|
|
#513955 - 04/17/08 07:56 PM
Simson - SoundExchange can't find 40,000 artists
|
Intheway
Silver Member
Registered: 04/12/06
Posts: 363
Loc: A little lower and to the left
|
Offline
|
|
John Simson gave a talk at Harvard yesterday.
A blogger has reported on it.
Chris Herot's blog
There are some pretty remarkable things in there. Its been a while since weve had Simson at a public podium, and it is clear that he hasnt lost his touch for dissembling.
First of all, there is this:
"SoundExchange brings in $140 million in revenue, of which 75% goes to the 31,000 performers they represent."
Now I think that the blogger got this wrong, and I have asked him to clarify it. I suspect that Simson said that 75% of the organization's receipts are paid out as royalties to artists AND labels.
The important thing is that SX expenses appear to be running at 25% of revenue. This is substantially higher than the 20% that SX supposedly voted as a self-imposed limit on expenses (and one that would not raise eyebrows at the IRS). The new figure does raise a question about how SX's board could unanimously vote to fund musicFIRST when they can't even honor the limits they set on themselves. Of course, the SX board doesn't have to answer the question, so they can ignore it and pretend no one really noticed.
Then Simson apparently said that SX has failed to track down 40,000 other artists.
40,000 unfound artists.
Wow.
They are paying 31,000. They are not paying 40,000, and they know the names of that 40,000, so God knows how many they miss in sampling that would increase that number.
Imagine that. I got on their case when their "unfound artist" list constituted 20% of the artists they are supposed to pay, and people said I was doing it just to be annoying. Not paying 55% of the artists they can identify is reprehensible. The number of actual "unfound" artists is FIVE TIMES the size of the list they post on their website.
Its probably even higher, given that they count unfound groups just once, regardless of the number of members, but when you admit to 40,000, how much worse can reality be?
Being unable to find 55% of the artists who have been reported after six years isn't a long tail problem, unless the tail begins where the neck leaves off. It is either sheer incompetence or willful indifference to the charter it was given. If anyone at SX was capable of shame, this ought to provoke it. I'm not holding my breath.
But on the other hand, can you imagine how much worse their performance would be if we didn't know how hard Mr. Dick Huey is working within SX to improve things? After all, that's what he promised he would do when he finally admitted he wasnt going to keep the promise he made to answer any question put to him.
It would appear, however, that Mr. Huey isn't getting much help, if any at all.
Isn't it time that SoundExchange give up the pretense that they want to pay artists at all?
Oh. Did I mention sampling?
So did Mr. Simson, even though the SX website continues to pretend it doesn't really happen. Check their website. They never mention they sample.
Mr. Simson revealed that when SoundExchange compared the results of using the sampling done by ASCAP and BMI to getting actual census data, they found that the sampling method missed 41% of the artists and 26% of the titles.
Wow. Again.
41% percent of artists missed in the samples.
26% of the titles missed.
Boy. If 59% is a passing grade, Bear Stearns would still be in business.
So, we've got a collective entity that can't be bothered to pay 55% of the artists it knows about, and untold tens of thousands it can't identify. And it appears that the folks who ostensibly know best about sampling of musical performances only get 3 out of 5 artists identified, and 3 out of 4 songs.
Tomorrows got to be better for artists, because it really doesnt get worse than this.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#514066 - 04/18/08 01:30 AM
Re: Simson - SoundExchange can't find 40,000 artists
[Re: Intheway]
|
lowlight
Silver Member
Registered: 09/24/01
Posts: 379
Loc: CA
|
|
Offline
|
|
great post.
SX have a LONG way to go, and unfortunately it doesn't seem like they have any interest in getting their act together. what real reason do they have?
and dick huey is good people - I trust him - but he's got his hand's full that's for sure...
ll
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#514099 - 04/18/08 08:01 AM
Re: Simson - SoundExchange can't find 40,000 artists
[Re: lowlight]
|
tomhampton
Platinum Member
Registered: 11/29/06
Posts: 1117
|
|
Offline
|
|
simson was at a NARAS event in philadelphia last summer, and in an auditorium with over 100 people in it, not one of them chimed in about this (myself included, i'm ashamed to say)...but then again, he was on a panel with several other people and didn't really have much to say, save for reciting the company mission and getting out of the way.
are they publishing a list like they did the last time this came up, or is the opportunity to try to weed through something like that passed at this point?
_________________________
"...i used to be disgusted...but now i'm just amused..."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#514141 - 04/18/08 09:37 AM
Re: Simson - SoundExchange can't find 40,000 artists
[Re: Intheway]
|
Mister_Tog
Gold Member
Registered: 10/25/02
Posts: 930
Loc: Nod
|
|
Offline
|
|
Sorry for being dense, but when they say that they are unable to identify an artist, does this mean that they are not able to track plays, or does it just mean that have tracked plays but don't know where to send the statements?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#514218 - 04/18/08 10:47 AM
Re: Simson - SoundExchange can't find 40,000 artis
[Re: tomhampton]
|
Intheway
Silver Member
Registered: 04/12/06
Posts: 363
Loc: A little lower and to the left
|
|
Offline
|
|
are they publishing a list like they did the last time this came up, or is the opportunity to try to weed through something like that passed at this point?
