[Fmpro] CPA music?

[Mark Northam]

On 11/27/07 10:51 AM, "James Ryan" <jeryan at optonline.net> wrote:

> According to an ASCAP rep who prefers not to be quoted on this list,
> when ASCAP raised the score rate to 20% from 16% it wasn't enough to
> make the underscore gang happy, and it was a big whack to the
> songwriters.  The earning songwriters are fewer in number than the
> composers, so they had to shoulder a fairly hefty royalty cut to
> compensate for the upgrade to the much larger number of score
> composers.

I always am skeptical of anyone who is afraid to say things publicly, but is
more than happy to state them "as fact" privately. It's at the root of so
many of the problems in this industry, especially with the PROs where there
is such a huge lack of facts and everybody is left trying to fill in the
blanks. 

Personally, on more than one occasion, I've been told of PRO officials
instructing members to dismiss anything and everything they read on the
FMPRO list, especially data coming from myself, as lies and falsehoods. But
not once has any PRO official ever factually challenged a single word I've
written. This kind of "knife in the back" behavior is deplorable, and a sign
of desperate, cowardly people who can't win on the issues, and instead
choose to "discredit the messenger". The fact that ASCAP officials who
monitor this list refuse to answer so many questions posed to them on this
list also makes the case for the integrity of what is posted here. If the
facts revealed here were wrong, any responsible business would step in and
correct people. Have we seen a single "correction" from ASCAP? Never.

Simply put, they have too high a price to pay for engaging informed members
on the way ASCAP treats composers, because they have an indefensible case.
There is absolutely no financial justification that has ever been presented
by ASCAP or any of its officials to justify the horrific weighting formula
that decimates the value of score music. There is no justification for
killing watermarking at ASCAP. There's no justification for lousy tracking
of CPA music. The only reason all of these are done is fairly obvious: more
money for the songwriters. But is ASCAP willing to present one shred of
financial or statistical evidence to support this "claim"? Never. Not once.
Nothing. Nada. All we hear is deafening silence as they apparently hope the
latest round of embarrassing disclosures and revealed information will blow
over and they can get back to the EXPO or whatever other sideshow they're
promoting (with our money) to create the perception that they are fair,
accountable, transparent, etc etc. while their back office works overtime to
funnel every penny possible to the songwriters - especially the "hit"
songwriters. In other words, their only way "out" is to remain silent and
take their lumps.  

James, I'd like to ask you to ask your ASCAP rep to supply some facts and
figures to back up the claim about the number of earnings songwriters being
fewer in number than the composers. With the prevalence of song on TV today,
that's something that needs clarifying. While the number of earning
songwriters are fewer in number, so are the instances of song (than score),
so I need some more data to fully understand the facts here.

And if your rep is unwilling to provide these figures, that's reason enough
in my book to heavily discount any statements from that rep. We are working
in a large information vacuum with the PROs, and for them to state facts
without any numerical references just doesn't wash. We've been deceived too
many times, and there have been too many assumptions made by all sides in
this controversy regarding broadcast and member numbers and statistics.

Time for some good ole hard, cold data!

Best,

Mark Northam


---------------------------------
Mark Northam, CEO
Global Media Development Group

http://www.FilmMusicInstitute.com - Film Music Courses and Seminars

1-800-774-3700 ext. 702 / 310-645-9000 ext. 702
http://www.gmdgroup.com
Yahoo/Skype: marknortham  /  AIM: mnortham