscape change
Speaker 1: as a results of consolidation in the Internet. In terms
Speaker 1: of record deals, well, there are less buyers for obvious reasons.
Speaker 1: I mean there are now you know, a number of
Speaker 1: independents that are also in the marketplace, but in terms
Speaker 1: of majors, there are only three. Uh. And they don't
Speaker 1: let their labels compete against each other. So if two
Speaker 1: labels owned by the same major are both wanting the artists,
Speaker 1: they will negotiate jointly, or the artists will nick a
Speaker 1: Laine before they do that because they won't outbid each other. Um.
Speaker 1: But you know, as long as you get two horses
Speaker 1: in the race, you can still have a spirited bidding. Warm. Now,
Speaker 1: in the old days, attorneys were conduits for talent. To
Speaker 1: what degree is that still the game? Um? I think
Speaker 1: it's just still the game to some degree. I mean,
Speaker 1: you know, the attorneys have more knowledge than others because
Speaker 1: we can have more clients. Uh. You know, agents may
Speaker 1: have more clients, but they're in a one lane. In
Speaker 1: terms of overall understanding of the industry. Managers can't have
Speaker 1: as many clients. Some of the big companies obviously do,
Speaker 1: but I'm saying individual managers can't and lawyers are much
Speaker 1: less of a time commitment, so we have more clients
Speaker 1: and we see a lot of deals. So we have
Speaker 1: quite a bit of quite a bit of knowledge, and
Speaker 1: we have relationships with with people as well. So when
Speaker 1: someone you know needs to be connected or needs something done,
Speaker 1: we're in a position to do it. Okay, to what
Speaker 1: did we? Are people knocking on your door wanting to
Speaker 1: hire you to make a record deal? Um? If you
Speaker 1: are you talking about new people in the business or yes? Yes, Oh,
Speaker 1: I get a fair amount of that because of my
Speaker 1: book All you need to know about the music business.
Speaker 1: I get people calling me and while I did that
Speaker 1: when I was young and starting out, I don't do
Speaker 1: that anymore. But I have a list of lawyers that
Speaker 1: very much like to do that if they like the music,
Speaker 1: and I give them referrals. So generally speaking, if you
Speaker 1: don't know someone, you refer it out. Yes, And I
Speaker 1: referred out if I don't have expertise, because I think
Speaker 1: it's important to be clear about where my strengths are
Speaker 1: and clear about where my weaknesses are. So if I
Speaker 1: if it's an area I don't completely understand, I'll make
Speaker 1: sure the client gets involved with someone who does and
Speaker 1: what would you deep your areas of expertise in areas
Speaker 1: where you have less knowledge. Oh, it would be I
Speaker 1: mean to pick an easy example, something like criminal law.
Speaker 1: But it can also be I started life as a
Speaker 1: tax lawyer, but my tax expertise is very rusty. Uh,
Speaker 1: and so I'll bring in a tax specialist. Sometimes we
Speaker 1: need help with some corporate issues if it's an extremely
Speaker 1: complicated transaction. Um, you know people that want to rent
Speaker 1: charter planes. That's especially that I and have expertise and
Speaker 1: things like that. Okay, So let's assume you have a
Speaker 1: relationship with someone a manager you've done business before, and
Speaker 1: they say they want to represent the act to what
Speaker 1: did you to represent the act? To what degree do
Speaker 1: you make a judgment based on the qualitability, quality, or
Speaker 1: saleability of the material? Oh? I have terrible ears. Um,
Speaker 1: if I like something that's not usually a good sign
Speaker 1: and my track rigor don that isn't terrific. I have
Speaker 1: a couple of partners Jean Solomon, Ethan Schiffer's who haven't
Speaker 1: had very good years, very good ears, and so I
Speaker 1: rely on them. But primarily I rely on who the
Speaker 1: manager is, who's the team is around him? If there's
Speaker 1: someone at the label that I respect was interested in them,
Speaker 1: So I don't make the independent judgment myself. Okay, at
Speaker 1: what stage does it tend to come to you? Does
Speaker 1: a manager say I have a new act, I haven't
Speaker 1: talked to the labels, don helped me out, or I've
Speaker 1: already talked to some labels. Now I want you to
Speaker 1: come in when you come into the process, I'm sure
Speaker 1: there are million examples of everything, but generally speaking, yeah, well,
Speaker 1: at this stage, I tend to take more established artists
Speaker 1: or at least mid level on their way up. We
Speaker 1: take a few shots with young artists, but can't take
Speaker 1: very many because our basic philosophy is were a small
Speaker 1: firm and we try to do great work for a
Speaker 1: fewer number of people, so I can't take as many
Speaker 1: shots as I might like. So generally I want to
Speaker 1: see something going on before I'll get involved. That there's
Speaker 1: a buzz there, there's a lot of interest, they've got
Speaker 1: a few labels bidding um. But we can we can
Speaker 1: come in at any stage. We can. You know, clients
Speaker 1: come to us sometimes at the highest level if they're
Speaker 1: making a change. So it just depends and what kind
Speaker 1: of fee structure do you institute? Generally we charge five percent? Okay,
Speaker 1: And how do you know if they're accounting to you accurately?
Speaker 1: We rely on the business manager, and uh, you know,
Speaker 1: to some degree we have knowledge. We know, for example,
Speaker 1: of a certain deal how much they're getting paid on it,
Speaker 1: so we'll have a sense of what we should be getting.
Speaker 1: But in general we rely on the business manager. Okay,
Speaker 1: what about sunset issues? You mean on our fees? Yeah, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: we are. The way our deals work is that any
Speaker 1: contracts that we made, we get paid for while we
Speaker 1: represent them, and then a year after and then it's over. Okay.
Speaker 1: That's standard. So okay, Uh, you're representing an act. Labels
Speaker 1: are interested, what's the next step? Um? We would actually
Speaker 1: it would start to solicit offers and say, okay, you're
Speaker 1: interested in make us a proposal. It depends by the
Speaker 1: way it depends. Um. If it's a really major act,
Speaker 1: we'll put the proposal together because we'll have a history
Speaker 1: and we'll have a pretty good idea and we want
Speaker 1: to press the envelope. If it's a newer act and
Speaker 1: there's no history to it, will ask the labels to
Speaker 1: make bids and then we'll start to sort them by
Speaker 1: stone how they line up. And Okay, now you've zeroed
Speaker 1: in on one label and you would like to make
Speaker 1: a deal with that label. What are the arguments? So
Speaker 1: what are the negotiations end up being when you're cammering
Speaker 1: out the final deal. Well, we generally start with all
Speaker 1: the major points. How much product is it going to be,
Speaker 1: what's going to be the advance, what's the royalty rate? Um?
Speaker 1: The argument used to be a lot about how much
Speaker 1: are you going to pay for use of the songs
Speaker 1: and the records? But that's pretty much becoming irrelevant for
Speaker 1: reasons I can explain if you're interested why I want
Speaker 1: to explain those. Okay, Um, those are called mechanical royalties,
Speaker 1: And every time a CD is sold you get paid
Speaker 1: a certain number of pennies. Every time there's a download,
Speaker 1: you get a certain number of pennies every time every
Speaker 1: time there's a stream you get a percentage of the
Speaker 1: streaming revenue that gets paid for the songs. Now, this
Speaker 1: is remember we're talking about two different rights. This is
Speaker 1: a record deal, So what are buying is the right
Speaker 1: to distribute physical recordings, but you also get paid for
Speaker 1: the songwriting, which may or may not even be the artist,
Speaker 1: but you get you get paid as a songwriter, which
Speaker 1: is a separate payment for what you get for the
Speaker 1: actual master recording. Those are called mechanicals, and it used
Speaker 1: to be a major part of record deals to negotiate
Speaker 1: the mechanicals because you get those moneys right from the
Speaker 1: get go. The first record that sold, you get paid.