I'm sure full list of the 40,000 names somewhere, but if SoundExchange past practice is any indication, the information on it is "proprietary."
The current list on the website (which manages to freeze up every time I try to check the FAQ) is "only" 7,800 names long. These are the artists they haven't been able to find [b]and[b] who are having money leeched from their accounts on the basis of the near-secret unpublicized forfeitures SoundExchange engages in. Those 7,800 names have been on the list for at least three years. The other 32,000 are newer.
SoundExchange has been able to reduce that published list by about 250 names in the last six months. That 250 includes about 30 artists I've sent to them in that period. At that rate, it will take SoundExchange about 80 years to find the 40,000 artists, if they even bother to try.
Gee, I wish Memrox was still around to tell us how good a job SoundExchange is doing finding artists now that they are admitting to 40,000 "unfound."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#514303 - 04/18/08 12:02 PM
Re: Simson - SoundExchange can't find 40,000 artis
[Re: Mister_Tog]
|
Intheway
Silver Member
Registered: 04/12/06
Posts: 363
Loc: A little lower and to the left
|
|
Offline
|
|
Sorry for being dense, but when they say that they are unable to identify an artist, does this mean that they are not able to track plays, or does it just mean that have tracked plays but don't know where to send the statements?
It means they know who the artist is, they don't know where to send the statements. It doesn't appear they are looking real hard, either.
A little background might help put the scope of this admission in the proper context.
Last March, John Simson appeared on the VR during the discussion about the CRB decision on Internet royalty rates. He said that he was happy to answer any questions, but that he needed to start by correcting a misapprehension I had repeated in an earlier post.
In that post, I questioned SoundExchange's decision to set aside a "reserve" of 40% of the royalty money allocated to artists for purposes of paying claims by artists who were then not registered with them. If, I asked, SoundExchange knew who was being played (as their FAQ stated and as their spokespeople had repeatedly trumpeted in interviews -"if you get played, you get paid."), there was no need for a general reserve. Just put the specific dollars and cents they earn in the unregistered artist accounts and go find them. You don't need an unallocated reserve at all.
Simson said that SE had to base royalty allocations on samples because Webcasters were not providing them with detailed playlist data for them to make a complete and accurate payout based on a full census of track plays. A reserve was necessary because SoundExchange could not be certain what artists might come forward to be paid and how much they were entitled to.
When I challenged Simson to show me where this was explained on the SoundExchange website, he disappeared from VR.
Last April, I wrote him privately to ask him how the sampling was conducted so that I could explain it to some of my clients who know they get played on Internet stations but who have yet to receive a statement or a check.
He promised me an answer "soon."
In June, when I asked when "soon" was going to be, he told me that he had turned over the task of responding to my question to Neeta Ragoowansi, SE's Director of Artist and Label Relations (aka The Minister of Fun). Ms. Ragoowansi wrote to me and said I could expect an answer "soon."
After several more emails asking about progress on explaining the way SE samples, and not getting any answers, Mr. Simson finally admitted in September, 2007, that they weren't going to answer me directly ("What happens in SoundExchange . . ."), but would be updating the FAQ on the SE website "soon" to give everyone the information I was seeking.
Here we are, 13 months later, and there's been no FAQ update that mentions sampling, and the website still insists that if you get played once, you get credit for it.
So, there is really no evidence that SE gives a damn if artists are paid or not, or if they know how it happens. The RIAA-appointed "artist representatives" on the SE Board are either happy with this situation, or powerless to prevent it.
So, we really don't have a clue if the "40,000" is the actual number or not. It is what they admit to. We know that SoundExchange engages in some really obvious number juggling when it comes to artist accounts.
40% of the entries on the published "unfound artist" list are groups. The other 60% are solo performers. On the basis of a sample survey I did a number of years ago for a different purpose, I estimated the number of individuals entitled to be considered members of a group at one time or another during the recording career of the group was about 3.5. Simon & Garfunkel are 2, the Beatles are 4, Fleetwood Mac is about 3,000, and so on. Be that as it may, if SE can't find any of them, the group is one "unfound" unit.
However, once a group registers, unless arrangements are made to cut a single check for everyone in the group (as in some cases where the group is still active and with the original recording lineup), SE cuts checks for each member individually, and counts each one as an individual artist account.
So, comparing the 31,000 artists they send checks to to the 40,000 they don't is not really an accurate comparison, because the 40,000 unfound artists include multiple member groups. Using my estimates, there are actually about 80,000 individuals they can identify but can't find. Comparing apples to apples, it is pretty clear that SE is doing an even worse job than they admit to.
