Business
Page: 195
Don Passman had been teaching a course on music law at USC for several years when he realized his class notes were the outline of a book. “Because musicians are oriented to their ears,” he says, there was an opportunity to write “an easy-to-read overview of the business for people who don’t like to read.” Think “big print, lots of pictures, analogies, simple language.” When the first edition of All You Need to Know About the Music Business came out in 1991 — the 11th edition arrived this past October — “there was only one book on the music business at the time that was of any consequence,” Passman recalls. “And it was a bit difficult to read.”
Recently, however, music business education appears to be an increasingly hot topic. Thanks to technological advances, the number of aspiring artists releasing songs with little-to-no understanding of the music industry has ballooned. Many of these acts start releasing tracks in their early teens, long before they might get the chance to take a college-level course on the music business, much less master the nuances of copyright law. And they often hire a similarly-inexperienced friend to serve as a “manager,” ensuring that even their closest advisors lack experience in navigating the industry.
Trending on Billboard
As a result, there is a dire need for quality, accessible music business education. Many of the platforms that allow artists to create, listen to, or distribute music today see educational initiatives as a way to foster loyalty and community — which will in turn help them stand out in the neverending battle for users and attention — and possibly as an additional revenue stream as well.
Some of these educational efforts are in their early stages: Spotify started testing video learning courses in the U.K. in March, for example, while TIDAL has said education will be a cornerstone of its new era as it works to build financial tools for artists. (It was acquired by Block in 2021.)
The company Creative Intell is further along — it has raised money from around the music business and created an animated series to teach young artists the inner workings of the industry, from record deals to publishing. And the platform Bandlab, which allows its 100-million-plus users to create songs on their phones, has been releasing a steady stream of free tutorials and blog posts.
Helping aspiring artists grasp the intricacies of the music industry is “something that we’re investing a lot in,” says Krevin Breuner, Bandlab’s head of artist development and education. “The industry is more complex than ever, and understanding the business from day one is not just an advantage; it’s essential. Bandlab has such a young audience, it’s growing, and we want those artists to feel like they have a partner — somebody they can trust.”
Austen Smart agrees: The DJ, who co-founded the U.K. music-education company PLAYvirtuoso in 2020 with his brother, sees “huge potential in this space.” “I look at it like, there will be one in eight people, at least, learning at home,” he says, and a portion of those will be interested in the music industry.
Creative Intell co-founder Steven Ship divides the music education field into three buckets — how to create music, how to market music and the business of music. While YouTube alone is littered with free videos on the first two topics — not to mention all the Reddit threads, blog posts and TikTok tutorials — finding reliable and accessible information on the third is more challenging. “The business of music is probably the most important; it has to be the most accurate, and it’s often ignored,” Ship says.
If an aspiring artist produces a track poorly or markets it clumsily, that song probably won’t do well — a temporary setback. In contrast, if they don’t understand how the industry works, the consequences can be far more damaging: They could sign a contract with a manager, label, or publisher that cedes control of their output for decades. “Artists were horribly taken advantage of in the early days of the music business, because they just didn’t know what they were doing,” Passman says. And today, “the industry is changing so fast,” Breuner adds, making it even harder to “know what’s important and what’s not.”
When Smart signed a major label deal with his brother — just “two hungry young artists living in London” — he admits the pair “didn’t have the knowledge and the understanding of what we were ultimately signing.” An attorney would have helped, but they didn’t have the cash “to engage with lawyers who could help us interpret it.”
Contracts are often “murky and complicated,” Smart continues. “You get offered a relatively big advance; it’s quite a big number when you’re 25 and 22. What does it actually mean? What does it mean ten years later?”
If he could rewind the clock, he imagines going through the process again — but this time, “we’ve got that course on understanding label deals” available. And if necessary, he could “book a one-on-one session with someone for 30 pounds” to help provide extra context. This is part of the reason that one of PLAYvirtuoso’s “three pillars” of educational material centers on understanding the music industry.
PLAYvirtuoso is one of four companies that partnered with Spotify initially to provide courses on a variety of topics. The streaming service’s decision to test new education materials came about because it saw data indicating that some users were eager to acquire more knowledge.
“If I take you 10 years back, most of the people that came to Spotify came with a single intent: listening to music,” says Mohit Jitani, a product director at Spotify. “But in the last few years, as we brought on podcasts and audiobooks, people started to come to Spotify to listen to an interview or learn leadership and finance.”
Currently Spotify’s courses are offered via a freemium model: Users are able to access the first few lessons for free, but they must pay to complete a full course.
While Spotify’s exploratory foray into education stemmed from the fact that “people started coming to [us] for casual learning,” as Jitani puts it — and it potentially offers the platform another new revenue stream — TIDAL’s recent drive to help artists raise their business IQ is driven in part by its new owner, the payments company Block.
“Building tools and services for business owners, we saw that the moment that you get a little traction outside of your friends and family, the world becomes a lot more complicated,” says Agustina Sacerdote, the TIDAL’s global head of product. “You have to start to understand your numbers to understand where the next big opportunity is going to come from.”
The same principle applies to artists. Understandably, they tend to focus on the art. But as Ship notes, “The moment you release a song, you’re in business” — whether you like it or not. So TIDAL has started offering webinars and rolled out a new product called Circles, which Sacerdote likens to “a very curated version of Reddit, where we have the topics that we believe most artists have questions about,” including touring and merchandise.
