diffusionx
Gold Member
If the song blows up and people stream it on Spotify, he gets the money. Rockstar only gets the right to keep it in GTA, not every platform ever lol.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Martyn Ware, a member of 80's synthpop band Heaven 17, was offered by Rockstar $7,500 to license the song Temptation in perpetuity [He lied, $22,500]
- Thread starter ManaByte
- Start date
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Celebs do Superbowl halftime shows for free due to the giant exposure it gets them keeping them in the limelight. Long term success.
This noname band (checking their discography wiki they were popular in UK and Ireland 40 years ago), should had taken the money. He's 68 years old. Take the money.
It's like giving in to a deal to Walmart for long term payoffs. They play hardball and get a good price off a supplier. In return, they sell it, hope it sells great and next thing you know other stores notice it and want it too. And if it does well, Walmart wants to buy more products off you. The payoff pie expands.
This Ware guy thinks he's Coke or Pepsi trying to command what he wants as if he's Taylor Swift.
This noname band (checking their discography wiki they were popular in UK and Ireland 40 years ago), should had taken the money. He's 68 years old. Take the money.
It's like giving in to a deal to Walmart for long term payoffs. They play hardball and get a good price off a supplier. In return, they sell it, hope it sells great and next thing you know other stores notice it and want it too. And if it does well, Walmart wants to buy more products off you. The payoff pie expands.
This Ware guy thinks he's Coke or Pepsi trying to command what he wants as if he's Taylor Swift.
Last edited:
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
Musicians are notoriously smart business people.
Peroroncino
Member
yeah no kidding, dude should've been kissing them in the hand while accepting, his work would get so much renewed exposure, now all that he's gonna get is 1 day drama in woke media
JerryinSoCal
Member
Plus it's just one song of many to be part of an in game radio station, they aren't going to use it to market the game or make it the main theme or something.
cormack12
Gold Member
Congratz, you just saved yourself receiving $7,500 dude.
I never get this attitude tbh. Guess what, you're likely to be one of about 600 songs. You'll have a portion of players who just skip your song anyway because they think it's shit, some will never even hear the station you're on and some play with radio off and their own tunes (me).
Recent history shows the effect of having an 80s classic revived like Kate Bush etc.
Profile pic tells you everything you need to know about this person is likely to engage in any type of discussion.
I never get this attitude tbh. Guess what, you're likely to be one of about 600 songs. You'll have a portion of players who just skip your song anyway because they think it's shit, some will never even hear the station you're on and some play with radio off and their own tunes (me).
Recent history shows the effect of having an 80s classic revived like Kate Bush etc.
Profile pic tells you everything you need to know about this person is likely to engage in any type of discussion.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
A band that had some singles success in UK and Ireland in the 80s. The guy is almost 70 years old.
This is their most popular song (Temptation) done in 1983.
Last edited:
Hustler
Member
Id be curious what he considers a realistic offer…. Does he expect Rockstar to pay these artists in the millions for 1 song? That sets a bad precedent for all video games and then no licensed music will ever be used. His song I wager isn’t even the main headline song, but part of a playlist.
And why do ppl feel the need to blast negotiations online? This is a bad idea. No one will want to work with you in the future.
And why do ppl feel the need to blast negotiations online? This is a bad idea. No one will want to work with you in the future.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
He's a musician. So he thinks every person and company owes him forever royalty money for something he recorded once.
It'd be like Gap charging you $1 every time you wore their jeans, or a writer trying to charge you a nickel every time you read a page. Read the book twice and get charged twice.
Last edited:
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
That's your typical creative artist. Loud and annoying with no filter. Anything goes on social media.
Out of all the hardcore wheeling and dealing I've seen at work between supplier and retailer regarding pricing, annual agreements, shady stuff, overcharging, undercharging, false audited claims, etc..... I have never seen one person ever on either side ever go on social media to air out business contracts.
This no name guy with $7,500 dangling on a stick airs it out like he's god when this song topped out being a highly rated song in 1983 in the UK.
Last edited:
poopchad420
Neo Member
It's his song so he can choose to licence it or not. Doesn't really matter if it's the "smart" thing to do or not.
Rockstar made a business proposition, he didn't like the terms.
Everyone moves on and goes about their lives.
