State Champ Radio

by DJ Frosty

Current track

Title

Artist

Current show

State Champ Radio Mix

8:00 pm 12:00 am

Current show

State Champ Radio Mix

8:00 pm 12:00 am


finance

Page: 3

Rarely does an accounting issue move markets and surprise people throughout the music business. But that’s what happened Monday when Hipgnosis Songs Fund, the publicly traded investment trust backed by the catalogs of such artists as Neil Young and Stevie Nicks, announced it will cancel a planned quarterly dividend payment to shareholders.
According to Hipgnosis Songs Fund’s board of directors, the decision was the result of the company’s independent valuation expert, Citrin Cooperman, reducing its expectations of “industry-wide” retroactive payments from the Copyright Royalty Board’s Phonorecords III (a.k.a. CRB III) ruling that increased the royalties music publishers receive from on-demand music streaming services for the years 2018 to 2022. Billboard estimated that the music industry would gain over $250 million in total, and another industry expert recently told Billboard they estimated the industry-wide retroactive payment will approach $400 million.

Hipgnosis’ adjustment was substantial: down roughly 54% from $21.7 million to $9.9 million. Meanwhile, Billboard continues to stand by its previous estimate and no other publishers or rights funds that spoke for this story have had to decrease their projections.

“Frankly, I’m shocked… I really do not understand this,” says one music publishing executive.

Multiple sources say there have been no new updates regarding CRB III in recent weeks that would cause a publisher to cut their expectations for accruals by more than half, and it must be an accounting error unique to Hipgnosis and Citrin Cooperman. “None of the data points have changed,” explains another publishing executive. “The ruling is what it is, so they must’ve made a mistake here.” Citrin Cooperman did not respond to Billboard’s request for comment.

The fallout Monday was immediate: With the sudden change in expected retroactive royalties, Hipgnosis Songs Fund was forced to cancel a dividend payment to not risk violating the debt covenants for its $700 million revolving credit facility. That dividend — 1.3125 pence per ordinary share — was announced on Sept. 21 and was to have a payment date of Oct. 27. The company’s share price dropped 10% on Monday’s news. Dividends are an integral component to the fund’s strategy of providing investors with stable returns from proven, successful music catalogs. Since its initial public offering in July 2018 through March, Hipgnosis Songs Fund had declared dividends of 21.6 pence per share, according to the latest annual report.

While the retroactive CRB III payments would be less than Hipgnosis Songs Fund expected and impacted a dividend payment this quarter, the resulting cash crunch likely won’t happen until 2024. Streaming royalties due for the period 2018 to 2020 will be paid directly to rights holders, with everything after that flowing through the Music Licensing Collective with a Feb. 9, 2024, deadline. Most of the adjustment will come from the 2021-2022 royalties owed to the MLC, according to sources. Considering the time it will take the MLC process the distributions, publishers probably won’t receive this tranche of royalties until the spring 2024.

In August, the Copyright Royalty Board stated its final determination for how songwriters and publishers would be paid for the period of 2018-2022. These rates were hotly contested between the music business and streaming services over the past six years. Though rates were nearly finalized in 2018, some streamers remanded it back to the CRB in 2019 in hopes of getting more favorable terms. In the meantime, the streaming services paid songwriters and publishers under the guidelines set by the previous period, Phonorecords II, which was lower than what was ultimately set for 2018-2022.

Ever since, the music business has been preparing for when the 2018-2022 rates would finally be settled, and streaming services would have to undergo a massive recalibration of what they had previously paid out. When the judges released their final determination in mid-August, it proved that these streaming rates overall would lead to more money for publishers and songwriters.

Other publicly traded publishing companies have also announced the amounts of their expected adjustments ahead of receiving the money. Universal Music Group-owned Universal Music Publishing Group, one of the world’s largest music publishers, expects to book a catch-up adjustment of nearly 30 million euros in the third quarter of 2023 related to Phonorecords III, UMG said in its July 26 earnings call. Warner Music Group, which often ranks as the third largest publisher, according to Billboard’s Publishers Quarterly, recognized a benefit of $20 million — less than the amount of Hipgnosis Songs Fund’s initial estimate — in the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2022, resulting from the CRB’s ruling July 1, 2022, ruling.