Speaker 1: Whereas on your record deal they take back all the
Speaker 1: money they've paid you for an advance and for costs,
Speaker 1: and you may not get record royalties ever or for years.
Speaker 1: But mechanical world is you get right from day one.
Speaker 1: So that was a big negotiating point. What happened was
Speaker 1: there was a couple of changes in the copyright law.
Speaker 1: The first one said that record deals made after a
Speaker 1: certain date, I don't remember the exact in the In
Speaker 1: the in the nineties, all record all future record deals
Speaker 1: had to pay a full amount of royalties for uh
Speaker 1: for downloads. And what the companies always tried to do
Speaker 1: is reduce the mechanicals, because that is money they're paying
Speaker 1: out before they get their money back. And that was
Speaker 1: the argument was how much are they going to reduce it?
Speaker 1: So starting there they said you can't reduce it for
Speaker 1: downloads not a big deal at the time, because you know,
Speaker 1: big percent of the market was physical. Then along came streaming,
Speaker 1: which is now the dominant part of the market, and
Speaker 1: that rate is set by the copyright law and there's
Speaker 1: no negotiating about it, and it's not even in fact
Speaker 1: paid by the record companies. It's paid by the digital
Speaker 1: service providers, the spotifyes and so forth, so that the
Speaker 1: only thing you're arguing about now is physical product, which
Speaker 1: is dwindling, and so it's becoming much less relevant. Okay,
Speaker 1: going a little bit deeper, the streaming services, there's only
Speaker 1: a hundred cents and a dollar, and Universal just made
Speaker 1: their deal with Spotify. Spotify is reducing the percentage of
Speaker 1: income they're paying the major distributors. But many people on
Speaker 1: the writing side, the songwriting side, believe eve that the
Speaker 1: percentage that went to songwriters was too low to begin with.
Speaker 1: Is there what's your viewpoint on that and is there
Speaker 1: any way to claw any of that percentage back? Well, um, yes,
Speaker 1: that's been an argument for quite a bit of time.
Speaker 1: The argument on the record company side is we're making
Speaker 1: a much bigger investment, We have much more risk and
Speaker 1: much more expense than the songwriters do, and the songwriters
Speaker 1: of course look at it the other way around. Um
Speaker 1: And when it comes to synchronization licenses, the songwriter, the
Speaker 1: master and the songwriter publisher are getting the same amount
Speaker 1: of money and they think that should be the model
Speaker 1: on the master's side too, but that we're not likely
Speaker 1: to get there. The percentages are not far off from
Speaker 1: the same ratio that they used to be on physical
Speaker 1: product on CDs, which was the norm of the industry
Speaker 1: for many, many years. UM. So I think it's going
Speaker 1: to be difficult because to claw a bigger percentage, it's
Speaker 1: got to come from somewhere. It's not likely to come
Speaker 1: from Spotify. I their rate is set by by the
Speaker 1: copyright law though, uh and so there's not a lot
Speaker 1: of negotiating around it at this point, and in fact,
Speaker 1: they're getting escalations that goes up over time. Okay, talking
Speaker 1: about Spotify d cents they've recently in the last few months,
Speaker 1: especially going deeply into podcasts, Wall Street has reacted very positively,
Speaker 1: believing there's a lot more profit A can you explain
Speaker 1: to what degree this reduces labels income and how this
Speaker 1: is going to play out? I don't think podcasts will.
Speaker 1: Now this is just my personal opinion, but I don't
Speaker 1: think podcasts are going to reduce labels income because I
Speaker 1: think it's a different audience. I mean, yes, of course,
Speaker 1: we only have so many leisure hours, and how we're
Speaker 1: going to suspend it, whether it's watching TV or or
Speaker 1: watching streaming shows on Netflix, or uh, listening to music
Speaker 1: or listening to podcasts. Um. You know, podcasts require you
Speaker 1: to actually sit in constant trade and listen music. I
Speaker 1: can have on in the background and so and I
Speaker 1: can be doing other things at the same time. So
Speaker 1: I don't know that there is directly competitive as it
Speaker 1: might seem, but I can understand why they would think
Speaker 1: it's a good source of income. Okay, but let's be
Speaker 1: very specific. If there's a hundred cents in the dollar,
Speaker 1: let's just make numbers round in sixty goes to audio streams.
Speaker 1: Doesn't the sixty percent that recording companies would normally get
Speaker 1: be Aren't they reduced by the amount of time that
Speaker 1: people spend listening to podcasts. I would think that that's right.
Speaker 1: I would think that, you know, and the overall allocation
Speaker 1: of how much it goes to music and how much
Speaker 1: goes to podcasts. Yes, I think that. I think it
Speaker 1: would to some degree if they are truly doing it
Speaker 1: on the same basis. Now I'm not you know, I'm
Speaker 1: not directly involved in the Spotify ideals. I don't know
Speaker 1: if they're based on music streaming or if they're based
Speaker 1: on a dent of the service and it would take
Speaker 1: the podcast out. But if that is what they're doing,
Speaker 1: then yes, you're right, it would reduce music. Okay, So
Speaker 1: let's go back to the record deal. The points that
Speaker 1: you're negotiating, uh, whether it be historically and how that's
Speaker 1: changed now, or what you're still negotiating now. Okay, UM,
Speaker 1: I think I had covered most of the major parts.
Speaker 1: The other things that are interesting these days are exclusivity. UM.
Speaker 1: That used to not be as big an issue as
Speaker 1: it's become over the last number of years, and the
Speaker 1: reason for that is that historically, UM exclusivity was limited
Speaker 1: to basically devices that were delivered to consumers. And the
Speaker 1: only wrinkle in that one was that they had audio
Speaker 1: visual devices, which in theory covered at the time video cassettes,
Speaker 1: and if you were in a movie that was out
Speaker 1: on video cassettes, you could be in breach of your
Speaker 1: record deal. UM, something that was an easy fix if
Speaker 1: you new enough to ask about it. Now, the exclusivity
Speaker 1: is so broad that it covers anything you do, uh
Speaker 1: in any way communicating to the public. So, whether you're
Speaker 1: on a radio show, a TV show, UM, you're on
Speaker 1: a doing a concert that streamed at festivals, all these
Speaker 1: things fall under the exclusivity and the record company needs
Speaker 1: to either consent and or get paid for it. Okay,
Speaker 1: into what degree are you experiencing the three sixty deal?
Speaker 1: The three sixty deals is which if anyone isn't familiar with,
Speaker 1: is where the record companies in the crash of the business. Uh,
Speaker 1: starting in after UM said we can't make money on
Speaker 1: traditional sales of music anymore. We're putting a lot of
Speaker 1: money into making your career. You're making a lot of
Speaker 1: money outside of records because of what we're doing, So
Speaker 1: we want to share in your other income besides just records.
