bdgr
July 13, 2001, 9:18pm
21
*Originally posted by Bill H. *bdgr wrote
No, dude, read it again. The Manager was paid 15% of the Advance (15% of 250k = $37.5k). (plus 15% of tour and merchandising, but that’s not what we’re talking about.)
What I’m suggesting is that he should be paid on a percentage of the profit, i.e. What the band gets .
The manager is financially incentivised to get a big advance. Well, that’s great, but it isn’t everything. In the example cited, the manager made money and the band didn’t. Had he been incentivised on what the band made, he may have made better choices.
Again, I know nothing of the business of music. It could very well be that there aren’t choices in the matter, that bands are forced to spend more money than is reasonable on production costs out of their own pockets. But I suspect a business-savy musician could do pretty good by watching the bottom line in the deal described. Or paying someone (i.e. a manager) to do that for him. **
I see what you are saying, he is payed 15% of the gross, not the net that the band sees in the end.
Good point. Unfortuneately most managers won’t do work off of the net. At least not the ones with the contacts and experiance that they hired this guy for.