Reservoir Media accrued less than $3 million in royalties in the third and fourth quarters of calendar 2022 related to the CRB III decision, says CEO Golnar Khosrowshahi. Reservoir Media doesn’t expect to adjust the size of the CRB III adjustment. “We continue to believe our estimates are accurate,” says Khosrowshahi. “We’ve applied an appropriate level of conservatism in recording that revenue.”

The amount of the expected windfall appears to have received a great deal of consideration inside Hipgnosis Songs Fund. According to Hipgnosis Songs Fund’s latest annual report, the company compared the Phonorecords III accrual estimates to estimates provided by the independent valuer — Citron Cooperman — as well as the fair-value appraiser for the City National Bank-led revolving credit facility. The 182-page report mentions the term “CRB III” 49 times and includes lengthy discussions of the company’s regulatory environment and how the CRB III determination raised the headline royalty rate due to music publishers by 44% from 10.5% to 15.1%.

CRB III will give publishers less than a 44% rate increase, though. The amount owed to music publishers is a complicated formula that includes minimum per-subscriber fees and percentage-of-revenue calculations. Publishers typically received above the headline rate from streaming services from 2018 to 2022, meaning extra amounts owed retroactively will be less than they would otherwise. Sources tell Billboard the effective rate for some streaming services was in the range of 12% to 13% of service revenue rather than 10.5%.

Hipgnosis did not respond to Billboard’s request for comment.

Hipgnosis Songs Fund said on Monday it would not pay its investors a dividend in October because of new, lower projections for the amount of revenue it can expect from the U.S. Copyright Royalty Board for certain streaming royalties, causing its stock to dip more than 10%.

Hipgnosis Songs Fund’s board said it had to withdraw the proposed interim dividend of 1.1325 pence per share, which it had announced to shareholders on Sept. 21, after its independent portfolio valuer, Citrin Cooperman, “materially reduced” Hipgnosis’ projected payments from CRB III, causing the board to cut its expectations for CRB III retroactive accrual to $9.9 million, from $21.7 million. Hipgnosis’s board said it “expects to declare and pay future dividends as targeted,” subject to discussions with its lenders.

The announcement comes 10 days ahead of the London-listed music royalty trust’s first shareholder continuation vote, where investors are asked to vote on whether they want to keep the investment trust going or liquidate the fund.

Hipgnosis Songs Fund made history in the music industry when it went public in July 2018 as the first publicly listed company offering investors the chance to earn returns from the royalties on famous songs like “Sweet Dreams Are Made of This,” “Don’t Stop Believin’,” Neil Young’s catalog and more.

But the company is facing some of its first, serious growing pains as the high interest-rate environment has made acquiring more catalogs more expensive and drawn investors’ interest away from alternative investments like music rights to high-yielding bonds. Hipgnosis Songs Fund’s share price is down more than 25% over the past year and was trading at 66.26 British pence ($0.90 USD) as of 8:50 a.m. New York time.

The board has announced a number of initiatives since September that appear to be aimed at addressing investors’ concerns ahead of the Oct. 26 continuation vote, including the proposed sale of $440 million worth of catalogs from its portfolio to the private side of Hipgnosis — Hipgnosis Songs Capital, which is backed by private equity goliath Blackstone. The board said it would use the proceeds to buy back up to $180 million of its own stock, pay down $250 million of its revolving debt and to introduce new, lower advisory fees to be paid to Hipgnosis Song Management Limited.

The board has said it hopes the proposal, which must be approved by shareholders, would help to “re-rate” the company’s share price in the eyes of investors and the broader market.