Speaker 1: Those are called three sixty rights, and they've become very
Speaker 1: much the norm and presdent in the industry. Uh. If
Speaker 1: you have enough clout, you can get them cut down
Speaker 1: to small numbers or even get rid of them sometimes. UM.
Speaker 1: But every label, whether it's independent or major. Now once
Speaker 1: three sixty rights is their initial go round. You can
Speaker 1: also cut back the areas that they apply to UM.
Speaker 1: So for example, maybe they only apply to uh the
Speaker 1: songwriting or publishing, or maybe they only apply to uh,
Speaker 1: you know, touring, UM. But they are very much here
Speaker 1: to stay for the near term. In the long term, well,
Speaker 1: I guess we'll see. And how do those percentages break down?
Speaker 1: They're different. Uh, they can be anywhere from the most
Speaker 1: aggressive I've seen. Are some labels trying to take more
Speaker 1: more in the norm is somewhere in the fifteen to
Speaker 1: twenty or range. And on touring they try to take
Speaker 1: it on the gross, but a smaller percentage because uh, well,
Speaker 1: run tour in the beginning of your stay of your
Speaker 1: career could probably lose money, not make money, and they
Speaker 1: shouldn't get paid on the growth of that because they
Speaker 1: get you'd be losing money and paying your record company.
Speaker 1: At a higher level tour, the artist still may only
Speaker 1: gross fifty or sixty percent of of what they're growth, sorry,
Speaker 1: may only take home fifty or sixty of what they're grossing.
Speaker 1: And so the record companies, uh you know, want to
Speaker 1: get paid on the higher number. And more importantly, they
Speaker 1: don't want people playing games of throwing all these expenses
Speaker 1: into the tour and make it look like they lost
Speaker 1: money just so they don't have to pay the record company. Okay,
Speaker 1: is it a straight percentage for all third party activities
Speaker 1: or does some third party activities have a different rate.
Speaker 1: It's all negotiable, but yes, they're they're not necessarily the
Speaker 1: same percentage overall, So you might have You might pay
Speaker 1: them only uh, you know, five percent on tours or
Speaker 1: five percent of gross on tours. Uh. And you might
Speaker 1: pay them five or ten percent on publishing, but you
Speaker 1: pay them on merchandizing. I'm making this up, but they
Speaker 1: can be different percentages, okay. And generally speaking on the
Speaker 1: touring deals, are they gross or are they net? You
Speaker 1: mean from there? Yes, they usually try. Sometimes they'll do
Speaker 1: a combination. You know, we want of net, but not
Speaker 1: less than seven and a half percent of gross, or
Speaker 1: they'll just take a percentage of gross. And now traditionally,
Speaker 1: although you say it's not that much the case today,
Speaker 1: the record companies have screwed the acts. How does the
Speaker 1: record company know the accounting to them is accurate? A
Speaker 1: good question. They all have the ability to audit, come
Speaker 1: in and look at the books. Uh. In my experience,
Speaker 1: they don't generally do that, although I've seen it happen
Speaker 1: where they'll come in and make sure that they're getting
Speaker 1: a fair count, and they'll want to they've gotten pretty
Speaker 1: sophisticated about touring. They'll want to see budgets, projections. Uh.
Speaker 1: And they may not let you deduct expenses like your
Speaker 1: manager or your agent, on the theory that they, you know,
Speaker 1: if they're getting paid full vote socials the label. Okay,
Speaker 1: let's go back to commitments. What kind of commitments are
Speaker 1: you seeing these days in terms of number of albums? Yes, okay, Well,
Speaker 1: interesting question before we even get to the number of
Speaker 1: albums or whether or not the deal is going to
Speaker 1: be based on albums, because albums may or may not
Speaker 1: be the norm in the years to come, likely won't be. Uh.
Speaker 1: So some companies are are are willing to go to
Speaker 1: you know, we'll give you twelve or fourteen masters as
Speaker 1: opposed to an album. Uh. Some companies are still holding
Speaker 1: onto albums and want to negotiate it when we get
Speaker 1: there if albums aren't the right way to go. But
Speaker 1: in general speaking, they're gonna want it. For a new artist,
Speaker 1: they're gonna want to have the options. Probably they'll commit
Speaker 1: to one album, and what the options for uh, you know,
Speaker 1: two or three more uh, four more established artists. You know,
Speaker 1: you might limit the entire deal the three uh. And
Speaker 1: in fact, for newer artists, they're gonna want much more
Speaker 1: than that. They're going to try and get four or
Speaker 1: five albums total for part of the deal. Now, it
Speaker 1: used to be historically no one would uh let anybody
Speaker 1: go in California under the seven year rule, but there's
Speaker 1: been some leakage there. What do you think about the
Speaker 1: seven year rule applying to recording commitments today? Well, the
Speaker 1: record companies did a pretty masterful job of lobbying the
Speaker 1: California legislature to exempt record deals from the seven year statute.
Speaker 1: Not saying you can't get out of your record deal
Speaker 1: after seven years, because you can, but saying that the
Speaker 1: record company could sue you for the profits on the
Speaker 1: undelivered masters, and the profits on the undelivered masters could
Speaker 1: be much more than the artist is going to make
Speaker 1: going to a new company. So in effect, they've got
Speaker 1: the artist to where they can't really terminate under the
Speaker 1: seven year statute. And to what degree do you have
Speaker 1: managers coming and saying I want this deal based in
Speaker 1: a state other than California because it advantages to them. Um,
Speaker 1: you mean because of the manager's enforcement of their of
Speaker 1: their contracts. Right, unless there's a New York manager or
Speaker 1: some sort of connection or the artist and the new
Speaker 1: are on the manager in another state, generally they don't
Speaker 1: seem to object to that. Um. A few try every
Speaker 1: now and then, but you need some kind of connection
Speaker 1: to where the law that's going to apply. Okay, now
Speaker 1: let's talk about advances. Advances. What's the range today? What
Speaker 1: are the commitments? Well, it's so you know, fact specific
Speaker 1: and dependent on how much heat and what kind of
Speaker 1: genre and uh, you know, how many people are chasing
Speaker 1: it or what's the history. It's really really hard to say.
Speaker 1: I mean, you can see for you know, for artists
Speaker 1: that have already a significant UM streaming history that's building.
Speaker 1: You can see multimillion dollar deals for people who have
Speaker 1: never had a record out before. UM. At the same time,
Speaker 1: if you're a rock band, you know, you might get
Speaker 1: a few hundred thousand because nobody seems to want rock
Speaker 1: right at the moment, which I personally find said Okay,
Speaker 1: that big the question. Someone comes to you and the
Speaker 1: act is not hip hop or pop. To what degree
Speaker 1: do you say, listen, this is not the major labels expertise,
Speaker 1: they probably don't want it. You're probably best to go
Speaker 1: somewhere else. You know, that's more of a manager's call
Speaker 1: than ours. Uh, genuinely, because I don't know that I
Speaker 1: have the expertise to say that. I think I can
Speaker 1: certainly say that it's a harder sell at the major labels,
Speaker 1: But I think the labels still want some rock acts.