For now, TIDAL’s products are free. “Once an artist does get a really good piece of advice that they would have never gotten [elsewhere] on Circles, then we’ll start to think about, how do we monetize?” Sacerdote says.
Creative Intell’s materials on the music business are currently far more comprehensive than TIDAL’s or Spotify’s: The company has created 18 animated courses to help aspiring artists — the vast majority of whom don’t have a manager or lawyer — “understand what they’re signing, learn how to monetize themselves better and learn how to protect themselves,” Ship says.
Creative Intell releases some materials for free and charges for access to everything ($29.99 a month). It’s also aiming to work with distributors like Vydia as marketing partners. Vydia is not the only company looking to provide this type of resource — Songtrust, for example, has built out its own materials to help songwriters understand how to collect their money from around the world.
“Other industries have all kinds of corporate resources for training and the music industry is lacking those,” Ship says. “We’re trying to fill that void.”
Shares of Live Nation jumped 7.2% to $94.66 on Friday following the company’s earnings report on Thursday (May 2), which showed the concert promotion and ticketing giant had a record first quarter. Revenue of $3.8 billion was up 21% year over year, and the company said it expects strong results in 2024 from its arena and high-margin amphitheater businesses.
Investors may have been encouraged by Live Nation’s insistence during Thursday’s earnings call that the U.S. Department of Justice does not pose a mortal threat to the company. Commenting about an April 16 Wall Street Journal article about a pending DOJ lawsuit, president and CFO Joe Berchtold dismissed the notion that regulators could force Live Nation to sever its concert promotion and ticketing businesses. “Very little of the conduct the DOJ has raised with us relates to the combination of ticketing and promotion resulting from the merger,” he said. “And most of what does was anticipated and addressed by the consent decree allowing the merger to go forward.
“Based on the issues we know about,” Berchtold added, “we don’t believe a breakup of Live Nation and Ticketmaster would be a legally permissible remedy.”
Trending on Billboard
Live Nation hasn’t fully recovered since news of a pending DOJ lawsuit broke. Through Wednesday (May 1), Live Nation shares had lost 11.5% since the WSJ article. Friday’s 7.2% gain helped Live Nation recover nearly half of that loss.
Numerous analysts see upside in Live Nation’s stock. On Tuesday, Deutsche Bank initiated coverage of Live Nation with a $120 price target and a “buy” rating. Following Thursday’s earnings release, Jefferies upped its price target to $115 from $114, Wolf Research raised its price target to $131 from $128, and Benchmark increased its price target to $132 from $130. CFRA downgraded Live Nation to “hold” from “strong buy,” however, and lowered its price target to $105 from $120.
Live Nation was one of the best-performing music stocks in a week the vast majority of them posted gains. Seventeen of the index’s 20 stocks gained ground this week, helping the Billboard Global Music Index improve 3.8% to 1,824.29 and nearly match the all-time high of 1,841.66 reached four weeks ago. Two stocks — Abu Dhabi-based music streamer Anghami and New York-based label and publisher Reservoir Media — posted losses and one stock, French music company Believe, was unchanged.
Universal Music Group shares climbed 4.9% to 28.92 euros ($31.16) following its first-quarter earnings release on Thursday and its announcement of a renewed licensing deal with TikTok. UMG’s earnings rose 6% (8% at constant currency) to 2.59 billion euros ($2.8 billion) and adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) improved 13.2% to 591 million euros ($640 million).
K-pop company SM Entertainment was the week’s best performer after gaining 5.9% to 85,800 won ($63.27). Warner Music Group rose 5.4% to $34.14. iHeartMedia climbed 5.1% to $2.25. Cumulus Media gained 2.6% — and rose 4.2% on Friday — after its first-quarter earnings showed its 2.7% decline in revenue, to $200 million, was in line with previous guidance.
SiriusXM shares improved 3.3% to $3.12 this week despite falling 7.2% on Monday after its first-quarter earnings report showed the company’s self-pay subscribers dropped by 1.4%. Many analysts cut their price targets in the wake of the earnings. Barrington dropped SiriusXM to $4.75 from $5.75 and maintained its “outperform” rating. Deutsche Bank lowered its price target to $3.75 from $5 and kept its “hold” rating. Goldman Sachs dropped its price target to $3.25 from $3.50 and upgraded its rating to “neutral” from “sell.”
Universal Music Group’s three-month hiatus from TikTok ended this week after the companies reached a new, multi-faceted licensing agreement. On Thursday, UMG executives explained why it was worth the wait.
The bottom line: UMG believes its new licensing deal with TikTok is an improvement over the deal that expired at the end of January. UMG has “substantially improved the total value we’ll derive from this relationship,” CFO Boyd Muir said. Michael Nash, executive vp/chief digital officer, said the new TikTok deal “definitely deliver[s] a fair level of value relative to other short form social platform partners,” which includes Instagram Reels, YouTube Shorts and Snap.
In Thursday’s earnings call and CEO Lucian Grainge’s internal memo obtained by Billboard the same day, Grainge, Muir and Nash mentioned numerous components of the new deal that can be broken into two camps: revenue and non-revenue features and arrangements.