The board said it learned of the reduction in expected payments around Sept. 30, after Citirn Cooperman “reduced its expectations of industry-wide retroactive payments in relation to the U.S. Copyright Royalty Board’s  decision in relation to royalties payable to songwriters for the period covering 2018-2022 (“CRB III“) for its valuation of the Company’s portfolio.”

Abu Dhabi-based music streamer Anghami led all music stocks this week after gaining 17.6% to $0.82. On Thursday, the company announced through an SEC filing it had received a written notification from the Nasdaq Stock Market regarding its closing share price being below $1.00 for the previous 30 days. The Nasdaq gives companies 180 days to regain compliance or face de-listing from the exchange. 

The warning appeared to spur a 16.5% gain on Thursday as investors saw signs the share price won’t remain under $1. In its SEC filing, Anghami stated if the share price remains under the $1 threshold it will “consider available options to cure the deficiency,” including a reverse share split (which would increase the share price by reducing the number of shares outstanding while the market capitalization remains unchanged). 

SiriusXM gained 5.7% on Friday (Oct. 13) and finished the week up 11.8%. Its $4.85 closing price was the highest for the satellite radio company since Aug. 9. The typically steady stock has fallen 17% this year as self-pay satellite radio subscribers stagnated at or around 32 million for eight straight quarters. SiriusXM will host a Nov. 8 presentation to unveil a new streaming app and preview upcoming in-car innovations and new programming. 

The 21-stock Billboard Global Music Index fell 1.3% to 1,355.65 this week as 13 stocks were in negative territory and only eight stocks gained ground.  Year to date, the index has gained 16.1%. Led by SiriusXM’s gain and a 7.6% increase from Cumulus Media, the index’s three radio stocks had an average improvement of 5.5%. Eight record labels and publishers had an average weekly gain of 0.3%. HYBE improved 6.8% while Believe climbed 3.6% and Universal Music Group added 0.6%. Streaming companies were, on average, flat this week. 

Live music stocks dropped an average of 4.8%. Shares of Sphere Entertainment Co. dropped 11.1%, effectively offsetting the 11% gain on Oct. 2 following U2’s debut performances at Sphere in Las Vegas. Live Nation dropped 3.9%, MSG Entertainment fell 3.5% and CTS Eventim shares fell 0.7%. If investors are curious what’s next for Sphere Entertainment, clues comes from an interview published Thursday. Executive chairman and CEO James Dolan said the company is “actively pursuing other markets” and “has six different kinds of spheres down to a 3,000-seater.” A Las Vegas-style Sphere may not work in London, where according to reports residents are concerned about the location and light pollution that could arise from a massive external display similar to the Las Vegas venue. 

Music stocks underperformed numerous indexes. In the United States, the S&P 500 gained 0.1% and the Nasdaq composite fell 0.3%. In the United Kingdom, the FTSE 100 gained 1.4%. South Korea’s KOSPI composite index rose 2%. 

Stocks faded after the release of consumer sentiment data for October by the University of Michigan showed a decline from September based on “a substantial increase” in concerns about inflation. Expectations for inflation in one year rose from 3.2% in September to 3.8% this month. That’s the highest mark since May 2023 and substantially above the 2.3% to 3% range seen in the two years before the pandemic. 

Also a factor in stock prices, the U.S. Federal Reserve expects to raise interest rates one more time, according to minutes released from its September policy meeting. Interest rates have an inverse relationship with equity prices. Higher interest rates make borrowing more expensive and cut down on corporate profits.

U.S. labels and musicians have long counted on welcoming international audiences to turn home-grown successes into global stars. Just as people around the world snap up tickets for Hollywood blockbuster movies, consumers abroad have been typically eager for English-language music from the world’s leading entertainment exporter.

In recent years, however, U.S. pop stars have increasingly heavy competition from artists most Americans will never know. In France, the top song of 2022 was “Tout va bien” by Alonzo featuring Nino and Naps, according to French recorded music trade group SNEP. Only one foreign song, “As It Was” by Harry Styles, cracked France’s top 10. The top of the chart’s composition looked drastically different from previous years. In 2017, when Ed Sheeran’s “Shape of You” reigned supreme with French music fans, five of the country’s top 10 songs came from foreign artists. In 2012, eight of France’s top 10 songs were from foreign artists.

