Divying up Sales

Seafroggys

Well-known member
Not sure this is the right forum, but seemed the biggest fit.

I am in the middle of working on a production that isn't the traditional 'band' production, where the agreement is we just divide the earnings equally among us. This is a production where all the musicians are paid up front. Now I highly doubt this production will be profitable anyway, *but* that being said, its good that an agreement is reached ahead of time, just in case.

So what I have figured out are two categories....producer and songwriter. The producer is funding it entirely; in a traditional record model, they would fill a combination of record label/producer. And there's the songwriters who would earn a royalty. There are two songwriters, and they've agreed to split their share 50/50.

So basically, what would be the appropriate percentages for the groups. 80/20? (producer gets 80, songwriters get 10 each). 50/50? Considering the producer is funding it, by logic they should get the bigger chunk.

What is traditional for a simple setup like this, and what would you think is fair?
 
Not sure this is the right forum, but seemed the biggest fit.

I am in the middle of working on a production that isn't the traditional 'band' production, where the agreement is we just divide the earnings equally among us. This is a production where all the musicians are paid up front. Now I highly doubt this production will be profitable anyway, *but* that being said, its good that an agreement is reached ahead of time, just in case.

So what I have figured out are two categories....producer and songwriter. The producer is funding it entirely; in a traditional record model, they would fill a combination of record label/producer. And there's the songwriters who would earn a royalty. There are two songwriters, and they've agreed to split their share 50/50.

So basically, what would be the appropriate percentages for the groups. 80/20? (producer gets 80, songwriters get 10 each). 50/50? Considering the producer is funding it, by logic they should get the bigger chunk.

What is traditional for a simple setup like this, and what would you think is fair?

First, since everyone is getting paid, I would set a fee that, the first amount of monies earned goes straight back to the person(s) who funded it + studio time. Set that amount up front. Then after that has been reached, you can set up some kind of formula(there should be some formulas out there to guide you). I would look that up and get everyone to agree on which one will be used. This is a very difficult area to comment on as there are many factors. See if BMI (BMI.com), ASCAP (ascap.com) or WIPO (wipo.org) might have something that you could use.
 
Well, everyone is getting paid except the songwriters. They're the only people on percentage. It makes sense that since they are on percentage that they get a cut from sale #1.

Most of what I've read online give absymal amounts to the songwriters. Something like 10 cents per album sold. Makes sense for a major label release, when there's hundreds of people getting paid. This is a smaller release, only 3 people are getting paid here, so I'm looking for a fairer rate.
 
Well, everyone is getting paid except the songwriters. They're the only people on percentage. It makes sense that since they are on percentage that they get a cut from sale #1.

Most of what I've read online give absymal amounts to the songwriters. Something like 10 cents per album sold. Makes sense for a major label release, when there's hundreds of people getting paid. This is a smaller release, only 3 people are getting paid here, so I'm looking for a fairer rate.

On a general scale, the reason is the writers get publishing, and that can be huge sum (Once again, my nephew who was signed to a label received a large upfront sum of money for his publishing and the rest of the band just received performance residual, he was rich[past tense], they were still broke [they still are]).

If someone else records it, performs it on stage, puts the song in a book, etc, writers' get a cut of that too. (That is why Paul McCartney has to pay to perform his songs, he doesn't own the songs for example). That is the main reason you are seeing such a small cut. But, since you don't foresee this happening, you could give everyone publishing rights, cut it all equal.

But really, you could still shop the song, the writers (owners) have a lot more flexibility. One decent hit and you could be set for life as a writer. You take a Hank Williams song, his estate gets money every time it plays, regardless of who recorded it (10% across the board).
 
Something like 10 cents per album sold.

it's actually 9.1 cents per song per album sold. If the songwriters have more than one song on the album, they get paid for each one on that album. Then they have to share that among the other co-writers. But you all can agree to different terms.

I'd be more inclined to go 50/50 with no upfront fees, especially if you're not likely to be profitable. The producer might have put up money, but the songwriters put up their songs.
 
Back
Top