Speaker 1: I think it's just it depends on an anar guy
Speaker 1: getting our in our woman getting excited about you. Okay,
Speaker 1: Just going back to an earlier point, reauditing on a
Speaker 1: three sixty deal. Used to be these record companies had
Speaker 1: an amazing number of employees. They would buy tickets, they
Speaker 1: would sponsor stuff. There are many fewer employees. They're much,
Speaker 1: you know, less tight than they used to be. To
Speaker 1: what degree does this affect the development of the act
Speaker 1: and also affect whether they're able to uh stand up,
Speaker 1: whether it be an accounting or any other battle with
Speaker 1: the artist. Well, I think that, um, you know, the
Speaker 1: expert if the record company is genuinely excited about someone
Speaker 1: and can and will really put the resources behind them.
Speaker 1: I think they can still be very very effective. And
Speaker 1: I'm sorry to think I understood the second part about it. Well,
Speaker 1: I guess you know, if there are ten people working
Speaker 1: there instead of a thousand, certain balls dropped through and
Speaker 1: and low, that would be make the act angry. That
Speaker 1: would also mean they're not enough eyes to pay attention
Speaker 1: on my three sixty deal. Uh. Well, I look, I
Speaker 1: I have not had the personal experience, but I certainly
Speaker 1: know of artists that just ignore the three sixty and
Speaker 1: don't pay them. Uh and uh, you know, but it's
Speaker 1: not something I've had a direct experience with. Okay, so
Speaker 1: I'm a I'm a new act, new developing act. What
Speaker 1: do you tell me about the publishing? Hang onto it,
Speaker 1: own it, don't sell it. Uh, you know, try to
Speaker 1: make a deal for somebody to do what we call
Speaker 1: it an administration deal, which means that they will take
Speaker 1: care of it for a period of time, but you
Speaker 1: continue to own it and uh and you get it
Speaker 1: back at the end of the term or a period
Speaker 1: of time after the end of the term. Let's assume
Speaker 1: I make a deal with a major label. What would
Speaker 1: be the admin deal like and would there be in advance, Well,
Speaker 1: it wouldn't be with the label, it would be with
Speaker 1: a publisher or but that the publisher would know that
Speaker 1: there's a big company behind me, therefore in lockstep, they
Speaker 1: would make a deal with me for the songs. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's it's again very very dependent. I mean, if you've
Speaker 1: got you know, a track history of streaming and it's
Speaker 1: building and you've already got multimillions of streams, you know
Speaker 1: you're gonna get a much bigger check than if you're
Speaker 1: a brand new artist has never put out product and
Speaker 1: the labels excited about you. Uh, you know, you might
Speaker 1: get in the latter situation, you might get a funder
Speaker 1: thousand and the other you might get, you know, into
Speaker 1: the seven figures. And what would be the ADMD fee
Speaker 1: that would be collected against that. It's directly dependent on
Speaker 1: how big an advance you want. The bigger advance us
Speaker 1: you want, the bigger the admin fee that the company
Speaker 1: that the publisher is gonna want. Uh, the what they
Speaker 1: would love to get is of each dollar for an
Speaker 1: admin fee, you can get them do as low as
Speaker 1: ten percent, meaning of the artists. But the lower you get,
Speaker 1: the lesson an advance you're going to get because they
Speaker 1: don't have as much margin. And to how long do
Speaker 1: these initial publishing admin deals tend to last three years
Speaker 1: generally something like that, but they can also be based
Speaker 1: on a certain number of songs. In other words, particularly
Speaker 1: if there's an advance they I'll say, you know, we
Speaker 1: have to have a certain number of songs before you
Speaker 1: can move the term forward. And they may want options
Speaker 1: beyond the three years, okay, and their options and the
Speaker 1: options are based on what usually what are the triggers. Well,
Speaker 1: the trigger would be either nothing that it's completely at
Speaker 1: the discretion of the publishing company, or if you can negotiate.
Speaker 1: Sometimes they can't do it if they haven't earned more
Speaker 1: than a certain dollar amount during the period. But that
Speaker 1: isn't always meaningful becus they haven't learned that much. They
Speaker 1: may not want to they got the option anyway, but
Speaker 1: it's still a good protection to build in for yourself. Now.
Speaker 1: A lot of the acts from the late sixties and
Speaker 1: early seventies had we version clauses because the company's thought
Speaker 1: that these records would ultimately be worth nothing. To what
Speaker 1: degree are those gotten today? And also the issue of
Speaker 1: ownership of the underlying copyright. Are you talking about records now,
Speaker 1: are publishing? I'm talking about the record deal, record deal. Uh,
Speaker 1: it is, yes, you're you're quite right. There was a
Speaker 1: versions because everybody assumed they'd be valueless after ten or
Speaker 1: fifteen years, and those were easy to get back. Then
Speaker 1: not so much anymore. The companies the masters are their
Speaker 1: companies uh, primary assets. So they are much less likely
Speaker 1: to part with them these days if they if they
Speaker 1: can avoid it, if you have enough cloud, you can
Speaker 1: make a deal where you own your masters and you
Speaker 1: basically rent them to them. Uh and uh. And so
Speaker 1: that's still doable, but it can be again, it can
Speaker 1: be a period of time. It would be not a
Speaker 1: short period of time, maybe ten or fifteen years after
Speaker 1: the end of your term of your deal. Uh. And
Speaker 1: it would be dependent on you being recouped, although we
Speaker 1: negotiate and ask for the right to if you're unrecouped,
Speaker 1: I say a hundred thousand dollars, we give you a
Speaker 1: hundred thousand dollars, and then we get the masters back
Speaker 1: right away after this time period is up. And one
Speaker 1: thing that has always you know, bothered me is a
Speaker 1: recording costs, a recording cost. If you go into a
Speaker 1: studio and you pay a dollar, doesn't matter whether you're
Speaker 1: a superstar or you're a new artist. Yet you recoup
Speaker 1: at different rates. Can that ever change? Well, you're going
Speaker 1: to recoup at your royalty rate. The higher your royalty right,
Speaker 1: the faster you recoup. I guess yeah. I feel before
Speaker 1: you get the royalty rate dollar for dollar, if you
Speaker 1: spend a hundred thousand dollars making the record, okay, once
Speaker 1: they got a hundred thousand in however, with a percentage,
Speaker 1: but the superstars should recoup at the same rate when
Speaker 1: it comes to costs. Then when we go to pain,
Speaker 1: you should go to your royalty rate. It seems like
Speaker 1: you're doubly screwed as a new act. You're getting a
Speaker 1: lower ROULETI hated, you're recouping even slower. Yes, I mean
Speaker 1: to some degree, that's true, and that's historical as to
Speaker 1: why it work that way. Um, you can do on
Speaker 1: a on a profit sharing deal, they will still generally
Speaker 1: try to put some of the costs against the artists
Speaker 1: of the profits, although that's negotiable as well. But but
Speaker 1: when you do a profit share deal, you also have
Speaker 1: things charged against you that would not be charged against
Speaker 1: you if you were just recouping um. And that's things
Speaker 1: becoming less relevant. But it's things like manufacturing and shipping
Speaker 1: and freight and bad debts and those kinds of things. Again,
Speaker 1: those are becoming less relevant. But there are some marketing
Speaker 1: costs and promotion that might not be charged against you
Speaker 1: as an artist. Uh So it's not exactly apples to apples,
Speaker 1: but in a profit share deal you can come closer
Speaker 1: to what you're talking about. And let's talk about delivery issues.