To Will Page, author and former chief economist at Spotify, the changing fortunes of French artists is evidence streaming and online platforms have changed the balance of power. “When the cost structure changes, local [music] bounces back,” he says. The CD era involved higher costs — mainly manufacturing and marketing — that favored international artists. Despite France’s rule that a quarter of the songs played on radio must be French, the system still tilted toward foreign artists with greater financial backing.

But with streaming and digital distribution, those costs are all but eliminated. Local artists are free to create and distribute music in far greater numbers, satiating a demand that had been unfulfilled. Consumers who previously listened to American pop stars are all too happy to stream artists singing and rapping in their native tongue. “An unregulated free market has achieved what regulation failed to do,” says Page.

In a paper titled Glocalization of Music Streaming Within and Across Europe, Page and Chris Dalla Riva, a musician who works at music tech startup Audiomack, showed France is hardly alone in this trend toward “glocalization” — local entertainment succeeding in an increasingly globalized digital economy. In other large European markets such as Italy, Poland and Sweden, consumers are also gravitating toward local artists who create music in local languages. These countries — along with Spain, the Netherlands, Germany and the U.K. — matched or reached their peak domestic share of top 10 songs in 2022. In 2012, less than a fifth of the top 10 songs in Poland, France, Netherlands and Germany were local artists. In 2022, local music’s share of the top 10 songs reached 70% in Poland, Italy and Sweden, 60% in France, 30% in the Netherlands and Spain, and 20% in Germany.

Similar results are echoed on TikTok, which has transformed how people discover music around the world. In France, Italy, Poland and Greece, 80% of TikTok’s top 10 songs of 2022 were by home grown acts. Local artists accounted for 60% of the top 10 in Spain and 50% in the U.K. Local hip-hop is especially popular on TikTok in these markets, says Paul Hourican, the platform’s global head of music operations. Drake and Eminem may have a universal appeal but don’t connect with audiences the way local musicians can. “When you think about what hip-hop is, it’s amazing beats and truth telling, and speaking their truth in local language,” says Hourican. “That seems to be really, really connecting, and kind of forwarding the culture of hip-hop into into all these markets.”

The localization shift doesn’t surprise Sylvain Delange, managing director, Asia Pacific at French music company Believe. “We knew that the market would grow domestically, and that the local music would take a bigger share of the music consumption,” he says.

“When streaming came in, there was a very natural effect that skewed consumption towards international music for the simple reason that when streaming music comes, it serves, first and foremost, the higher income, large, tier one cities that are more open to international influence,” says Delange. “So, it’s very logical that in the beginning, international music would over index on streaming platforms. But then it would progressively switch back towards a fairly natural trend — which is domestic music.”

Early on, streaming services’ curation was much more focused on English-language music, adds Dominique Casimir, chief content officer at BMG. “You couldn’t put an Italian song in the middle of that playlist, that just certainly makes no sense.” But as streaming exploded in popularity, the services hired more staff to service the local music market and put a greater emphasis on local music. With boots on the ground, streaming services created channels and playlists that focused on local repertoire, she says. “That did change massively the work we can do together with DSPs.”

Supply alone doesn’t explain the trend toward globalization, though. An additional explanation, “is generally people’s need to identify with their culture,” says Golnar Khosrowshahi, CEO of Reservoir Media. “That is driving listenership and the importance of that identification, whether it’s around the subject matter or the sound or the person. This is not new news. People identify with their culture. Their culture is important to them. Maintaining that culture is important.”

To take advantage of the forces shaping globalization, Khosrowshahi has targeted investments throughout Latin America and the Middle East. Among Reservoir Media’s recent acquisitions are the catalogs of Latin songwriter and producer Rudy Perez and, in conjunction with PopArabia, the catalogs of Egyptian company RE Media and Egyptian rap duo El Sawareekh. Additionally, in June, Reservoir Media and PopArabia formed a joint venture with Saudi Arabian hip-hop label Mashrex and acquired some of its back catalog.

