´óÏó´«Ã½

« Previous | Main | Next »

Charlotte Church and Katherine Jenkins: the millionaires hiding the financial truth for musicians

Post categories: ,Ìý

James McLaren James McLaren | 13:14 UK time, Friday, 23 April 2010

This weekend sees the Sunday Times wallow in its annual celebration of mammon, as it publishes its . Topping the list of musical millionnaires under 30 are two Welsh stars, Charlotte Church and Katherine Jenkins, each with a personal fortune estimated at £11m.

The paper makes estimates based on things like record sales, airplay, merchandising and image rights, catalogue value and so on. Both Church and Jenkins are big success stories and are a couple of Wales' biggest media stars.

However, some years ago, while working at , I heard a claim that - and don't quote me on this - something like 99% of acts never make any money. On the face of it that's a shocking figure, and one's instant reaction is incredulity.

But when one thinks a little more deeply, certain things become depressingly apparent. Tracing the ranks of artists from the basement to the peak is like a pyramid. Thousands of bands are down the bottom, writing and performing music, unsigned but gigging when they can, their payments going on diesel, pasties from service stations and the upkeep of dilapidated Transit vans.

No matter how sensible they are, those acts are losing money. It really can't be any other way.

Move up the pyramid a bit and there's a far smaller number of signed acts on small labels who maybe get some support from their label through touring costs or 'buy-ons', some marketing and distribution and so on. These acts don't sell huge amounts and it's difficult to cover costs. And it's only some of these acts who actually can do it full time; many have to balance music with jobs.

Move up again and even the small number of artists on big labels can struggle. Yes the rewards are potentially great, but a vast proportion of acts at this level are dropped. Their revenues are compromised by everything from illegal downloads to recoupable costs and it's difficult to make a living wage. Famously, old school indie band only made money from their merchandise, creating a range of t-shirt designs for their rabid fans to buy. They wisely kept their merchandise rights, but most acts are not so lucky.

So this is all very depressing, and no-one in their right mind would recommend going into performing original music as a career choice. It's simply too risky. But this is 'art' isn't it? Is it worth the almost-inevitable sacrifice and financial ruin? I talked to a few people involved in music to get their opinions.

Tom Willecombe is lead singer of the South Wales indie band . "Touring is key to any rock band," he says, "and if you don't do a load of it it'll never be anything more than an expensive hobby.

"Externally, there's not enough interest in the kind of music we play to make us a great deal of cash. We're a pretty accessible band and, on occasion - due, in part to culture's cyclical nature - what we do comes close to being in vogue, but competition is pretty fierce.

"It's a sad fact that, at the level we work at - pubs and clubs, the so-called 'toilet circuit' - the cover band is king. Cover bands make a lot more money per gig, up to 10 times what we make for a similar room, and since they don't need to record their costs are also much lower."

Willecombe puts his finger on the fact that it's difficult for original acts to compete against cover bands who - demoralisingly - are often able to bring greater audiences.

But he also believes that it's possible to change perception and find success where you look for it: "I'm pretty sure that if you can find your niche, put the work in and reign in the rock-star affectations that you can still make a respectable living from it.

"The problem many bands have is expectation management. Very few artists make a lot of money; that's the nature of capitalism - the big artists make excessively more than everyone else. However, success is very much a matter of opinion. I consider it a success to have released records that people seem to like and to have played gigs with artists that have inspired me, to people who appreciate it."

Another Newport-based band, experimental drone group Spider Kitten, have opted to simply ditch the idea of making money as an important consideration. Singer/guitarist Chi says: "After years of trying to make money out of music, or at least trying to break even, I gave up on the idea completely.

"I decided that it was more important that people hear the music than they pay for it, which is why we now make everything we release available online for free. We get a lot of respect and positive feedback about this and people will often buy the physical release after downloading it.

"I think, if anything, it's getting easier to make money from music because of digital distribution. It's certainly easier to get a finished release out into the world without huge initial costs. If I worked it out then I'd imagine being in a band has cost me thousands over the years, but you have to examine your motivation for doing it. I found that once I gave up on the idea of turning a profit I felt really liberated, and my music improved because of this."

Being so clear-minded about one's music as art and not a product is rare, though, and most acts do want to make money somehow. It's turning a hobby into a job and that's something most of us would want to do. Austen Cruickshank works at , the record company which has worked with Lostprophets, Bullet For My Valentine and currently has a roster of hopeful new rock bands.