Rockstar made a business proposition, he didn't like the terms.
Everyone moves on and goes about their lives.
Wildebeest
Member
But think about the exposure! He could be making 10 dollars a year from knuckle draggers who go to youtube to listen to his song so they can post "GTA 6!" in the comments. That's serious business that serious businessmen do in suits and ties!
Yes of course and he thinks it's worth more than $7,500 to license the song in perpetuity. Rockstar doesn't owe him anything and he doesn't owe Rockstar anything. The lowball offer was just surprising especially with the money that GTA makes.
Yeah I guess they do since well they can reject any higher price but doesn't mean he has to accept just $7,500 either. He's well aware of the "exposure" too and doesn't want it or considers it not worth it.
Gorilla Shark
Member
I just listened to the song on Spotify.
I’m glad he didn’t accept their offer…
I’m glad he didn’t accept their offer…
Gambit2483
Member
I think most people are missing the "perpetuity" part.
And yeah, Rockstar is no stranger to "getting over" on their talent/artist.
funking giblet
Member
€7,500 is an insult I think, the song was pretty big in the UK/Ireland in the 80's and after featuring in Trainspotting.
LiquidMetal14
hide your water-based mammals
I think they would be smart to secure the songs long term. And to be fair, we are buying the game for the game itself and not some music. For example, I'm not getting any closer to buying a game it it has my favorite song. You can listen to Spotify while playing.
I'm not sure what a fair amount is considering they do get good exposure.
I'm not sure what a fair amount is considering they do get good exposure.
Gambit2483
Member
It's not always a guarantee that exposure = future success.
The actor that played Niko Bellic in GTAIV felt robbed that he was only payed a pittance compared to what the game made overall.
His talent and voice (i.e. exposure) has been recognized the world over but it hasn't necessarily translated to success/financial prosperity
Last edited:
SmurfMustard
Member
Some of you suddenly seem very fine to grab your ankles for the billion dollar company because it's Rockstar.
The "in perpetuity" part of the offer is the important part. They should add a zero if they really want the song and I'm sure Ware would accept.
I'd love to hear the song in the game.
The "in perpetuity" part of the offer is the important part. They should add a zero if they really want the song and I'm sure Ware would accept.
I'd love to hear the song in the game.
diffusionx
Gold Member
Transporting was like 30 years ago gramps.
It's about exposing the music to a new generation.
That's why I asked if he presented a counteroffer. We aren't talking about New Order here. I don't know what would be fair.
Last edited:
Soodanim
Gold Member
I don't understand the thought processes some posters ITT have. Acting like there's no numbers between 7,500 and millions or 10% of the game's gross.
7500 of 8.6 billion is 0.0000008721%
So, sarcastic hyperbole masters of GAF, tell me again how Rockstar didn't take the piss and that their profit margins couldn't take any more than that hefty hit.
R* could have given a more respectful offer than not even hitting 5 figures. They could have offered 10x more and it would still be a drop in the ocean. Even 100x more, which is far more than this song would ever be worth, wouldn't have been missed. 7,500 is offensive.
7500 of 8.6 billion is 0.0000008721%
So, sarcastic hyperbole masters of GAF, tell me again how Rockstar didn't take the piss and that their profit margins couldn't take any more than that hefty hit.
R* could have given a more respectful offer than not even hitting 5 figures. They could have offered 10x more and it would still be a drop in the ocean. Even 100x more, which is far more than this song would ever be worth, wouldn't have been missed. 7,500 is offensive.
MarkMe2525
Banned
Obviously, you don't know what you are talking about. If Rockstar contacted him for the rights, that means he owns the rights. If the song "blows up", he would see financial benefits from increased streams and possibly even further licensing. You are so far off base that you might as well be in another stadium.
Calverz
Gold Member
He should have accepted the offer. It would have brought a whole new generation to his music. I know San Andreas introduced to me to a lot of country and western music I previously could not give a fuck about. But it sounds like he doesn’t understand the game/industry or was given wrong information. He just hears how much gtav made and thinks his offer is low.
Last edited:
diffusionx
Gold Member
Just for perspective, a million streams on Spotify gets you like $3500. Spotify's revenue is like $15B per year. So that's what we are talking about in terms of the value of a song nowadays. It's basically nothing. Rockstar isn't running a charity for old musicians.