“One of the reasons we’re compelled by the Middle East market and the Arabic-speaking market is because of the size of that diaspora,” says Khosrowshahi. “The geographical reach of that diaspora goes to Malaysia and Indonesia. You have substantive Arabic speaking populations, granted different dialects, but music seems to be able to transcend them a little bit.”

Through both catalog acquisitions and frontline label partnerships, companies are finding opportunities in an increasingly online global music market. Investments are now commonplace in developing markets that were previously overlooked by music companies. Believe acquired Indian music company Venus Music, partnered with Indian imprints Think Music and Panorama Music, and partnered with Viva Music and Artists Group in the Philippines. In August, Universal Music Group-owned Virgin Music Group acquired United Arab Emirates-based Chabaka. In 2022, Warner Music Group purchased a majority stake in Africori, the top digital distributor in Africa.

While TikTok and streaming services’ international popularity have leveled the playing field for local music around the world, Delange says YouTube has been the biggest driver of this trend over the last decade. For years, a debate raged throughout Europe and the U.S. about YouTube’s “value gap,” the difference between its ad-supported royalties and per-stream payments from competing subscription services. While the West was hesitant to embrace YouTube, Asian artists and labels embraced the opportunities for promotion, marketing and monetization, says Delange. In the West, YouTube was a problematic free platform. In the East, YouTube was a free platform with a massive audience. “That was revolutionary in a market that had been decimated on the physical side,” says Delange. It’s now proving the driver for a new stage of growth in the global music market.

BMI has released its annual report for its fiscal year and, for the first time ever, it hardly contains any financial information.

Such information as how much it collected or distributed in the recently completed year is not revealed in the annual report, even though BMI has historically revealed detailed financial information every year. The report also doesn’t show how much collection and distribution amounts changed from the prior year’s $1.573 billion and $1.471 billion, respectively.

The only information indicating BMI’s financial performance in the year is an observation by BMI president and CEO Mike O’Neill that “every distribution we issued in our last fiscal year was higher than the corresponding one from the previous year.” No further specifics were provided.

The only numbers in the entire annual report that give any indication of how much activity BMI tracked in the year was a note that the performance rights organization processed 2.61 trillion performances, while its membership grew 7% to 1.4 million affiliates, and that it licenses and collects on behalf of 22.4 million works. Dollar amounts only appear once in the 24-page report, when O’Neill states in the opening note that BMI’s November distribution is forecast to be $400 million — which he labeled another record “that would make BMI the first ever PRO to ever distribute this high an amount in a single quarter.” The November quarter is in its current fiscal year, and not a part of the completed year covered in the annual report.

Last October, BMI announced it was switching from a not-for-profit model to a for-profit one. Now, in an opening note to this latest report, O’Neill disclosed the organization’s goal is to distribute 85% of the licensing revenue it collects to songwriters and publishers. The other 15% of collections, he wrote, will cover overhead and allow BMI to achieve a modest profit margin, noting that expenses typically comprise about 10% of revenue. In recent years, BMI’s distribution has been about $90% of revenue.

If BMI creates new M&A opportunities, however, or enters new businesses or offers expanded services, O’Neill said that BMI “will look to take a higher margin on any revenue generated, though always with the goal of sharing that new growth with our affiliates.” In other words, for those business, BMI may not limit itself to a 5% profit margin.

O’Neill also noted that “if BMI decides to seek outside capital or borrow money to invest in new services and opportunities, any repayments will come out of our retained profits and not distributions.”

In the current fiscal year, O’Neill reported that under the new business model BMI’s February distribution was its largest ever, up 6% over the previous year. That was then surpassed by the May distribution, which was up 15% over the corresponding year-earlier period. O’Neill predicted that the next two distributions for the remaining calendar year will follow that trend. For the full calendar year, distributions are projected to be 11% above calendar 2023, the report noted.