Speaker 1: I have a commitment of twenty masters, the term goes by,
Speaker 1: I've only delivered ten. What tends to happen there? Well,
Speaker 1: the term doesn't these days. The term doesn't end until
Speaker 1: you've delivered it. So the term can't go by before
Speaker 1: you've done it, because the record companies got stuck with
Speaker 1: that years ago and changed their contracts based on the
Speaker 1: fact that now they're saying, you know, the termines x
Speaker 1: months after delivery of the product for that term. Okay,
Speaker 1: let's go back to you originally, I mean I know this,
Speaker 1: but for my listeners, you originally from where Dallas, Texas?
Speaker 1: And how many generations is your family in Dallas. Um. Well,
Speaker 1: let's see, my grandparents on one side were in Dallas.
Speaker 1: The other ones I think we're in Houston or Galveston. Wow,
Speaker 1: so they why did they end up in uh? Texas? Uh?
Speaker 1: The short answer is I'm not sure. Um the because
Speaker 1: I never knew those grandparents who had the chance to
Speaker 1: talk him. I know that my father's side, you know,
Speaker 1: came through Ellis Island, went to New York, drifted down
Speaker 1: to New Orleans and ended up somehow in Galthaston. My
Speaker 1: mother's side came through one side came through Canada. One
Speaker 1: side games for Kansas City. I don't know the exact
Speaker 1: story of how they got there, but that's where they were. Okay.
Speaker 1: You know Texans, and I know people from that area
Speaker 1: attend of a lot of pride in Texas. Do you
Speaker 1: have that pride? Um? I like Texas? I mean, I
Speaker 1: uh it's It's not a place I would choose to
Speaker 1: live today, but I loved growing up there, and uh
Speaker 1: it has a lot of unique and sort of fun
Speaker 1: aspects to it. Okay, and your parents did what for
Speaker 1: a living? Uh? My father was a lawyer in Dallas. Uh.
Speaker 1: Interesting guy rep presented abes a pruder the guy who
Speaker 1: took the Kennedy films and and represented Jacob Rubinstein, who
Speaker 1: changed his name to Jack Ruby. Let's slow down that
Speaker 1: faithful weekend Friday, Kennedy gets shot in Dallas. What was
Speaker 1: it like being in Dallas? Then of course the chapter
Speaker 1: with Jack Ruby. Then of course there's a pruder chapter. Well,
Speaker 1: those are all a bit tied together. I was not
Speaker 1: in Dallas. I was in Austin. I was in college
Speaker 1: at the University of Texas when Kennedy was shot. Um
Speaker 1: and I went to Dallas the next day it was
Speaker 1: Thanksgiving and uh my, in fact, we went over to
Speaker 1: abes a Brewer's house the following day because my he
Speaker 1: was He was related. His daughter was married to my
Speaker 1: first cousin. So my father on the drive over says,
Speaker 1: don't talk to Abe about the Kennedy film. He's sick
Speaker 1: of it. Everybody's hounding him. Don't say a word. So
Speaker 1: we get there and everybody's sitting in a semicircle and
Speaker 1: Abe striding back and forth with great gusto telling this
Speaker 1: entire story. That's why it always is. And Okay, what
Speaker 1: about Jack Ruby. Uh, he was a small time guy
Speaker 1: in Texas that years before the Kennedy assassination. My father
Speaker 1: represented him when he changed his name from Jacob Rubinstein
Speaker 1: to Jack Ruby, and I just I think it's a
Speaker 1: pretty bizarical incidence. Uh. And then once what once he
Speaker 1: shoots Oswald? As your father involved in any of the representation, No,
Speaker 1: my dad said he called him uh and wanted him
Speaker 1: to help, but he said, I'm not a criminal lawyer
Speaker 1: and honestly didn't want to get involved. But uh, but
Speaker 1: he did not have anything further to do with him.
Speaker 1: What do you and your father believe was Oswald the
Speaker 1: lone gunman? Was Ruby acting purely on anger and inspiration,
Speaker 1: you know? Uh. My dad's theory was he was a
Speaker 1: small time guy and not that connected and probably acting
Speaker 1: on his own Ruby that is Oswald. I don't think
Speaker 1: either of us have any better idea than anybody else. Okay,
Speaker 1: so you're growing up. How many kids in the family?
Speaker 1: Just me? Just you, It's me. My parents got divorced
Speaker 1: when I was five years old. So, uh, this is
Speaker 1: another thing I did not know. Your parents get divorced
Speaker 1: and what are their paths? Well, my dad stayed in Dallas,
Speaker 1: he had a law firm there, and my mom moved
Speaker 1: to remarried to a disc jockey who had a was
Speaker 1: a colorful personality jock and uh in Dallas, and got
Speaker 1: a job at kf w B in Los Angeles when
Speaker 1: it was the uh top uh, you know, top forty
Speaker 1: station and he had the morning drive. So we moved
Speaker 1: to California. And that was how I got to Los Angeles. Okay.
Speaker 1: So what was his handle online? That was his name,
Speaker 1: Bruce Hays. Okay. So you go to school first in Dallas,
Speaker 1: you go to public school or private school? Public school? Okay?
Speaker 1: And at what age do you move to Los Angeles?
Speaker 1: I was twelve, okay. Can you moved where in l A,
Speaker 1: North Hollywood? Okay? And how do you end up going
Speaker 1: to college back in Austin Um? When I got out
Speaker 1: of car and when I was getting out of high school,
Speaker 1: I realized I spent more of my life in Texas
Speaker 1: and California, and I thought maybe I'd want to go
Speaker 1: back and live in Texas. And my mother and my
Speaker 1: father and my grandmother, who graduated from college in nineteen seventeen,
Speaker 1: pretty unusual for a woman, had all gone to the
Speaker 1: University of Texas, and I thought, Okay, I'll get out
Speaker 1: of l A I'll give it a try. And so
Speaker 1: I went to UT And did you get in state tuition?
Speaker 1: I think I did, actually, because my my father still
Speaker 1: live there. Okay, you know Austin has seen as super
Speaker 1: hip today. What was it like when you went to college?
Speaker 1: It was a hot and eight degrees from super hit.
Speaker 1: It was a football team with no African American players
Speaker 1: because the coach said he thought it would demoralize his
Speaker 1: boys to uh to put as he put it in. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it wasn't like it was a pretense, Um. It was.
Speaker 1: It was very very football beer. Um. And I was
Speaker 1: not a particularly good fit. I was it was. You
Speaker 1: might ask why didn't transfer? And the answer was it
Speaker 1: never occurred to me? Um. But I didn't really enjoy
Speaker 1: it till my second year when I started a band
Speaker 1: and we had what I believe was the first mixed
Speaker 1: band in UH in Austin history. We had a black
Speaker 1: singer and a white band and UH and that when
Speaker 1: we started playing frat parties and we're booked pretty solid.
Speaker 1: Then I had a great time. Okay, A couple of questions.
Speaker 1: When did you start playing music? Um? I started playing
Speaker 1: music when I was young. I played the accordion when
Speaker 1: I was, uh, you know, six or seven years old,
Speaker 1: and I took up the guitar in high school and
Speaker 1: I took up the banjo when I was in law school.
