Music Licensing Revenue Drops in 2007

I saw this story and wanted to highlight the relevant passage for my readers:

"Music fell by the largest margin (5.5%) to $125 million from $132 million in 2006..."

I've highlighted this before, but let me address this issue again.  This is no time for any artist, songwriter, label, or music publisher to be turning down revenue-enhancing opportunities.  This is no time to rest on one's laurels when a licensing request comes in and sit on it until the requestor is forced to go to another party to get what they need.  There is a glut of quality music supply, so the licensee, the buyer, holds the upper hand, not the licensor.

But licensees, as George Costanza might say - you've got hand.

Comments

[Yadgyu]

Music licensing is a waste of time.

Most libraries will never license a song for you. The ones that do will usually pay no money upfront because they provide a blanket license. You end up getting paid backend royalties. These royalties are pathetically low for cable TV placements (cents on the dollar).

I would advice anyone serious about making a living from licensing music to throw in the towel. The competition is huge and you do not stand a chance if you are over 40 years old. It may hurt to hear such advice, but it is true. Young composers make current sounding music and will work for free just for the excitement of hearing their music in the background of “Keeping Up With The Kardashians”.

Anyone who has licensed music for more than 10 years can tell you that their earnings from royalties are going down and the upfront payments are all but non-existent. If you have a few thousand songs sitting on your hard drive, you stand half a chance of making a few hundred dollars a year. Anything less will net you enough money for a few items off of the McDonalds dollar menu every three months.