Justin Bieber Says Fukk an LLC, Closes in on $200million deal to sell his ENTIRE music catalog

[UncleTomFord15]

As racist as he is, it's actually pretty impressive tbh. Dude isn't even 30 yet and has remained relevant for damn near 15 years.

 

[Rembrandt]

Let's take an artist with an above average audience:

Sorry, but posting meek was already the wrong example.

The services don't pay..."right now". And they can't afford to hold out to when they do, because they might not be popping in the 2-10 years when that price model changes. Private Equity can.

No, that isn't streamings fault. That's labels fault. Labels take majority of the income that you get from streaming and while, yes, the amount is low for a stream - it's the profit splits that streaming platforms do and the overall cut that the records labels take that makes it so the money doesn't go to artists.

I just think it's a combination of things rather than just streaming being the Boogeyman.

The question is where aren’t they gettin played? These songs are still gettin radio spin, if u go to bars, malls, sporting events they play shyt like this between timeouts etc.

Haven't heard any of these songs in public for a while unless I play them and I've been out. Haven't heard them on the radio either for a very long time and I'm an avid and vocal pop music fan.

When Bruce Springsteen or Bob Dylan is selling their music, that should tell you...Streaming; the primary way to reach listeners now...isn't paying what it should

Or it means this is a great opportunity for them to have immediately access to large terms of cash for them and their family considering they're 70-80 years old.

Bob Dylan was supposedly making $15 million dollars a year off his music. He sold his catalog for $400+ million and supposedly sold his master's for another $150 million. In a year, he got what would have took 36 years to make if his catalog kept supposedly making $15 mil a year

Is $15 mil a year insignificant? It's 36 years. He could have sold it because it would be easier for the family after death rather than estate arguments and fights like numerous families and them potentially being taken advantage of.

But I wouldn't call $15 mil a year off streaming/sales as passive income to be insidious

 

[Vandelay]

Sorry, but posting meek was already the wrong example.



No, that isn't streamings fault. That's labels fault. Labels take majority of the income that you get from streaming and while, yes, the amount is low for a stream - it's the profit splits that streaming platforms do and the overall cut that the records labels take that makes it so the money doesn't go to artists.

I just think it's a combination of things rather than just streaming being the Boogeyman.





Haven't heard any of these songs in public for a while unless I play them and I've been out. Haven't heard them on the radio either for a very long time and I'm an avid and vocal pop music fan.



Or it means this is a great opportunity for them to have immediately access to large terms of cash for them and their family considering they're 70-80 years old.

Bob Dylan was supposedly making $15 million dollars a year off his music. He sold his catalog for $400+ million and supposedly sold his master's for another $150 million. In a year, he got what would have took 36 years to make if his catalog kept supposedly making $15 mil a year

Is $15 mil a year insignificant? It's 36 years. He could have sold it because it would be easier for the family after death rather than estate arguments and fights like numerous families and them potentially being taken advantage of.

But I wouldn't call $15 mil a year off streaming/sales as passive income to be insidious

Fair points, but then why is everyone from Dream, Kanye, John Legend, and Justin Bieber selling when they have potentially 40+ years of life left? I agree it's a combination of things, but when when someone like Kanye who has been a top 20 most popular artist for 20 years is trying to shop his catalog because he's not making more than 5 million a year on streaming, that is indicative of the business model for streaming.

It's maximizing what they think they would make over 20-40 years and getting it now, knowing that their catalogs relevance will deteriorate in the next 5-10 years and streaming in it's current state won't pay shyt.

 

[Savvir]

I think its foolish and short sided.





Obviously that multi-billion dollar corporation that is buying those rights intends to flip his catalog like bricks from mexico. They arent in the business of taking losses. Watch warner bros or sony publishing make 750mil from this decision. While the remainder of bieber's career makes only 50mil for him.

They are in the position to make money because they can pair the music with other IP that they wouldn't pair it with if they had to license it from Bieber.

Music that's not streaming heavy gets less valuable the older it gets. Unless you have plug with a corporation, your music stops making any significant money 2-5 years after it drops. Bieber ain't Michael Jackson or prince. How many classic tracks does he even have that people are streaming en masse or paying for?

How many of his hits will still be big songs in 10-15years?

What experience do you have in the entertainment industry?

 

[Rembrandt]

but when when someone like Kanye who has been a top 20 most popular artist for 20 years is trying to shop his catalog because he's not making more than 5 million a year on streaming, that is indicative of the business model for streaming.

For the artists before this, I think it's because they're confident they can develop another catalog. So if your backlog isn't performing as well anymore and you can make maximum profit, while not, instead of dedicating time, money and resources to generate more money for it? Dream, Bieber, and John Legend aren't retiring anytime soon and for two of them, a lot of their work is behind the scenes anyways. Bieber hasn't even hit his adult r&b phase while still showing his brand is strong and viable. A resurgence for him wouldn't be surprising.

The lump sum is taxed lower than the general revenue and I may be wrong, but you also still have the ability to rerecord if you want.


Ye is entirely different situation and selling his shyt up front would be best for him bc he'll never see a bunch of money from his music because every song has 4+ writers, expensive samples which credits all of those singers and producers as writers, etc. His music is just generally expensive overall bc of how much he collaborates. Which is why he was trying to get so much money up front for each album and it increased as he released albums (according to the contracts he released). Him selling is cashing out and wiping his hands free of that


Not to mention, he also lost billions of dollars and is still presumably fighting, not only an adidas/GAP lawsuit, but also multiple settlements for damn near everything now from Donda 2 samples (he released commercially without clearing, antisemitism/sexism/etc settlements, not paying studios/mixers/masters)

Him selling his contract shouldn't be indicative of anything more than him needing money considering how much his old stuff still gets used in media

 

[ABlackMan]

Congrats to dude for picking up a 200 piece, I wonder what the play is for Hipgnosis buying all these catalogs

The answer is in your wonder my son

 

[Rembrandt]

Congrats to dude for picking up a 200 piece, I wonder what the play is for Hipgnosis buying all these catalogs

Gonna be bought out by a media company down the line or sell it piecemeal, but I could see them selling to a record label or a company like Netflix/HBO/etc so they'll be able to license endlessly

 

[Cakebatter]

Selling his catalog is smart. The music industry is in a massive bubble. Spotify still has not made a profit, so once they go down (And they will) so does all this groups buying up catalogs. Bieber will then be able to buy back his catalog for pennies on the dollar.

 

[Hawaiian Punch]

This is generational wealth.

 

[Rembrandt]

Spotify still has not made a profit, so once they go down (And they will)

If you're somehow right, you should short it bc analysts got Spotify doing nothing but growing exponentially this decade as they expand outside the HS

 

[WaveGang]

I wonder what drugs he gna buy wit the money

 

[Pegasus Jackson]

His catalogue will be about as hot as Tiffany's or Debbie Gibson's are now in 20 years (ice cold). Little fruit cake is making the right choice.

 

[OnlyOneBoss]

Honestly it makes sense he isn’t as young as he use to be he may not have another hit in him.

JB still huge breh I hate to have to break it to you.

 

[Denzel_Saucegton]

Ursherrrr sitting in the cut

 

[Cakebatter]

If you're somehow right, you should short it bc analysts got Spotify doing nothing but growing exponentially this decade as they expand outside the HS

Market share isn't everything. Even if you gain the majority of market share, you still have to ultimately turn a profit.

Also AI is about to completely disrupt the music licensing industry. Businesses like Gyms, Restaurants, Retailers, etc will soon use ultra-cheap AI generated music that simply mimics Justin Bieber's style rather than paying to license actual Bieber tracks.