He points to some of the reasons that bands at the level he works with find making money difficult: "I think it's harder than ever for bands to actually make money, or even break even from music. Making the transition from being an underground band playing the odd show to being in a professional band is really tough - you'll have to have a flexible job for starters. I think there's a real 'No Man's Land' between being a band with full/part time jobs and the bands who can quick their jobs and focus completely on the music."

He says that acts should ask themselves a series of questions before even embarking: "What steps can bands take towards making some money? I would say the most important thing to keep in mind is sacrifice. How much do you want it? Is this true for all the members of the band? Are you willing to not go to the pub on a Friday night and go out flyering your next gig instead? Are you willing to spend your spare time emailing promoters in other cities, asking them for a show with a decent fee?"

Having answered positively to all those, it's time to find a way of breaking even, he says. "Is it better to organise your own gigs rather than going with a promoter who is going to pay you peanuts? Do you need to move to a cheaper practice room? Do you really need to print your merch on American Apparel rather than a cheaper t-shirt?

"One of our bands, Outcry Collective, bought a Transit van and installed four bunks in it - they can now drive wherever they like and get a good night's sleep on tour. Of course there are times when you'll need to do things at a loss; working out when it's worthwhile is the key. From there, you will need to be careful with your cash - don't buy 10 tequilas with your merch money. Appoint a treasurer who will keep hold of all the cash and use it to record new music.

"Bands can still make money from music - they just have to be realistic, aware, hard working, creative, have true self belief and take the good times with the bad. A hardcore metal band probably isn't going to be as big as Charlotte Church, but that's not the point is it? If you want millions, go and audition for Simon Cowell. If you want to make real music for real people, get out there and spread the word."

Rousing words, and of course ones that anyone employed in the music industry should believe. But rousing words don't create money by themselves. Application is key, as is the environment one works in. is a Cardiff-based jazz and blues singer, so is working in a very different live music and recording environment. She about the state of the music industry, having spoken to other artists.

"The most common frustration seems to be the seemingly impossible dream to be able to earn a living through making music these days... [the internet] has been both a blessing and a curse for the music industry. It has provided the means and the engine to allow unsigned and independent artists to get their music out and promote it to the world, but it takes time, dedication and a flare for networking.

"On the other hand the music sites are saturated with thousands of artists all clambering [up] the ladder for success."

As well as the inevitable competiton inherent in the industry she also hits on the essential dilemma with which artists have to grapple: "If you want the whole package these days, success, record sales, world tours etc, apparently you need to be mindful of what the masses are buying and tailor yourself to fit the bill.

"So herein lies the double edged sword - do you strive to stay true to your heart and your music, consequently struggling to make music a sustainable career in music, or do sacrifice and compromise for success, to become something you are not to achieve your dreams of success?"

Martin Bowen of , who look after The Automatic, believes that to a certain extent the pressure that Simone talks of is exerted on acts - whether consciously or otherwise. "There's always going to be spoken and unspoken pressure on a band signed to a major label to create hit singles, whether you've already had one before or whether you are on your first few releases.

"However, I think we're entering an interesting period in the music business where bands, especially rock/alternative acts, are no longer getting major record deals and as such do not have the pressure to make hit records.

"However, in my experience, a band will quite rightly create the music it wants regardless of the pressure to create hits and it's why bands are more difficult and thankfully more interesting to work with than a solo artist having songs written and chosen for them by their label a la Simon Cowell.

"We are entering a new era in music where the smallest percentage of music ever completely dominates the charts while a massive underbelly of diverse and fascinating music lies far below. This is exciting for anyone who cares about music and a revolution as big as punk rock is brewing; while this revolution may not be televised or even get on the radio, you can be damn sure it will be all over the internet.

"The future hits are not in the charts but on the webpages which has got to be a good thing for music."

It's good that some in the industry, whether it's Bowen or Spider Kittens' Chi, believe that there are opportunities to be found in the current maelstrom. Church and Jenkins and their ilk will forever be in the top 1% of artists, making and keeping their millions, but there may be chances to open revenue streams for those further down, if the application and invention is there.

What do you think? Do you think acts will always struggle to make ends meet or does new technology give musicians an unprecedented market opportunity?

Comments

  • No comments to display yet.
Ìý

´óÏó´«Ã½ iD

´óÏó´«Ã½ navigation

´óÏó´«Ã½ © 2014 The ´óÏó´«Ã½ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.