Trending on Billboard
As for revenue, there will be more of it under the new deal — although none of the executives shared specific deal points such as advertising revenue sharing rates. Nash said that “revenue under this new deal does markedly improve over our last deal.” The previous deal amounted to about 1% of UMG’s annual revenues, which works out to about $120 million euros based on 2023 revenue. That’s not much for a platform that commands an average of 58 minutes per day in the U.S., according to eMarketer — almost as much as Netflix and more than YouTube.
But UMG is getting more value out of TikTok in forms other than royalties. Many of those non-revenue components typically cost money to labels: e-commerce tools, marketing and promotion campaigns and ad credits. Other aspects of the deal have value that’s hard to pin down: data, artist insights, intelligence and new programs and new collaboration opportunities.
One interesting aspect of the new deal is what Nash called “content management and attribution.” When TikTok users post videos with sped-up and slowed-down recordings, attribution for the UMG recording is credited “not [to] some infringing third party, but the artists,” said Nash. “And that content is better connected with their official presence on the platform.”
As Grainge outlined in an internal memo to staff on Thursday, the deal also met the two non-revenue criteria: protection against the harmful effects of AI and prioritizing online safety for both TikTok users and UMG’s artists.
TikTok made “a number of commitments” that respect UMG artists’ works and rights of publicity and supports UMG’s principles on training AI models without consent from rights holders. UMG wants to protect its artists against deepfakes such as “Heart on My Sleeve” by Ghostwriter, which used AI-generated soundalikes of Drake and Kendrick Lamar (both UMG artists). The new deal ensures such fake content will be removed, both Grainge and Nash said.
Nash also described these efforts to combat infringing content as “elevated requirements” that detect and avoid infringing content,” including leaks, unauthorized remixes and unauthorized AI versions. The deal also contains requirements for improved filtering and stream manipulation detection.
In addition, TikTok agreed to improve online safety and attempt to mitigate the harmful effects of social media, including hate speech, bullying, responsible use of AI, and addressing infringing content and algorithmic manipulation, Grainge wrote in his memo.
Social media income might not amount to much today, but it “is increasingly important income to artists, songwriters, labels and publishers,” said Grainge during Thursday’s earnings call, “which is why we’ve pushed so hard and we will continue to push to protect and to develop it.”
A criminal case against Morgan Wallen for allegedly throwing a chair off the roof of a six-story Nashville bar is moving forward after an initial court hearing Friday (May 3).
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
Wallen’s attorney Worrick Robinson appeared on behalf of the star before a Nashville judge, who set a new court date for Aug. 15. The hearing did not involve entering a plea, and Wallen had waived his right to appear in person, but Robinson said the star himself would be at the next hearing.
“This is obviously very complicated case and it’s not going to resolve itself without subpoenas and witnesses,” Robinson told the media after the hearing. “The state will subpoena witnesses and we’ll work on the case on our end. Morgan will be here on Aug. 15, and several things can happen in the case. We might have a hearing, we might settle the case or the case might continue. Those are the options.”
Trending on Billboard
Wallen, who is in the midst of three sold-out headlining shows at Nashville’s Nissan Stadium on his One Night at a Time Tour this weekend, was arrested in Nashville on April 7 in connection to the chair-throwing incident. Two Metro Nashville Police Department officers were reportedly standing on the street below Chief’s on Broadway, owned by country singer Eric Church, when the chair landed approximately three feet from the officers. Police then reportedly spoke with staff and witnesses and viewed security footage to confirm Wallen’s alleged actions.
After the arrest, the country star was charged with three felony counts of reckless endangerment and one misdemeanor count of disorderly conduct.
“I’m not proud of my behavior, and I accept responsibility,” Wallen said in a statement on April 19. “I have the utmost respect for the officers working every day to keep us all safe. Regarding my tour, there will be no change.”
Speaking with the media after Friday’s hearing, Robinson confirmed that there is surveillance footage of the incident, which he has viewed. He also addressed the issue of the police report noting that Wallen was seen “laughing” after the incident. “As each of you know, you can’t always believe everything you read, and I haven’t seen anything to suggest that at all, so I don’t have any proof that that is correct.”
Asked by media if they have a preference to settle the case, Robinson said, “These cases are always complicated and you just never know what’s going to happen. As an attorney, all you can do is be prepared and that’s what the district attorney’s office will do also. Everybody will prepare as if there’s going to be a hearing, but I think everybody generally wins if you can resolve it in a manner that everybody can live with.”
Robinson also responded to media who asked if Wallen was denying throwing the chair, saying, “I think he has said he takes responsibility for what he’s done … We’re not required to enter a plea of any type. But you’ve read his words and I think you understand them clearly.”
Friday night (May 3), Wallen continues with his second of three sold-out shows at Nissan Stadium as part of his One Night at a Time tour.
Assistance provided by Bill Donahue
A diss-track battle between two of the world’s biggest hip-hop stars has led to cryptic allegations that Drake directed his heavyweight record label to yank a hit featuring Kendrick Lamar from the airwaves. But would such a move be possible?
Probably not, say legal experts who study broadcast rights and the music business. “As a general law, broadcast stations have a lot of discretion over what they put on the air — almost unlimited discretion,” says Charles Naftalin, a Washington, D.C., attorney for Holland & Knight who specializes in telecommunications law. “A station is virtually free to pick and choose what it wants.”
