Producer
Deals
by Donald S. Passman
Donald Passman is a Los
Angeles-based music attorney with the firm of Gang, Tyre, Ramer &
Brown. Specializing in music business law for over 20 years, his clients
include major publishers, record companies, film companies, managers,
producers, songwriters, and artists such as REM, Janet Jackson, Quincy
Jones, Tina Turner and Green Day. On a regular basis, we will be
excerpting from Mr. Passman's best-selling book, "All You Need To
Know About The Music Business."
"Record One" Royalties

It is customary for producers, at some point, to be paid for all records
sold, meaning that recording costs are not charged against their royalties
(while those costs are always charged against artists' royalties). These
are called record one royalties because they are paid from the first
record that the company sells. (All producers have to recoup any advances
they have received, but if you think of these advances as a prepayment of
royalties, this is the same as getting royalties on all records). The key
question is when the record one royalties are paid, and there are three
methods:

Superstar Producers

Superstar producers are paid for every record sold without recoupment of
anything (except their advances). Let's look at an example: Suppose an
artist's "all-in" royalty (artist & producer combined) is
60-cents a record, and the producer's royalty is 10-cents a record. Assume
the producer gets a $10,000 advance and that the recording costs (including
the producer's advances) are $120,000. If the producer is paid from record
one, and the album sells 150,000 units, the producer will get $15,000 in
royalties (10-cents x 150,000 units). Since he already got a $10,000
advance, this is deducted, and he gets the balance of $5,000.

| Units Sold |
150,000
|
| Producer Royalty |
x $.10
|
|
$15,000
|
| Less Advance |
- $10,000
|
| Net Payable |
$5,000
|
So as not to mislead you, you should know that it's extremely difficult
for even superstar producers to be paid from record one.
Hot Producers

Hot producers can get a royalty that is retroactive to record one after
recoupment of recording costs at the combined rate. What this means in
English is that (a) before recording costs are recouped, the producer gets
no royalties at all; (b) once the recording costs are recouped, the
producer gets paid from record one "retroactively" (meaning the
company goes back and pays on sales previously made that didn't bear
royalties at the time of sale.); and (c) the recording costs are recouped
at the artist's "all-in" rate (the combined artist &
producer rate). This is easier to see with numbers:
Assume
the same facts as in the first example. By changing the deal so that the
producer is paid retroactively, however, the producer makes less. This is
because, at 150,000 units, the artist will have only recouped a total of
$90,000 ($0.60 x 150,000=$90,000), which is short of the $120,000
recording costs. Thus, the recording costs have not been recouped, and the
producer is not entitled to any royalties. So, instead of the additional
$5,000 paid in the first example, the producer gets nothing (except, of
course, the $10,000 advance).
If
that album later sells another 50,000 copies (a total of 200,000 units),
the recording costs are now recouped (200,000 x $0.60 = $120,000 in costs),
which means the producer gets paid for all 200,000 units ($20,000, which
is $0.10 x 200,000 units), less, of course, the $10,000 advance. At this
stage, note that the producer is in the exactly same position as if he or
she had been paid from the first record sold.

Most Producers

Most producers are paid retroactively after recoupment of recording costs
at the net rate. This means that, instead of recouping at the combined
producer & artist (all-in) rate, the recoupment is only at the
artist's rate after deducting the producer (i.e. the all-in rate
"net" of the producer's royalty). In our same example, this
would mean $0.60 less the $0.10 producer's royalty, or $0.50. Thus, under
this example at 200,000 units, the producer still doesn't get any
royalties, because $0.50 x 200,000 equals only $100,000 which is short of
the $120,000 needed to recoup the recording costs.
In
this case, the producer wouldn't get his record one royalties until the
artist sells a total of 240,000 units ($0.50 x 240,000 =$120,000). Once
this sales level is reached, the producer is paid retroactively ($24,000,
which is $0.10 x 240,000), less the $10,000 advance. At this point, re is
no difference between this deal and the deals under the first two examples.

Other Royalty Computations

Except for the record one aspect, producers' royalties are customarily
calculated in exactly the same way as the artists' (except for home
video). This means they get the same packaging deductions, the same "free
goods" reduction, and, the same proportionate reduction for foreign,
budget, mid-priced, CDs, etc. For example, if an artist gets 75% of his or
her U.S. rate in England, the producer will get 75% of his or her U.S.
producer rate in England.

Home Video Royalties

For home video devices, producers generally get half of their otherwise
applicable rate. The theory is that the Master is only half of the product
(the video portion is the other half).

In our December
Mumbo Jumbo column, we will further explore producer deals and discuss
both hiring and paying the producer.

From "All You Need To Know About The
Music Business" by Donald S. Passman. ©1991, 1994, 1997 by Donald S.
Passman. Reprinted by permission of Simon & Schuster, Inc.
|