Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Audio, iTS, Apple
Vivendi wants bigger cut of iTunes pie
Poor, poor Vivendi Universal, Apple is really pulling a fast one on them (which I assume is why they didn't renew their iTunes contract). Vivendi CEO Jean-Bernard Levy said that the contract between Apple and content providers is 'indecent.' It would seem that Vivendi Universal, and other content providers, only get .70 Euros out of the .99 Euro price of tracks on iTunes. It is enough to make you shed a tear, right?I imagine that Levy will only be happy when Apple pays Vivendi 2 euros for each .99 euro track as well as a few euros for each iPod sold (it worked for the Zune!). My question to Mr. Levy is this: out of that .70 euro that you get from Apple for one of your artist's work, how much is going to the artist? I'm betting that amount is the truly indecent one.
Thanks to everyone who sent this in.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
itsmeee said 11:31PM on 9-24-2007
what a bunch of crooks. If I were Steve Jobs I would just start signing bands to Apple! I can imagine it, Apple would have DRM free, high bitrate songs for $.49 a song! Hell if they had DRM free high bitrate songs I'd still pay the 99cents a song for those features! The record companies are just fucking themselves over and its pissing me off!
Reply
Reg said 9:33PM on 9-24-2007
> "out of that .70 euro ... how much is going to the artist? I'm betting that amount is the truly indecent one."
How completely true that is.
That's the whole problem. By signing contracts, record companies buy music as a wholesale commodity, package it, promote it, and on-sell it for a huge profit. They own the rights, they dictate the terms, they screw the artist and the customer.
The day artists wake up and realize that they could get far more by doing their own promotion - using the internet to build off their live performances and create buzz - and going direct, is the day the record companies will lose their monopoly, prices will fall, and artists will get the returns they deserve.
It's possible to avoid signing with a record company and still sell through iTunes... The CD Baby service has a flat $35 setup fee, and keeps only 9% of sales, the other 91% goes to the artist.
If more artists went this route, the massive power of the record companies would be relegated to selling their back catalog (which not actually insubstantial).
Reply
Thomas said 8:39PM on 9-24-2007
Seems fair enough but then Apple can send Universal a bill for the bandwidth of downloading songs, the hosting of the store, the maintenance of the store, the development of the store and all other ancillary costs related to selling their wares. Or Universal can go swivel.
Reply
Reg said 8:41PM on 9-24-2007
> "out of that .70 euro ... how much is going to the artist? I'm
betting that amount is the truly indecent one."
How completely true that is.
That's the whole problem. By signing contracts, record companies buy music as a wholesale commodity, package it, promote it, and on-sell it for a huge profit. They own the rights, they dictate the terms, they screw the artist and the customer.
The day artists wake up and realize that they could get far more by doing their own promotion - using the internet to build off their live performances and create buzz - and going direct, is the day the record companies will lose their monopoly, prices will fall, and artists will get the
returns they deserve.
It's possible to avoid signing with a record company and still sell through iTunes... The CD Baby service has a flat $35 setup fee, and keeps only 9% of sales, the other 91% goes to the artist.
If more artists went this route, the massive power of the record companies would be relegated to selling their back catalog (which is not actually insubstantial).
Reply
Victor Agreda Jr said 9:20PM on 9-24-2007
Reg, the problem with that thinking is what stops a lot of revolutions from fomenting. I mean, while Britney isn't the greatest performer of our age (or any age, for that matter), I think a lot of "artists" see her $700k+/mo. paycheck and think "dang, that'd be cool."
So can you point to a band or artists who has achieved that level of success by self-promotion?
The real problem isn't just greed on behalf of the labels, or the media empires, but also the limited visions of the artists and their management early in the game. I agree with you in prinicple, but what are the chances some really great band who is unsigned is going to get the kind of exposure a media behemoth like Vivendi/Universal/NBC/ (and for all I know) Jim'sDiscountTacoShopsUnlimited can provide?
Sadly, while we were all busy tooling around on Napster the industry was busy consolidating its power. Yes, we have the tools and the talent, but so far "we the people" lack a true leader of this revolution... But hope springs eternal.
Reply
Reg said 9:43PM on 9-24-2007
@Victor,
Agreed. It's a testament to the marketing power of the industry that grows celebrities from the merest seeds of talent!
However, if an artist is getting 5 cents in the dollar by signing, and another artist is getting 70c in the dollar, they don't actually need to sell as many copies to earn the same return, so don't need the same level of promotion.
Yes, shining examples of wildly successful independents are few and far between.
But if no one ever storms the Bastille, the revolution will never begin...
Reply
tim said 1:24AM on 9-25-2007
@itsmeee -
HA! you should tell apple to start their own label and see what happens. ;-)
this matter is the same as micrsoft and IE, until something HUGE happens, nothing is going to change and the wrong people will be able to make the wrong decisions to dictate our lives.
and if anyone thinks we are pathetic for caring, this is art, and we need it. it cant be ruled over by anyone, especially not for monetary purposes.
Reply
Mo said 3:28AM on 9-25-2007
As I wrote a couple of days ago on my blog (in a post entitled “Apple: Five years on”):
“Having squared things up nicely with Apple Corps, Apple Inc. went the whole hog and offered artists what they wanted all along: a straightforward distribution platform. iTunes is the king of music, and through a partnership with Amazon, you can have a physical copy of full albums that you download sent to you for an extra $2.99 (or £2.99 in the UK—some things never change). The iTunes front page showcases new (rather than popular) talent on a weekly basis, and the iTunes Store and iTunes WiFi Store let you buy tickets for gigs.”
http://nevali.net/2007/09/apple-five-years-on/
Maybe it'll come true after all :)
Reply
Fredster said 6:47AM on 9-26-2007
Vivendi/Universal are big crooks for being so greedy, but oh poor little Jobsy and Apple who have so small margins on their iPods/iPhones, we gladly pay them and shut up. Geez fanboys, give it a rest!
Reply