Speaker 1: And so I've always loved music. Okay, So when you
Speaker 1: have this band, this is pre Beatles in Austin, Yes,
Speaker 1: And what kind of music are you playing? It was
Speaker 1: mostly R and B and it was we were just
Speaker 1: cover bands. We had a couple of original songs, one
Speaker 1: of which has become a bit of a cult hit.
Speaker 1: Uh and uh, I've had collectors called me and I
Speaker 1: want to buy some of the forty five from the era. Um.
Speaker 1: But but for the most part it was a cover band.
Speaker 1: So what was the track and what was the band? Oh?
Speaker 1: The band was called Oedipus and the Mothers, and the
Speaker 1: track is how it used to be. And do you
Speaker 1: have any for I have I think one or two left? Yes?
Speaker 1: Did you? Did you sell any of them to these collectors?
Speaker 1: I saw one of them because the guy seemed really
Speaker 1: hot for it, and sincere about wanting it? So yeah,
Speaker 1: And what did you study the UT I majored in history.
Speaker 1: I was going to major in psychology because I was
Speaker 1: enjoying in those classes. So much. But you needed to
Speaker 1: take analytical geometry and statistics and I did not. I
Speaker 1: took analytical geometry, had no clue what they were talking about,
Speaker 1: ended up dropping it. So I minored in psychology, basically
Speaker 1: taking every class except those, and majored in history. Okay,
Speaker 1: you graduate from UT do you immediately go to law
Speaker 1: school or do you take time off? No? I went.
Speaker 1: I went directly to law school. Less common in those
Speaker 1: days to take time off than it would be today.
Speaker 1: To what degree did you go to law school because
Speaker 1: your father was a lawyer? Big part of it. Um.
Speaker 1: But at the same time, I always enjoyed arguing, I
Speaker 1: always enjoyed logic. I always enjoyed, you know, trying to
Speaker 1: understand complex things, make them simple, figure out how to
Speaker 1: what motivates people, and how to move things from one
Speaker 1: side to the other. So it played very much into
Speaker 1: what I was interested in. And your desire was to
Speaker 1: go to Harvard. Yes, and you know, I'm needless to say,
Speaker 1: there's the one l book, there's you know, there's the
Speaker 1: paper Chase. What was your experience at Harvard Law School? Well,
Speaker 1: paper Chase was written by one of my classmates. Um,
Speaker 1: but I I and I loved it. At Harvard Law School,
Speaker 1: I thought it was the most intellectually challenged I've ever
Speaker 1: been in my life. It was a lot of really interesting,
Speaker 1: bright people in my class. I thought the professors, you know,
Speaker 1: some of them were dullards, but for the most part,
Speaker 1: we're interesting and engaging. And I was intrigued by the
Speaker 1: subject matter. So I really enjoyed the experience. And you
Speaker 1: graduate in what's the plan? Um? The plan was. I
Speaker 1: had two offers, one from a I thought I wanted
Speaker 1: to be a tax lawyer originally when I went to
Speaker 1: law school because I liked tax and intricate problems and
Speaker 1: um and so. But then after my second year, I
Speaker 1: saw a firm put up a thing that said entertainment
Speaker 1: law was one of their specialties, and I've never heard
Speaker 1: of it, and I thought, oh, that sounds like fun.
Speaker 1: And so I was thinking about whether I should go
Speaker 1: to an entertainment firm or a tax firm. But I
Speaker 1: decided to try a tax firm. A firm here and
Speaker 1: I lay called Irell and Manella, which is now mostly litigation,
Speaker 1: but then was a premier tax firm, and I had
Speaker 1: an offer from them. So I took a summer clerkship
Speaker 1: with them, and while I was here, I interviewed with
Speaker 1: several entertainment firms, including the one I worked for now,
Speaker 1: And when I graduated, I had an offer from both
Speaker 1: at an offer from my real and an offer from
Speaker 1: a gang Tire, which is my current firm, and I
Speaker 1: went back and forth about it, but I really said,
Speaker 1: you know, come over here and do tax work and
Speaker 1: we're going to start an entertainment area. You can do both.
Speaker 1: You can be part of the beginning of it. And
Speaker 1: it sounded intriguing and I ended up going there, and
Speaker 1: as soon as I got there it was not a
Speaker 1: good experience. They put me into mergers and acquisitions, which
Speaker 1: I had no interest and I wasn't doing tax I
Speaker 1: wasn't doing entertainment. And I stayed there about it, and
Speaker 1: then I took a class at USC on the music business,
Speaker 1: talked by Jay Cooper and Irwin O. Spegel old timer's.
Speaker 1: Uh Jay's still around, Irwin isn't um And it was
Speaker 1: so much fun. I thought I'm wasting my time. So
Speaker 1: I went back to gang Tire said, hey, I made
Speaker 1: a mistake, and uh, fortunately they let me switch and
Speaker 1: I've been there ever since. And how long after how
Speaker 1: long did you actually work at IRAL in Manoa? About
Speaker 1: eighteen months? Okay, So you start at gang Tire in
Speaker 1: what year, nineteen seventy two? Okay, you know there are
Speaker 1: billboards on Sunset, the music businesses burgeoning. Do they immediately
Speaker 1: put in music or I don't know about gang tied
Speaker 1: or what degree there in other entertainment venues. Yeah, they
Speaker 1: Their theory was you should do a bit of everything.
Speaker 1: So I was doing film, I was doing music, and
Speaker 1: they were doing litigation in those days, which I did
Speaker 1: not particularly enjoy, but it was part of the process.
Speaker 1: I ended up, in fact, doing two trials with a
Speaker 1: senior partner. But I couldn't wait to get out of litigation.
Speaker 1: Uh and uh. And I was so passionate about music
Speaker 1: that they eventually sort of got it and let me
Speaker 1: start moving into the music as opposed to the film
Speaker 1: and TV side of it. And who was the boss
Speaker 1: of the music in when you did that, Well, Bruce
Speaker 1: Raymer was doing a lot of it, and Payson Wolfe,
Speaker 1: who was really my mentor, was was doing most of it.
Speaker 1: When I started out, the firm was representing almost all
Speaker 1: record companies and publishing companies on the corporate side, and uh,
Speaker 1: my heart was always on the artist side. But it
Speaker 1: was enormously good training. In those days, they didn't have
Speaker 1: as much in house capability, so the larger deals they
Speaker 1: would farm out to us and we were So I
Speaker 1: got this great training doing really sophisticated deals on behalf
Speaker 1: of the record label, dealing with all the talent lawyers
Speaker 1: in town, and learned a draft and I learned what
Speaker 1: everybody was asking for and it was a fabulous education.
Speaker 1: But my heart was on the artist side. So I
Speaker 1: set out to build an artist practice. And how long
Speaker 1: did you were you at gang Tied before you started
Speaker 1: working on the other side. Um, well, it was gradual,
Speaker 1: because you know, that wasn't most of our business. So
Speaker 1: I had to build the artist thing from scratch. I
Speaker 1: started doing it pretty quickly, just but that was because
Speaker 1: I just took anybody to walked in the door. Um,
Speaker 1: I go to be in my showcases, I go to uh,
Speaker 1: you know, just ask anybody to send me whatever, because
Speaker 1: I just wanted to get experience and I wanted to
Speaker 1: start to get into the artist world. So that begs
Speaker 1: a question, although you're referencing it, to what degree did
Speaker 1: you work trying to get a client base, and how
Speaker 1: did you actually get a client bass Um slowly was
Speaker 1: the answer. But yes, it was something very intentional and
Speaker 1: something I worked very hard for. It was My theory
Speaker 1: was is that if I met as many people as
Speaker 1: possible that were my age, then when they grew up
Speaker 1: in the business, I have relationships. I knew that was
Speaker 1: a long term strategy, but I didn't think a bad one.