Lamar’s new song “euphoria,” which he released April 30, alleges Drake and Republic had attempted to “try cease and desist on the ‘Like That’ record” — a reference to the recent Future–Metro Boomin hit containing a Lamar verse that attacks last year’s Drake-J. Cole track “First Person Shooter,” and helped spark the recent back-and-forth between the two rappers. Then a screenshot of an alleged email appeared on social media purporting to be from a Republic business-affairs executive declaring “we are not granting radio rights” for “Like That.” (Reps for Republic and Universal Music Group, the label’s parent company, did not respond to requests for comment, and the screenshot could not be verified.)
Trending on Billboard
Hypothetically, if Lamar’s lyrical allegation were true, and the Republic exec’s email were legitimate, how could a label, even the home of Taylor Swift, Morgan Wallen, The Weeknd and Post Malone, which has the industry’s largest market share, pull off such a move? One conceivable explanation stems from the fact that “Like That” is an unusual business collaboration — it’s a joint release from competing major labels, Universal-owned Republic and Sony-owned Epic. The former is Metro Boomin’s label; the latter is Future’s label. (Adding confusion to the affair: Lamar records for Interscope, also owned by UMG, so he is, in a very broad sense, Drake’s labelmate.)
Because Republic had a hand in releasing “Like That,” it is conceivable — though extremely unlikely — that the company could demand that radio stations stop playing its own song. “I don’t readily see a legal reason to request takedown from radio solely based on certain lyrics being in the song,” says Matt Buser, an attorney who represents top artists and music companies. “However, there could be a justified legal reason for takedown based on the promotional grant of rights and understanding between the two collaborating labels.”
Like Buser, Larry Kenswil, a retired top business and legal affairs executive for UMG, has no idea what is in the contractual agreement between Republic and Epic for “Like That.” (A rep for Sony, Epic’s parent company, also did not respond to a request for comment.) But he’s certain that Republic has no right to demand a radio takedown. If Lamar’s “euphoria” lyric about a cease-and-desist is true, Kenswil says, “The artist [Drake] complained to the label [Republic] and the label felt like they had to do something to satisfy the artist. But, of course, we probably don’t have the full story.”
He adds: “That happens all the time. Artists tell their lawyers: ‘Send a cease-and-desist.’ The lawyer says, ‘Uh, I don’t think they’re doing anything wrong.’ ‘Send a cease-and-desist or I’ll fire you.’ And they send the cease-and-desist — and don’t follow up.’” Evidence on behalf of Kenswil’s theory: “Like That” not only came out, but radio played the track, it debuted at No. 1 on the Hot 100 and remained there for three weeks. And as of this writing, “Like That” is No. 21 on the all-genre Radio Songs chart.
On Saturday night (April 27), Vancouver witnessed Diljit Dosanjh make history. The artist kicked off his Dil-Luminati tour with a sold-out stadium show at BC Place to a crowd of 54,000 people — making it the largest ever Punjabi music concert outside of India.
The show leaned into its historic accomplishment, with an ominous voice preceding Diljit Dosanjh’s entry, “Remember, firsts are always special and what you witness here will never be repeated.”
Trending on Billboard
In over two decades in the music and film industry, Dosanjh has solidified himself as a global star. Last year, he was the first Indian-born Punjabi singer to perform at Coachella and has recently made strides for international music amassing hundreds of millions of streams on collaborative tracks with Sia, Saweetie and Camilo respectively. More recently, Dosanjh is fresh off the critical acclaim of his performance of the titular Amar Singh Chamkila, a Bollywood biopic about the life and death of the controversial Punjabi singer who was killed at the height of his fame in 1988.
With anticipation palpable in the air, Dosanjh delivered a high-powered 27-song set with charisma and an undeniable star-power that easily captivated the record-breaking audience. It was an unabashed celebration of Punjabi music and culture.
The artist has a deep connection to Vancouver. Several of his popular Punjabi films that accelerated his career like Jatt and Juliet and Honsla Rakh were filmed across Greater Vancouver, making this moment that much more special for fans who have been longtime supporters far before his recent international successes.
“Now, Punjabis have made it to stadiums,” Dosanjh said. “The next generation won’t be able to say that this has never happened before. Now for generations to come, our kids can dream even bigger.”
During his performance of “Vibe,” the singer scooped up a young fan from the crowd who was dressed in signature Diljit Dosanjh attire, inviting him to dance with him. As the boy, understandably intimidated by the size of the crowd in front him, got more comfortable, he broke into dance himself. It was his hopes for the next generation coming to life right in front of him — a child who can now literally see himself on stage performing for a stadium of fans.
Dosanjh’s tour continues with arena dates in Winnipeg, Edmonton, Calgary, Los Angeles and more, and another stadium date at Toronto’s Rogers Centre on July 13. – Jeevan Sangha
🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦
Rising Canadian Stars Chani Nattan and Owen Riegling Make International Moves
Punjabi powerhouse lyricist Chani Nattan is the next signing to Warner Music Canada and Warner Music India’s joint venture, 91 North Records. Nattan will join fellow Punjabi-Canadian artists Karan Aujla, Jonita Gandhi and AR Paisley on the label, which was created to support South Asian artists.
Born and raised in Surrey, B.C., Nattan has already broken through to Punjabi music audiences around the world. In 2021, Nattan teamed up with Inderpal Moga and released “Daku” — a heady Punjabi hip-hop track that has garnered 247 million views on YouTube, and became one of the most streamed songs on Spotify India. With Sukha and Punjabi singer Gurlez Akhtar, Nattan’s “8 Asle” sparked a viral TikTok dance trend and charted on the Billboard Canadian Hot 100.
