November 25, 2018 – I hope everyone has sufficiently recovered from their Thursday meals and festivities, or for the lucky few, that you’re still eating and having festivities. And let’s not forget the reason for this holiday, to give thanks.

There are many things to give thanks for. Personally, I’m thankful to still have all my loved ones on planet Earth for yet another year. I’m thankful to be in a mostly good mood these days. I’m forever thankful for those, human and animal, who love me. And I’m thankful you all indulge me in visiting with me in this place. I’m sure many people are thankful for those same things, but music artists, at least those with Universal, should be thankful for … Taylor Swift.

Months ago, I saw news that Taylor Swift’s contract with her long-time label, Big Machine Records, expired. Taylor was a free agent for a while, and I wondered if she was going to make her own label. Turns out, she was shopping. She landed at Universal, and as a part of her deal, required Universal to pay royalties to all Universal artists if Universal sells its shares in Spotify.

I’ve read several articles, but what that means sounds like a story out of Van Halen’s history. I’ve always heard Van Halen didn’t make any money for a long time, not really understanding why, other than they were charged costs. Apparently, that’s the deal, meaning that’s how it works. Artists receive an advance, meaning money up front, to sign. Then the record company invests in making the artists’ records – recording, promotion, distribution cots, touring costs, but recoups all of those amounts before the artists receive royalties. Also, apparently, the record companies own the entire process, so they can, and do, charge inflated amounts to interrelated companies for these various cost items. There aren’t so many labels, so the competition is lessened on the artists’ end, with the record company pretty much controlling all the money. Honestly, that traditional model makes me wonder why Taylor didn’t stay with the indie label Big Machine, unless it got gobbled up (note the Thanksgiving reference) by one of the biggies, but I couldn’t find anything on that deal.

Then, of course, there’ Spotify. I really don’t know how the artists get paid from Spotify, but from what I’ve gathered, that’s just another income stream that goes onto the account, with the labels owning shares in Spotify (I mean why not). Spotify eventually went public, and as part of its IPO, the labels agreed as part of that IPO to share any capital gains from an eventual sale of their Spotify shares with the artists in their catalogs. The problem is the terms of that IPO deal did not state if the payments to the artists would actually be made in the form of a check, or if the payment would merely be on an account held for when a particular artist pays back the costs carried on the artist’s account.

Taylor’s deal with Universal requires all artists to get paid on any sale of Universal’s Spotify shares, meaning the artist will get a check, not simply an entry on their accounting. Who knows how many artists this will affect, and who knows how or when Universal will sell its Spotify shares? Perhaps this is Taylor’s way of changing the long-held methodology of accounting, one step, in one area, but a step. Who knows her reason, but I would like to think she’s trying to help the smaller musician for the sake of music. Whatever the reason, I think that’s a nice thing she did.

Here’s a tribute to her, the making of her song I Did Something Bad. I think that title sums up her move with Universal. And on behalf of the indie musicians of Universal, thanks, Taylor.