Speaker 1: And then I just went out and not as many
Speaker 1: people as I could. I remember you you were speaking
Speaker 1: once at the Beverly Hills Bar Association, probably ninety or something.
Speaker 1: Did you consciously take all those speaking gigs to drive
Speaker 1: your business? I did, uh, and that and I like
Speaker 1: speaking anyway. Um Uh, as a friend of mine says,
Speaker 1: I'll go miles to hear myself speak. So what was
Speaker 1: the turning point? What client pushed you into? Uh? The
Speaker 1: story you are now? Um. Probably Heart was the first one,
Speaker 1: and then Tina Turner was the second. I think when
Speaker 1: when I had both of them, that really changed the game.
Speaker 1: And how did you get them? Uh? Different ways? Heart
Speaker 1: came through their producer was a client of mine and
Speaker 1: they were looking to make a change, and he got
Speaker 1: me an introduction to him. Uh. Tina came through her manager,
Speaker 1: who I had met on the other side of a deal,
Speaker 1: uh where we were representing, and I got to know
Speaker 1: him and when he looked to make a change, he
Speaker 1: called okay. So this always pigs a question when you're
Speaker 1: an attorney, do you look back and say, not specifically
Speaker 1: with the act you mentioned, Oh, if I knew what
Speaker 1: I do now, I screwed up. Yeah, you know, I
Speaker 1: honestly don't. I mean, obviously I made mistakes along the
Speaker 1: way everybody does. I don't know that I would change
Speaker 1: the overall strategy. It was just frustrating because it took
Speaker 1: a long time. Um, and uh, I watched guys my age,
Speaker 1: you know, sale passed me and and do better, and
Speaker 1: that was that was frustrating and a little disconcerting. But
Speaker 1: I you know, I was I just determined to be
Speaker 1: the tortoise in the race, if not the hair and
Speaker 1: it came I think in the time frame that it
Speaker 1: should have. But I can't point to any particular thing
Speaker 1: that I think is a major change. And to what
Speaker 1: did we do? These acts change attorneys at this point? Yeah,
Speaker 1: it depends on the artist. I mean, you know there
Speaker 1: are people that change attorneys like they change their sneakers. Uh,
Speaker 1: and there's other people that stick around for years and years.
Speaker 1: Our philosophy is different from a lot of our competitors.
Speaker 1: Were a very small firm. There's only three lawyers doing music. Uh,
Speaker 1: and do paralegals and uh. We want to be able
Speaker 1: to give really and you know, hands on service to
Speaker 1: a few number of clients. So we're selective about it.
Speaker 1: We take and one of the things we look for
Speaker 1: is someone that we think, uh, you know, is a
Speaker 1: good person and that we can have a long term
Speaker 1: relationship with. And your name is finally on the door.
Speaker 1: How did that happen? Oh? Just maybe just because it
Speaker 1: was time? Okay, So can you tell us a couple
Speaker 1: of tales from your career? Uh that you know that
Speaker 1: people would like to hear around the fire. Unfortunately, a
Speaker 1: lot of what I talk, you know, I've learned I
Speaker 1: can't talk about because attorney client privilege. Yeah, exactly. UM,
Speaker 1: so it may be a little too general of a question.
Speaker 1: So okay, now you have other interests for someone who's
Speaker 1: working so hard. First, let's talk about the book. How
Speaker 1: did you decide to write the book? Well, I was
Speaker 1: teaching the class. I told you I took at USC
Speaker 1: on the music business. I ended up teaching, and I
Speaker 1: was taught it for about three years, and it dawned
Speaker 1: on me that I had in my class note outline
Speaker 1: the outline of a book. And there was only one
Speaker 1: book on the music business at the time, called This
Speaker 1: Business of Music, and it was it was a good resource,
Speaker 1: but it was very difficult to read, and even as
Speaker 1: a lawyer, I had trouble understanding parts of it. And
Speaker 1: I thought, you know, there's a need for a very
Speaker 1: easy to read overview for people who are musicians oriented.
Speaker 1: Their ears don't like to read. Uh, And you know,
Speaker 1: so I wanted to write something that was simple and
Speaker 1: easy to understand. I always wanted to write a book
Speaker 1: all my life. I started and stopped trying to write
Speaker 1: a book and never really finished one. And I thought,
Speaker 1: you know, here's a chance to put together a bunch
Speaker 1: of things. And I thought there was a need in
Speaker 1: the marketplace to do it. So I literally grabbed a
Speaker 1: dictaphone I started talking based on it, and uh, you know,
Speaker 1: about a year and a half later, I I had
Speaker 1: I had the book and was it instantly successful. I mean,
Speaker 1: I'm inside, so I'm viewing this you know a little differently,
Speaker 1: but a book like that has to sell a certain
Speaker 1: number of copies to be worthwhile. He what was the
Speaker 1: initial was the initial publisher Simon and Schuster. Yeah, it was.
Speaker 1: It was a story was I was at dinner at
Speaker 1: at an event next to Michael Ovits, who at the
Speaker 1: time was at the height of his powers, and I
Speaker 1: told him, was telling him about the book, and he said, oh,
Speaker 1: let me sell it for you. And I'm not an idiot.
Speaker 1: If Michael Evits wants to sell my book, I went sure.
Speaker 1: So I sent him the book and a week later
Speaker 1: I have two offers from uh, from two different publishers
Speaker 1: in New York. So I got on a plane and
Speaker 1: I went and I met him and Simon and Schuster.
Speaker 1: The editor who wanted it was a twenty seven year
Speaker 1: old guy at the time who was in a band
Speaker 1: on weekends and completely got the book and it was
Speaker 1: very helpful in terms of helping crafted as well. So
Speaker 1: I went with them, and uh, you know it was.
Speaker 1: It didn't happen immediately out of the box. It took
Speaker 1: time for people to get used to it and uh,
Speaker 1: and then I did a lot of fublicity around it
Speaker 1: at the time. And I thought, you know, it'll be
Speaker 1: a long, slow build, but it seemed to start to
Speaker 1: build and built by word of mouth. And we just
Speaker 1: released the tenth edition last year. And how do you
Speaker 1: decide to update it? I generally do it about every
Speaker 1: three years. This one took four years because streaming so
Speaker 1: up into the business that I had to seriously and
Speaker 1: radically rewrite the book, the most extensive rewrite since the
Speaker 1: first edition. Really, uh, and because it just I mean,
Speaker 1: things you wouldn't think about, like the CD royalties were
Speaker 1: first in the chapter on royalties. Well that's obviously almost
Speaker 1: irrelevant now, so they're not first anymore. The whole publishing section,
Speaker 1: the way the industry was shaped has changed over the
Speaker 1: last four years. It's just it's a very radical rewrite.