Nattan marks the signing with the release of his new song “Facetime,” alongside frequent collaborator Inderpal Moga and iconic Punjabi singer Miss Pooja.
Nattan uses a traditional Punjabi duet style, typically consisting of a playful back and forth between a quarreling couple. “Facetime” blends those old-school Punjabi vibes with the hip-hop elements that he is so heavily influenced by, Nattan tells Billboard Canada.
“The beats are different but the heart and soul of it maintains the sound of Punjab and its concepts,” he says. “It’s about honouring our roots while embracing the evolution of our music.”
Meanwhile, Canadian-based management and production company Workshop Music Group has announced a new partnership with talent representation company The Familie to co-manage rising young country singer-songwriter Owen Riegling. The Familie’s client roster includes Machine Gun Kelly and Avril Lavigne and it recently launched a country music division.
Now boasting over 50M global streams for his songs, Riegling won the 2022 Emerging Artists Showcase at the CanCountry mega-fest Boots & Hearts, then signed his record deal with Universal Music Canada. Last year he was selected for Apple Music’s UpNext Program and is now part of Spotify’s Hot Country Artists To Watch and Amazon Canada’s Breakthrough Artists to Watch 2024. – Jeevan Sanha & Kerry Doole
🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦
Toronto Chinese Restaurant Gets a Boost from Kendrick Lamar’s Namedrop
Toronto caught a few strays in Kendrick Lamar’s “Euphoria,” the first of two diss tracks aimed at hometown star Drake. While listing all the things he hates about Drizzy, Kendrick takes a moment to slip into an exaggerated Toronto accent complete with local slang and a surprising reference to a popular late-night Chinatown restaurant: “I be at New Ho King eatin’ fried rice with a dip sauce and a blammy, crodie,” he raps.
CityNews spoke to New Ho King owner Johnny Lu for a TV segment. Playing him the track, they get his live reaction to the nametrack: “I see, Kendrick’s a good guy. Oh my God!” he says.
CityNews also caught up with residents who are fans of Kendrick who made trips just to give the fried rice dish a try. “I came all the way from Markham just to see this fried rice,” one says. “Kendrick Lamar, man. You gotta pay respect to K. Dot, man. Ever since he dropped the diss track I was like, ‘I gotta visit this place.’”
The reference may have had a darker meaning than just fried rice, with some fans believing it was a sly reference to Drake’s 2009 armed robbery. Toronto rapper Sizzlac, who was rumoured to be part of the robbery, once filmed a music video at New Ho King, which may be how the restaurant hit Kendrick’s radar. But New Ho King is reaping the rewards. Since the track dropped, New Ho King has been showered with five-star reviews on Google and Yelp. – Richard Trapunski
Last Week In Canada: Cowboy Junkies Write to U.S. Senators
These days, a new Beyoncé album is generally a cause for celebration — fans pore over album covers, track listings, song lyrics and rollout plans, searching for hidden gems and rare treasures. For Cowboy Carter, her latest album released in March, one of those gems came in the form of Shaboozey, the rising country singer who had made some minor waves in his career to date and was featured on two tracks on the album, “Spaghetti” with Linda Martell” and “Sweet / Honey / Buckiin.’”
If those guest spots introduced Shaboozey to the mainstream of pop culture, it was what came next that has truly brought him to the forefront. Two weeks after the release of Cowboy Carter, the Virginia-born singer released “A Bar Song (Tipsy)” through American Dogwood/EMPIRE, a flip of J-Kwon’s 2004 song “Tipsy” that is a fun-loving, infectious romp of a song, and has quickly captured hearts, minds — and a very captive audience. This week, the song makes a historic jump on Billboard’s Hot Country Songs chart, bounding from No. 6 to No. 1 — and replacing Beyoncé’s “Texas Hold ‘Em” on top of the list, marking the first time ever that two Black artists have led the chart in back to back weeks since the chart became an all-encompassing genre ranking in 1958.
Trending on Billboard
The song, which will herald the artist’s next album, Where I’ve Been, Isn’t Where I’m Going, due out May 31, has been on such an upswing that even in the week that Taylor Swift flooded the Hot 100 with her new 31-song Tortured Poets Department album, “A Bar Song (Tipsy)” was one of just two songs on the entire Hot 100 to actually rise, as it moved from No. 36 to No. 27, with a possible jump into the top five on the cards for next week, as the Swift fervor ebbs. And all that momentum helps his Range Media co-manager Jared Cotter earn the title of Billboard’s Executive of the Week.
Here, Cotter talks about how the Beyoncé look helped boost Shaboozey’s latest hit, the value of being in the right place at the right time (and being prepared for the moment when it comes) and the history-making hit that brought them here. “He will be a superstar that continues to push boundaries and make great music for years to come,” Cotter says. “This is just the beginning.”
This week, Shaboozey’s “A Bar Song (Tipsy)” reached No. 1 on Hot Country Songs, his first chart-topper. What key decision did you make to help make that happen?
A key decision was making sure we were prepared for the Beyoncé moment. We didn’t even have it locked in 100% but I wanted the team to be prepared if it happened, so we moved our original release date for the song up by three weeks. That way we were able to take advantage of truly an extremely unique opportunity with lots of heat and algorithmic love. The Beyoncé Bounce is real!
