|
13 members (CTthomas, Gary E. Andrews, David Gill, Sunset Poet, Bill Draper, bennash, Fdemetrio, Everett Adams, Raymond Byabazaire, Brian Austin Whitney, 3 invisible),
5,064
guests, and
5,097
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Welcome to the Just Plain Folks forums! You are currently viewing our forums as a Guest which gives you limited access to most of our discussions and to other features.
By joining our free community you will have access to post and respond to topics, communicate privately with our users (PM), respond to polls, upload content, and access many other features. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free; so please join our community today!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kerouac
by Fdemetrio - 10/23/25 07:17 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lol...
by Bill Draper - 10/23/25 01:34 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 114
Serious Contributor
|
OP
Serious Contributor
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 114 |
Hi guys,
I'm Kevin Rivers (CEO of Venzo Digital). I see that many artists uses percentage base distribution (like CD Baby) while others uses flat fee distribution (like TuneCore). Here is my question to you:
Q: Which model do you think is better? And why?
 WaTunes - Where Your Music Is Social
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,001
Top 100 Poster
|
|
Top 100 Poster
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,001 |
It's not really a debate if you're informed. The answer is: it depends on the artist.
A lot of non-signed artists don't have a big enough following to justify a flat annual fee. There's a thread somewhere here on JPF where I once did the math as to the number of sales it would take to see a better cost to fee ratio from a flat fee.
The reality is, most artists won't sell enough to justify it.
A vast majority of artists need to think long-tail. That's because they'll sell fewer copies of material over a long course of time. Which means that a CD Baby style percentage makes way more sense.
If an artist gets to a point where they "blow up" and can maintain a lot of sales it's always possible to jump ship from the percentage to the flat fee. While a hassle, it's a much better option.
Case in point: A long time friend of mine has a new band and called me to ask my opinion on whether to use Tunecore or CD Baby. The first question I asked him was "how big is your email list?" The response was less than stellar. I asked "will you tour?" The answer: No. I asked "What's your marketing budget?" The response wasn't a good one.
To add to it, he/they wanted to only release a single.
Then he asked, what do you think about putting a video out on iTunes. I asked him: Have you ever purchased a video on iTunes? He replied: No. I let him know that it doesn't make sense to even try. One CD Baby doesn't do it and two Tunecore charges something like $80 to do it, plus an annual fee. I told him that I've been informed by those behind the scenes and in the know, that it's extremely rare to be able to sell a video on iTunes. Let alone break even, or even make money on it.
Why? Because it'll be on youtube for free. Most people want to own music, but not music videos.
After that long conversation with him, he still wasn't sure... to which I told him - if what I've told you hasn't made up your mind, then nothing will and you'll do what you want as a vanity release to please yourself. He didn't get it. Oh well.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 4,195 Likes: 1
Top 100 Poster
|
|
Top 100 Poster
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 4,195 Likes: 1 |
percentage - absolutely.
TFunk
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 10,943 Likes: 3
Top 10 Poster
|
|
Top 10 Poster
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 10,943 Likes: 3 |
Don't know -- just a bump to clean up the spam title in the "What's Going On" section
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,294
Top 200 Poster
|
|
Top 200 Poster
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,294 |
I've used both CD Baby and Tunecore, and the Tunecore yearly fee model has never really made much sense to me.
In addition to what Jody wrote above, consider also the next ten years. Do you think you'll still be doing music? Will your band still be together? If your situation changes, will you still want to be paying that yearly fee to keep your songs out there?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 114
Serious Contributor
|
|
OP
Serious Contributor
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 114 |
It's not really a debate if you're informed. The answer is: it depends on the artist.
A lot of non-signed artists don't have a big enough following to justify a flat annual fee. There's a thread somewhere here on JPF where I once did the math as to the number of sales it would take to see a better cost to fee ratio from a flat fee.
The reality is, most artists won't sell enough to justify it.
A vast majority of artists need to think long-tail. That's because they'll sell fewer copies of material over a long course of time. Which means that a CD Baby style percentage makes way more sense.
If an artist gets to a point where they "blow up" and can maintain a lot of sales it's always possible to jump ship from the percentage to the flat fee. While a hassle, it's a much better option.
Case in point: A long time friend of mine has a new band and called me to ask my opinion on whether to use Tunecore or CD Baby. The first question I asked him was "how big is your email list?" The response was less than stellar. I asked "will you tour?" The answer: No. I asked "What's your marketing budget?" The response wasn't a good one.
To add to it, he/they wanted to only release a single.
Then he asked, what do you think about putting a video out on iTunes. I asked him: Have you ever purchased a video on iTunes? He replied: No. I let him know that it doesn't make sense to even try. One CD Baby doesn't do it and two Tunecore charges something like $80 to do it, plus an annual fee. I told him that I've been informed by those behind the scenes and in the know, that it's extremely rare to be able to sell a video on iTunes. Let alone break even, or even make money on it.
Why? Because it'll be on youtube for free. Most people want to own music, but not music videos.
After that long conversation with him, he still wasn't sure... to which I told him - if what I've told you hasn't made up your mind, then nothing will and you'll do what you want as a vanity release to please yourself. He didn't get it. Oh well. Jody that is a very strong observation and I strongly agree with you on a lot of points. I personally am a strong advocate of the percentage base model. While I do agree that for artists who happens to have a jump start in fan base and growth in sales (i.e. generating more than $100,000 a year), a flat-fee may make more sense. I also stress out the importance of quantity as well as quality. If you're an artist that has over 100+ albums, using a flat-fee model may be proven to be more expensive in the long run (i.e. up to $5,000 a year based on popular flat fee services). Percentage base (revenue-sharing model) is strong if you can provide a fair balance between the service & artist. As most would believe that giving up any portion of money to a service may be unfair. I'd like to entail that paying for access to distribution for stores that you can get in free (via direct deals) is unfair.
WaTunes - Where Your Music Is Social
|
|
|
|
We would like to keep the membership in Just Plain Folks FREE! Your donation helps support the many programs we offer including Road Trips and the Music Awards.
|
|
|
Forums118
Topics127,932
Posts1,176,769
Members21,478
| |
Most Online37,523
Jan 25th, 2020
|
|
|
"We may wear different hats, but underneath, we're all just plain folks!" -Brian Austin Whitney
|
|
|
|