Going forward, O’Neill said BMI will announce percentage increases, but apparently will continue to withhold all other financial information.

Seemingly responding to immense pressure from the songwriter community and music publishers who have publicly expressed their unhappiness about BMI’s switch to profitability and its evasion of the many questions they asked, after disclosing the 85% distribution goal, O’Neill’s opening note repeats many of the thoughts he has already shared through open letters on the issue. “We changed our business model last year to invest in our company and position BMI for continued success in our rapidly evolving industry,” he wrote. “Our mission remains the same, to serve our songwriters, composers and publishers and continue to grow our overall distributions as BMI has done each year that I have been CEO. In order to continue this trajectory, we need to think more commercially, explore new sources of revenue and invest in our platforms to improve the quality of service we provide to you. I’m pleased to say that we have already made great progress on delivering these goals.”

He also reiterated that BMI changed its business model to better position the company for success in a rapidly evolving industry. “Our mission remains the same, to serve our songwriters, composers and publishers and continue to grow our overall distributions as BMI has done each year that I have been CEO,” O’Neill wrote. “In order to continue this trajectory, we need to think more commercially, explore new sources of revenue and invest in our platforms to improve the quality of service we provide to you.”

While BMI can accomplish its plans and goals on its own, O’Neill wrote, “We also recognize the opportunity to substantially accelerate our growth by partnering with a like-minded, growth-oriented investor with a successful history of building businesses. Of course, that partner would need to share our vision that driving value for our affiliates goes hand-in-hand with growing our business and building a stronger BMI.”

As Billboard previously reported, BMI is in an exclusive period with New Mountain Capital in a deal to sell the PRO — which is currently owned by radio and television broadcasters — at a $1.7 billion valuation. The valuation, however, sources say, is under downward pressure as negotiations continue.

While stating nothing has yet been signed, O’Neill wrote that the for-profit business model and the strategy outlined “will hold true for BMI whether or not we move forward with a sale.” In other words, BMI will continue to be a for-profit business, regardless of whether it sells or not.

HIFI, a financial services startup catering to the music business, has been acquired by Block, the payments technology company launched by Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey. A person with knowledge of the transaction tells Billboard the deal closed on Tuesday (Oct. 10). Launched in 2020, HIFI allows clients to track their royalty income from a variety […]

For some music companies, 2022 was the payoff for weathering the darkest days of the COVID-19 pandemic. When business returned that year — sometimes in record-setting fashion — these companies rewarded their executives handsomely, according to Billboard’s 2022 Executive Money Makers breakdown of stock ownership and compensation. But shareholders, as well as two investment advisory groups, contend the compensation for top executives at Live Nation and Universal Music Group (UMG) is excessive.

Live Nation, the world’s largest concert promotion and ticketing company, rebounded from revenue of $1.9 billion and $6.3 billion in 2020 and 2021, respectively, to a record $16.7 billion in 2022. That performance helped make its top two executives, president/CEO Michael Rapino and president/CFO Joe Berchtold, the best paid music executives of 2022. In total, Rapino received a pay package worth $139 million, while Berchtold earned $52.4 million. Rapino’s new employment contract includes an award of performance shares targeted at 1.1 million shares and roughly 334,000 shares of restricted stock that will fully pay off if the company hits aggressive growth targets and the stock price doubles in five years.

Live Nation explained in its 2023 proxy statement that its compensation program took into account management’s “strong leadership decisions” in 2020 and 2021 that put the company on a path to record revenue in 2022. Compared with 2019 — the last full year unaffected by the COVID-19 pandemic — concert attendance was up 24%, ticketing revenue grew 45%, sponsorships and advertising revenue improved 64%, and ancillary per-fan spending was up at least 20% across all major venue types. Importantly, Live Nation reached 127% of its target adjusted operating income, to which executives’ cash bonuses were tied.