The song replace’s Beyoncé’s “Texas Hold ‘Em” at No. 1, the first time in history that two Black artists led the chart back to back. What is the significance of that for you and Shaboozey?
As Black men, we are aware and in awe of the history that we’ve made. Country is a genre that historically has been very closed, and something like this typically could never happen. It’s a positive sign that times are changing and that country listeners just want great music, no matter who it comes from. Thank you to Beyoncé and her team for knocking down that door.
Shaboozey has been buzzing for a while, but he exploded into the mainstream with two features on Beyoncé’s Cowboy Carter album. How did that come about, and how were you guys able to use that momentum to help push “A Bar Song”?
Beyoncé’ was already familiar with Boozey because her team — including her Mom, Tina Knowles — showed us a lot of love on Shaboozey’s “Let It Burn.” But primarily the Beyoncé features came about because her A&R, Ricky Lawson, happened to be at our Range Showcase Night at Winston House in Venice, Calif. Shaboozey is an incredible live performer and that night was special. It’s a testament to taking advantage of the opportunities that are presented to you because you never know who is watching.
On this week’s Hot 100, amid a flood of new Taylor Swift songs, “A Bar Song” was one of only two songs on the entire chart to actually move up, going from No. 36 to No. 27. How was the song able to do that?
It’s the perfect song. It has a tried and true interpolation in J-Kwon’s “Tipsy,” so the familiarity is there and everything about the verses and chorus is a hook. Plus, it’s fun. After also having success with Paul Russell’s hit “Lil Boo Thang” this year I truly believe that people just want to have fun again.
Shaboozey first partnered with EMPIRE in 2021, and is having this huge moment three years later. Why did the EMPIRE partnership make sense over a traditional Nashville-type deal, and how have you built his career in that period of time to lay the foundation for this type of moment now?
EMPIRE has been an incredible partner. What Ghazi, Nima [Etminan] and Tina [Davis] have built is nothing short of amazing — I don’t think they get enough credit for what they’ve done and continue to do in multiple genres. They’ve been huge supporters of Shaboozey, and have shown immense patience as he figured out his sound. Now that the timing is right, they’re throwing everything at this project with staff and resources. Their belief in him is palpable from everyone on their team. As a manager I couldn’t be happier to be in business with all of EMPIRE, including Sak Pase, Peter Kadin and Harrison Golding.
With the likes of Morgan Wallen, Zach Bryan and Bailey Zimmerman, among others, country music music has had a big mainstream boost in the past year-plus. At the same time, Range has been signing more country acts of late and investing in the genre. Did you see this uptick in country music coming, and how do capitalize on the mainstream popularity of the genre moving forward?
Yes. Range is at the forefront of this country revolution and I’m happy to add my energy. It’s been extremely valuable to lean on country music veterans at Range like Matt Graham, Jack Minihan and Shawn McSpadden as I navigate a new genre as a manager. Our staff in the newly-opened Nashville office is second to none, and we’ll continue to capitalize on the uptick with passion, expertise, and boots on the ground.
What’s next for Shaboozey?
More great music and great shows coming to a city near you. He will be a superstar that continues to push boundaries and make great music for years to come. This is just the beginning.
Last Week’s Executive: Sabrina Carpenter’s Manager Janelle Lopez Genzink
Australia’s music community has reached a “crisis” point, as myriad factors contribute to the closure of grassroots venues and popular festivals, and a generation of homegrown artists are essentially overlooked and locked out of the sales charts.
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
Artist managers are proposing a solution.
Announced Friday (May 3), the Association of Artist Managers (AAM) unveils “Michael’s Rule,” a policy that would ensure at least one local artist would be among the support acts on every international tour of these parts.
The campaign bears the name of Michael McMartin, the late, great artist manager who guided the career of Hoodoo Gurus for more than 40 years, and is broken down into three main tenets: every international artist must include an Australian artist among their opening acts; the Australian artist must appear on the same stage at the international artist using reasonable sound and lighting; and the Australian artist must be announced at the same time as the tour so that they benefit from all the marketing and promotion.
Trending on Billboard
The Rule came from a discussion amongst senior members of the artist management fraternity in the lead-in to the 2024 AAM Awards in Sydney, and is born out of the frustration at the limited options for the discoverability of artists in Australia.
These challenges have been recognized by governments across Australia in recent years, notes Maggie Collins, executive director of the AAM, the trade body that represents more than 300 artist managers.
“Promoters received significant public funding during the pandemic and they understandably continue to receive public support for some of their major events,” she explains in a statement. “We think it is only reasonable that, in return, they should ‘do their bit’ to help give Australian artists a leg up by the simple means of including at least one local act on every international tour.”
Collins used the platform of the 2024 AAM Awards to present “Michael’s Rule.”
“If there’s one overarching issue that managers have been flagging time and time again, it is this: we need more Australians loving more Australian music. We have a major discoverability problem and if we don’t solve this issue, which is both economical and cultural,” she explained to a full house at Sydney’s Crowbar.
Had “Michael’s Rule” existed for major international tours, such as Taylor Swift’s seven-date The Eras Tour, which visited Sydney and Melbourne in 2023, “how many more fans could we have introduced to a local artist and started creating our own megastar of the future.”
The support act rule had once been a widely accepted industry code after lobbying by artist managers in the early 2000s. With the launch of “Michael’s Rule,” a voluntary code, senior artist managers call for its reintroduction “at this time of crisis for Australian music,” reads a statement from AAM.