Now, until Simson admitted to 40,000 at Harvard, that number was pretty much a secret, and I suspect he used it only because he, and SE, really don't care anymore how anyone reacts. It fits right in with the organization's real agenda, which is clear from their actions.
Here are four:
1. They finance and promote musicFIRST, a campaign to establish a performance royalty on terrestrial radio. By published figures, 90% of this royalty will go into the coffers of the four RIAA labels (there's not even the hint of a promise of direct payment to artists like there is with Internet webcasters who pay the statutory royalty, and the bill that would establish this royalty doesn't cover the subject of payments to artists). Why the "independent label" directors like Mr. Huey and the "artist representative" directors thought this potential windfall for the RIAA was a good way to spend SE money has not been explained by any of them.
No one at SE has yet addressed the issue that a terrestrial radio royalty appears to be outside SE's charter to deal with Internet and satellite radio royalties.
2. They have sent out numerous email appeals to the registered artists to get them to support the CRB royalty rates by writing to their Congress to defeat IREA. On the other hand, in the entire history of SE, they have not sent a single email to their registered artists asking for help in finding unregistered artists. It is clear that artists are there to be mobilized so more money can be brought in, and not mobilized when the issue is paying more money out.
In the same sense, I find it peculiar that an entity that is charged with collecting and distributing royalties from Internet broadcasts has made such piss-poor use of the Internet to find artists. There are thousands of websites, message boards, forums and social nodes where millions of people who love music gather. As best as I can determine, SE has gone to ONE of them to talk about finding artists, and that was to complain about me publicizing the forfeiture. (That post was subsequently removed by the poster.) The last time we went through this subject, posting the link to the list here on VR resulted in a couple dozen artists being found. Somehow, SoundExchange is either not paying attention, or intentionally ignoring this resource.
My money is on intentionally ignoring.
3. There has not been one press release or other publicity for the latest forfeiture of funds from those "unfound artists." You might think they don't want to find people to pay so they can forfeit more money. What other reason is there for not making noise about it?
4. Despite consistently referring to artists as "members" in press releases and public statements, SE doesn't allow artists to be members. Only copyright holders can be members. If an artist holds his or her own copyrights in the recordings, they can be members (even if there is no one on the Board who is accountable to them in that capacity). If they don't hold the copyrights, they can't be members. There's a plantation mentality at work here, and the pretense of nine "artist representatives" on the Board, none of whom are accountable to artists, only reinforces the second class status of artists.
There are more, but I think the point is made.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#514452 - 04/18/08 03:22 PM
Re: Simson - SoundExchange can't find 40,000 artis
[Re: Intheway]
|
Adrian
Gold Member
Registered: 05/19/02
Posts: 531
Loc: Pacific Northwest (N.A.)
|
|
Offline
|
|
Excellent, and valuable, analyses and reportage, Intheway. Thank you!
Here's hoping that as long as this remains on the public record, the news will reach a larger and larger audience.
_________________________
"Why music?" "Why breathing?"
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#514489 - 04/18/08 04:27 PM
Re: Simson - SoundExchange can't find 40,000 artis
[Re: Adrian]
|
atsixesandsevens
Member
Registered: 06/02/07
Posts: 6
Loc: Canada
|
|
Offline
|
|
when the list was posted here forever ago I glanced and saw some people I knew, told them and they're all off the list.
It's evident that no one is actually looking for any of the lost artists since it took me all of 5 mintues to locate at least one active band per letter thanks to google and myspace. I'm sure a college kid could be getting credit if they really wanted to track down the "lost" artists.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#514496 - 04/18/08 04:37 PM
Re: Simson - SoundExchange can't find 40,000 artis
[Re: atsixesandsevens]
|
corey3rd
Diamond Member
Registered: 06/23/03
Posts: 14836
Loc: The Last House on the Right
|
|
Offline
|
|
all he cares about is his cushy job and burning up the expense report. What does he care about a starving blues musician? And if you are registered with SoundExchange, you should be able to enter your account to find out about your plays, how much has been collected and a date when the next check is due to be cut. That's stuff that can easily be done with a database. But why let us see the Wizards at work when it's easier to hit the "soon" button on their keyboard?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#514521 - 04/18/08 05:34 PM
Re: Simson - SoundExchange can't find 40,000 artis
[Re: Intheway]
|
QueenSheDevilCow
Platinum Member
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 1999
|
|
Offline
|
|
Great post. Very interesting.
This may come across as heartless, but wouldn't it be more realistic for the burden be on the artists and labels to update SoundExchange when their contact information changes?
Tracking down 80,000 constantly changing addresses would require a small army. I would rather see SoundExchange dedicate their resources to tracking plays then spend their time scouring thousands of myspace profiles to figure out how to contact the artists.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: JGFlash
|
|