Last edited:
near
Member
Errmm.... so, your point is because Rockstar have deep pockets, they're obligated to pay more? Why?
Denton
Member
They made an offer.
He rejected the offer.
Shock and horror. Exploitation! Capitalism Bad!
Anyway, I never heard of him or the song. GTA6 could have made it known to 150 million people (if GTA5 sales numbers are anything to go by), instead only the people who follow nonsense controversies online will know about it. Was it a good business sense for him to reject it? I don't think so, but he has every right to do whatever he wants.
He rejected the offer.
Shock and horror. Exploitation! Capitalism Bad!
Anyway, I never heard of him or the song. GTA6 could have made it known to 150 million people (if GTA5 sales numbers are anything to go by), instead only the people who follow nonsense controversies online will know about it. Was it a good business sense for him to reject it? I don't think so, but he has every right to do whatever he wants.
RedC
Member
Soodanim
Gold Member
That's perfectly fine, and it should absolutely be taken into account, but to offer 4 figures is still abysmal. Rockstar isn't running a charity, but that works both ways. They're basically asking for charity themselves.
I do wonder how it was pitched to him, though. For him to flat out reject the offer suggests he's not aware (or not interested in) streaming revenue. Maybe he's short sighted and doesn't see the potential, or perhaps has a bad agent. Who knows.
Because that's how it works. Take Original GTAVC and compare it to this. The franchise and the industry weren't what they are today, so naturally the licensing deals would have been for far less. Do you think Billie Jean would be in GTA6 for the same price as it went for in VC, even for a limited deal? We're talking about licensing in perpetuity for 4 figures. That's low by anyone's standards.
Yes, Temptation isn't going to be the song that sells the game by any measure, but it's good enough for R* to want it so it's worth something.
Dynasty8
Member
Look at the exposure "Running up the Hill" (another 80's song) got from Stranger Things. It took the #1 spot right after the episode aired and got s hit ton of views on YouTube.
And this is GTA6 we're talking about. Instead of looking at the revenue generated, look at the units sold. Missed opportunity for them lol.
And this is GTA6 we're talking about. Instead of looking at the revenue generated, look at the units sold. Missed opportunity for them lol.
near
Member
I'm not sure I follow. So because Rockstar has deep pockets they have to pay more because that's how it works? Sure, licensing fees change over time, but that doesn't mean that it rises parallel to a companies' revenue.
Little Chicken
Banned
"Exposure" doesn't pay the bills. $7500 is a rude amount, especially with no royalties.
supercapacity
Neo Member
Some curious responses in here - the man is nearly 70, I don't think he's looking for exposure. And Heaven 17 (previously founding members of Human League) were amongst the synth pop pioneers at the start of the 80's, and he has his place in the foundations of the genre.
That aside, his tweet is a little curt, and has probably closed off any chance of negotiation. Musicians are understandably tetchy when it comes to the industry and their music - with streaming paying a relative pittance, and many bands living on merch sales (labels now take a huge slice of touring revenue), I have some sympathies with his position. On the flip side, he's lucky to have been a musician at a time when physical media was a great source of income, and modern acts will struggle to make the kind of monies he did.
A sorry episode all round. On the flip side, Synth Brittania is a great wee documentary about the burgeoning synth-pop scene in the industrial towns in the UK;
That aside, his tweet is a little curt, and has probably closed off any chance of negotiation. Musicians are understandably tetchy when it comes to the industry and their music - with streaming paying a relative pittance, and many bands living on merch sales (labels now take a huge slice of touring revenue), I have some sympathies with his position. On the flip side, he's lucky to have been a musician at a time when physical media was a great source of income, and modern acts will struggle to make the kind of monies he did.
A sorry episode all round. On the flip side, Synth Brittania is a great wee documentary about the burgeoning synth-pop scene in the industrial towns in the UK;
Last edited:
near
Member
What is a fair valuation for the song? It seems low, I agree, but what are we measuring against here?
cartman414
Member
People who say "he should have accepted the offer" don't seem to realize that accepting bad deals threatens to devalue the artist's work and could inspire other companies to lowball them.
poopchad420
Neo Member
7500 is a very low amount of money in today's world. That's about a month's salary after tax at a decent tech job.