If promoters are not willing to agree, the trade body insists it make formal representations for federal government to step in and make it a condition of issuing visas that international artists touring Australia must comply.Labels body ARIA welcomes “Michael’s Rule.” “Doing whatever we can to get our local artists in front of new audiences is the most important issue facing our local industry,” says ARIA CEO Annabelle Herd in a separate media release, “and as such the Michael’s Rule is a fantastic initiative, which we are confident can be implemented in a way that doesn’t impact the viability of international touring.”ARIA’s latest year-end charts spelled out the problem. Just four Australian albums cracked the top 100 last year, led by INXS hits collection The Very Best (at No. 58), and only three Australian-made singles impacted the top 100, none of which were released in 2023. The best-placed Australian track was The Kid Laroi’s 2021 collaboration with Justin Bieber, “Stay.”Other initiatives, including “looking to broaden venues like sports stadiums to multi-use facilities in NSW is a really important step to increase the availability of entertainment for everyone outside of sport,” adds Herd, “and continue to increase opportunities to see local artists alongside global icons.”The unveiling of the industry code closely follows the announcement that Brisbane’s The Zoo, one of the country’s longest-operating grassroots music venues, would close its doors due to crushing financial pressures, and a string of music festivals, including Splendour in the Grass, would skip this year – or close for good.
Drake’s track with an AI 2Pac verse didn’t last long. A day after the Tupac Shakur estate threatened to sue Drake for using an AI imitation of the later rapper’s voice on “Taylor Made Freestyle,” he took down the recording. In using 2Pac’s voice, though, Drake opened yet another important debate about generative AI that reveals just how risky the business is — and how rightsholders may have more power to shape it than they realize.
So let’s get legal! In the cease-and-desist letter he sent on behalf of the Shakur estate, lawyer Howard King referenced both Shakur’s personality rights, which encompasses publicity rights, or what some states refer to as likeness rights, plus the copyrights to the rapper’s recordings and songs. Most coverage of this focused on the former issue, since personality rights are relatively straightforward — Shakur’s estate controls the rights to the rapper’s distinctive style. The second gets complicated, since the recording copyrights — and potentially the song copyrights — have less to do with Drake’s use of 2Pac-style vocals than how he was able to create them in the first place.
Trending on Billboard
To create such a convincing imitation of 2Pac, an AI model would almost certainly have to ingest — and, in the course of doing so, copy — a significant number of Shakur’s recordings. So King, in his letter, demanded from Drake “a detailed explanation for how the sound-alike was created and the persons or company that created it, including all recordings and other data ‘scraped’ or used.” Any answer Drake gave would have taken the issue into legal terra incognita — an AI’s ingestion of recordings and songs would implicate copyright, although it’s not clear if this could be done without a license under fair use. The stakes would be high, though. As opposed to a California right of publicity violation, which would be relatively easy to prove and incur limited damages, copyright infringement is federal and comes with statutory damages of up to $150,000 per work infringed. That means a company that ingests 20 works to create one would be liable a maximum of $3 million.
For the last year, music creators and rightsholders have been talking about generative AI as something that’s coming — the deals they’ll negotiate, the terms they’ll set, the business they’ll do — once they negotiate the right deals. But technology companies tend to beg forgiveness rather than ask permission, and it seems some of them have already ingested a considerable amount of music for AI without a license. Think about it: None of the major labels have announced deals for AI companies to ingest their catalogs of recordings, but enough recordings have been ingested to make AI vocal imitations of Drake, 2Pac, Snoop — even Frank Sinatra doing Lil Jon’s “Skeet skeet.” That means that a company or companies could be in big trouble. Or that they have a first-mover advantage over their rivals. Or both.
Part of the reason technology companies forge ahead is that deals that involve new technology get complicated. In this case, how do you value a license you’re not sure you need? If you think that companies need a license to ingest music for the purposes of allowing users to make AI vocal imitations — as seems likely — the price for that license is going to be relatively high, with complicated terms, because rightsholders would presumably want to be compensated on an ongoing basis. (It’s insanely difficult to create a fair one-time license to ingest a catalog of music: first, since copyright law controls copying, the licensor would forfeit any control not specified in the contract; second, it would be hard for a potential buyer to raise the kind of money a seller might want, so the economics of ongoing payments make more sense.) If you think that ingestion would fall under fair use — which is very possible in some edge cases but much less so generally — why would you pay a high fee, much less constrain yourself with complicated terms?
The legal cases that will tip the scales in one direction or the other will proceed at the speed of litigation, which moves slower than culture, much less technology. The first big case will be against Anthropic, which Universal Music, Concord, ABKCO and other music publishers sued in October for training an AI on lyrics to compositions they control. (Universal’s agreement with YouTube on AI principles might make a ruling that this is fair use somewhat less likely, since it shows that major labels are willing to license their music.) There are already other cases in other parts of the media business — The New York Times sued OpenAI and Microsoft in December, for example — and one of them could set an important precedent.
Until that happens — and maybe after, too — there will be settlements. Very few rightsholders have much of an interest in stopping AI — some could in some cases, but it’s a losing battle. What they really want to do is leverage the power they have to destroy, or at least delay, a nascent business in order to shape it. (“The power to destroy a thing is the absolute control over it,” in the words of Paul Atreides, Padishah Emperor of the Known Universe, who might be exaggerating but certainly has a point.) That will give them real power — not only to monetize music with AI but to shape the terms of engagement in a way that, let’s face it, is likely to favor big companies with big catalogs. It will be interesting to see what they do with it.