Speaker 1: And you have these other interests. You've written novels, you
Speaker 1: play poker, you have magic. Could cover those a little
Speaker 1: for us, sure. Basically, I'm a serial obsessive and I
Speaker 1: go to um, you know, I had intensely involved in something,
Speaker 1: and then I'll burn out and move on to something else.
Speaker 1: And I don't relax by doing nothing. I relaxed by
Speaker 1: doing something very different, but just as intense. I don't
Speaker 1: know why. It's just the way I'm wired. So uh.
Speaker 1: You know, magic was a hobby since I was a
Speaker 1: little kid. I drifted and out of that one UM
Speaker 1: Poker I've been playing the last number of years pretty
Speaker 1: seriously because I enjoy it. And I was in a
Speaker 1: regular dame until COVID hit UM the backgam and I
Speaker 1: started recently and uh and took some lessons and I
Speaker 1: found out that was fascinating because it turns out it's
Speaker 1: very mathematical, very strategic, and not that I love math
Speaker 1: all that much, but I can enough to understand how
Speaker 1: it works. Um and you know, and then I just
Speaker 1: drift in and out of various other interests. Well, I
Speaker 1: know you've written these books, these novels. Uh, do you
Speaker 1: has that something that sort of ended because you talk
Speaker 1: about being a serial obsessive. Has your focus changed from that?
Speaker 1: It comes in and out. Actually, I have another novel
Speaker 1: that I finished last year that I'm still editing and
Speaker 1: working on. Uh and uh. I I have someone optioned
Speaker 1: one of my novels for a motion picture, and I
Speaker 1: worked on the script for that no idea if it
Speaker 1: will actually ever get made. But that was fine. I've
Speaker 1: never done a script before, So it just depends I
Speaker 1: have to go with where the news takes me. And
Speaker 1: how bit a magician are you? I'm pretty good. I'm
Speaker 1: a magician member of the Magic Castle, which means you
Speaker 1: have to take a test in order to be admitted.
Speaker 1: And uh, you know cards mostly I'm I'm a bit rusty,
Speaker 1: but I could still fool you, okay. And how good
Speaker 1: a poker player are you? I'm pretty good. I play
Speaker 1: at pretty high level games. I wouldn't say I'm a
Speaker 1: great poker player because the guys that do it full
Speaker 1: time in the pros are obviously at a whole different
Speaker 1: level from where I play the game. But I can
Speaker 1: hold my own. I can play in a game and uh,
Speaker 1: and not you know, not be the complete dufus. So
Speaker 1: what kind of when you say it's serious, what kind
Speaker 1: of players? Oh? I mean, you know, it just depends
Speaker 1: on news. In the game. I'll go to I'll go
Speaker 1: down to Commerce where they have a the world's largest
Speaker 1: poker room, or I'll go to Vegas and that at
Speaker 1: the higher games, you're gonna get professionals and you're gonna
Speaker 1: get you know, serious players. Um, but it's it's you know,
Speaker 1: for me, it's just fun. I mean, I'm not gonna
Speaker 1: play with my I'm not gonna lose the house. Okay,
Speaker 1: So what's your biggest loss in your biggest win? Um
Speaker 1: M hmmm. I don't know. I mean, you know, I
Speaker 1: don't play gigantic stakes, but I think i've I've lost
Speaker 1: a few thousand in a session and I have won
Speaker 1: a few thousand in a session, but somewhere in that range. Okay,
Speaker 1: You've been through a lot of changes. You got in
Speaker 1: the business, went from vinyl to cassette. I think you
Speaker 1: were kind of you know, came in towards the end
Speaker 1: of the eight track. We went to c D, went
Speaker 1: to streaming, We went to touring being the dominant amount
Speaker 1: of money. If you look in the crystal ball, what
Speaker 1: do you see coming down the line? I think it's
Speaker 1: gonna be streaming for quite a while. I mean, I
Speaker 1: think it's such a good experience that I'm not sure
Speaker 1: what more you could want as as a consumer. The
Speaker 1: ability to listen to anything you want, any time you
Speaker 1: want it, and the ability to have it curated if
Speaker 1: you want to curated. Um, I think that's going to
Speaker 1: be the dominant thing for for quite a bit of time,
Speaker 1: I'm genuinely don't have I did see streaming coming a
Speaker 1: long time ago, before the technology is there, but I don't.
Speaker 1: I don't have a vision of what's coming next to you. Well,
Speaker 1: I think streaming is in because he's on demand. So
Speaker 1: that's we come to the end of the game, which
Speaker 1: is so much of what's happening in you know, we
Speaker 1: figured it out in the music business. They're still going
Speaker 1: through wrenching transitions in the movie business, television business, etcetera.
Speaker 1: But I was really asking overall, Okay, used to be
Speaker 1: the record companies were big banks. You went on tour
Speaker 1: to promote the record. You've made most of the money
Speaker 1: on the record. Now that has flipped. Okay, used to
Speaker 1: be record companies supported you over a period of albums.
Speaker 1: Right now hip hop is dominant on streaming services, not
Speaker 1: necessarily dominant on the road. Do you see any trends
Speaker 1: playing out? I think that, Um, I don't have a
Speaker 1: specific trend that I see, except to know that it's
Speaker 1: cyclical that I you know, never nothing ever goes in
Speaker 1: a straight line, and things come in and out of
Speaker 1: vogue and in and out of fashion. So I think
Speaker 1: that will change. I do think that there's something in
Speaker 1: the live experience that you don't get any other way,
Speaker 1: and so I think touring will always be around for
Speaker 1: the right kind of artists that can that can tour.
Speaker 1: But I don't see any any I mean, particularly now
Speaker 1: with COVID, it's pretty hard to spot much of anything.
Speaker 1: But I don't see a change in the trend hip hop.
Speaker 1: I think it has been nominant for quite a period
Speaker 1: of time. It's just a lot more blatant now. Okay,
Speaker 1: used to be the barrier to entry to be in
Speaker 1: the music business was very high, assuming getting a record deal.
Speaker 1: Now the barrier to entry is almost non existence. We
Speaker 1: can put anything up on these streaming services. In terms
Speaker 1: of your viewpoint, it would seem that the development period
Speaker 1: would be longer. And what do you say to new
Speaker 1: acts today? Well, honestly, I don't have a lot of
Speaker 1: interaction with brand new acts. I mean, by the time
Speaker 1: they get to me, um, they're usually a little bit
Speaker 1: farther along. But I think that the thing that I
Speaker 1: say in my book all you need to know about
Speaker 1: the music business is that you've got to build a
Speaker 1: bus before you go anywhere, and you've got to do
Speaker 1: it yourself because nobody's really going to do it for you.
Speaker 1: It's got to be you know, you've got to develop
Speaker 1: an online following. You've got to develop a fan base.
Speaker 1: You've got to uh, you know, get out and get
Speaker 1: a story, get some streaming, get some action, get some
Speaker 1: numbers on SoundCloud, on the streaming services before you can
Speaker 1: move it to the next level. Well, don I think
Speaker 1: we've come to the end of the feeling we've known.
Speaker 1: This has been extremely informative. We also learned more about
Speaker 1: who you actually are, where you come from. Thanks so
Speaker 1: much for doing this my pleasure. Thank you about until
Speaker 1: next time. This is Bob left stands