Taylor Swift is returning to the road to complete the final leg of her Eras Tour for fans eager to hear the singer-songwriter perform new tracks like “Fortnight,” “Down Bad” and “Florida!!!” from her new album, The Tortured Poets Department.
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
But those fans may be in for some sticker shock. Prices to see Swift at one of her final nine shows in the United States have increased following the release of the album April 19, with the average get-in-the-door price — the lowest price available — hovering around $2,600 per ticket, according to data from TicketIQ. That means it would cost a couple more than $5,000 just to be in the same building as Swift in Miami (Oct 18-20), New Orleans (Oct 25-27) and Indianapolis (Nov. 1-3) this fall.
In Europe, however — where Swift starts a 51-show run on May 9 with a kickoff date at Paris’ La Defense Arena — tickets cost only a fraction of that. Right now, the get-in-the door price to see the opening of the European leg of the Eras Tour is $340 a ticket — 87% cheaper than the average price in the United States.
Trending on Billboard
That means a fan in Miami could fly to Paris for about $900 a person (according to prices generated on kayak.com), spend two nights at a four-star hotel at $250 a night and purchase a $340 concert ticket for a grand total of $1,740 — which is still $760 less than the cheapest tickets currently available for her Miami shows.
Tickets to see Swift in Stockholm (May 17-19) are even cheaper, at $312 for the cheapest tickets, while tickets for her show in Portugal (May 24-25) start at $336 and in Spain (May 29-30) start at $324. Prices do start to climb in the United Kingdom, with the get-in-the-door price hovering around £540 (about $674 USD) for Swift’s Liverpool shows (June 13-15). Prices to see Swift at Wembley Stadium (June 21-23) hover around £720 ($900).
The reason for the huge difference in price, experts say, is due in part to longstanding consumer skepticism about resale tickets in most of Europe. That’s coupled with a much more aggressive regulatory environment where artists and consumers are empowered to report and remove illegal ticket listings, and where prices are kept low thanks to laws limiting how high tickets can be marked up over face value.
The European approach is significantly different from that of the United States, where ticket resale is not regulated and deceptive marketing practices, including the use of deceptive websites and speculative ticket listings, continue unabated despite widespread outcry from consumers. And federal officials don’t regularly enforce the few ticketing laws that do exist. It took five years after the BOTS Act — banning automated programs that jump the queue and buy up tickets — was passed for the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to bring a case against brokers for violating the bill.
Sam Shemtob, managing director for ticket resale advocacy group Face-value European Alliance for Ticketing (FEAT), points to Europe as a model for how governments can be more vigilant about regulating resale markets. In countries like France, Germany and the Netherlands, ticket resellers face limits on how much tickets can be marked up on secondary sites — typically 20% over face value. Other countries like the United Kingdom allow resale but restrict who is allowed to post tickets for resale and give artists and event promoters the right to take some resale ticket listings down.
Adopting European-style regulations in the United States by restricting ticket markups to 20% above face value would transform the concert business overnight and likely drive prices down dramatically on the secondary market. Markup caps would also likely make programs like Ticketmaster’s platinum ticket pricing (which charges high markups for a small percentage of tickets to offset the resale market) obsolete and significantly reduce the number of ticket brokers and bad actors using bots to disrupt ticket sales and illegally buy up tickets.
A federal cap on ticket markups would also significantly disrupt the secondary ticketing market and push many brokers out of business, which might create unintended consequences for sports teams that are much more willing to sell season tickets to brokers and depend on resellers for distribution. It’s also unclear if Americans would even accept a regulatory framework capping how much tickets could be marked up. Lawmakers in New York, Utah, Colorado, Connecticut and Virginia have all passed laws in the last decade making it illegal to restrict how and where ticket brokers resell tickets. While U.S. consumers often complain about the excesses of ticket resale and like the idea of using technology to keep tickets out of the hands of scalpers, they also dislike the restrictions that come with non-transferable tickets and tend to loudly oppose policies that create inconveniences.
Shemtob notes that Europe’s ticketing rules aren’t just about protecting price, but are also designed to empower citizens to take action.
On Jan. 1, 2025, Europe’s Digital Services Act (DSA) will go into effect, creating a uniform set of guidelines for online ticket resale requiring resellers to disclose their names and contact details to potential ticket buyers. The DSA also mandates that resale platforms track takedowns of public ticket listings (to help provide a record of the deceptive activity taking place) and ban deceptive marketing practices.
While many of the DSA’s reforms mirror U.S. efforts to clean up ticketing, Shemtob says a provision in the DSA bill that makes it simple to flag, report and take down ticket listings that violate the rules is a game-changer for consumer advocates. The law creates “a clear process for removing illegal ticket listings as and when they appear,” he said in a statement provided to Billboard, putting in place “the groundwork for a fairer, more transparent ticket-buying experience for consumers.”
Besides keeping prices in Europe low, the legislation has also led to a surprising boom in tourism from U.S. fans traveling to the continent to pursue cheaper Eras Tour tickets: A spokesperson for StubHub told Billboard that 68% of ticket purchases for Swift’s 51-show run in Europe have come from U.S. buyers.