The bulk of Rapino’s and Berchtold’s compensation came from stock awards — $116.7 million for Rapino and $37.1 million for Berchtold — on top of relatively modest base salaries. Both received a $6 million signing bonus for reupping their employment contracts in 2022. (Story continues after charts.)

Lucian Grainge, the top-paid music executive in 2021, came in third in 2022 with total compensation of 47.3 million euros ($49.7 million). Unlike the other executives on this year’s list, he wasn’t given large stock awards or stock options. Instead, Grainge, who has been CEO of UMG since 2010, was given a performance bonus of 28.8 million euros ($30.3 million) in addition to a salary of 15.4 million euros ($16.2 million) — by far the largest of any music executive.

This year, shareholders have shown little appetite for some entertainment executives’ pay packages — most notably Netflix — and Live Nation’s compensation raised flags at two influential shareholder advisory groups, Institutional Shareholder Services and Glass Lewis, which both recommended that Live Nation shareholders vote “no” in an advisory “say on pay” vote during the company’s annual meeting on June 9. Shareholders did just that, voting against executives’ pay packages by a 53-to-47 margin.

Failed “say on pay” votes are rare amongst United States corporations. Through Aug. 17, just 2.1% of Russell 3000 companies and 2.3% of S&P 500 companies have received less than 50% votes on executive compensation, according to executive compensation consultancy Semler Brossy. (Live Nation is in both indexes.) About 93% of companies received at least 70% shareholder approval.

ISS was concerned that the stock grants given to Rapino and Berchtold were “multiple times larger” than total CEO pay in peer group companies and were not adequately linked to achieving sustained higher stock prices. Additionally, ISS thought Live Nation did not adequately explain the rationale behind the grants.

To determine what Rapino, Berchtold and other executives should earn, Live Nation’s compensation committee referenced high-earning executives from Netflix, Universal Music Group, SiriusXM, Spotify, Endeavor Group Holdings, Fox Corporation, Warner Bros. Discovery, Inc. and Paramount Global. Netflix co-CEOs Reed Hastings and Ted Sarandos were paid $51.1 million and $50.3 million, respectively, in 2022. Warner Bros. Discovery CEO David Zaslov made $39.3 million in 2022 — including a $21.8 million cash bonus — a year after his pay totaled $246.6 million, including $202.9 million in stock option awards that will vest over his six-year employment contract. Endeavor CEO Ari Emanuel and executive chairman Patrick Whitesell received pay packages worth $308.2 million and $123.1 million, respectively, in 2021 thanks to equity awards tied to the company’s IPO that year (the received more modest pay of $19 million and $12.2 million in 2022).

Some companies in the peer group didn’t fare well in “say on pay” votes in 2023, though. Netflix, got only 29% shareholder approval in this year’s say-on-pay advisory vote after Hastings’ and Sarandos’ compensations both increased from higher stock option awards while the company’s stock price, riding high as COVID-19 lockdowns drove investors to streaming stocks, fell 51% in 2022. Warner Bros. Discovery’s 2022 compensation squeaked by with 51% shareholder approval.

Minutes from UMG’s 2023 annual general meeting in May suggest many of its shareholders also didn’t approve of Grainge’s compensation. UMG’s 2022 compensation was approved by just 59% of shareholders, and the company’s four largest shareholders own 58.1% of outstanding shares, meaning virtually no minority shareholders voted in favor.

UMG shareholders’ votes could be meaningfully different next year. Anna Jones, chairman of the music company’s remuneration committee, said during the annual meeting that in 2024, shareholders will vote on a pay package related to Grainge’s new employment agreement that takes minority shareholders’ concerns from the 2022 annual meeting into consideration. Grainge’s contract lowers his cash compensation, and more than half of his total compensation will come from stock and performance-based stock options.

Other companies in Live Nation’s peer group received near unanimous shareholder approval. SiriusXM’s 2022 executive compensation received 98.5% approval at the company’s annual meeting. Paramount Global’s executive compensation was approved by 96.4% of its shareholders. Endeavor didn’t have a “say on pay” vote in 2023, but a year ago, it’s sizable 2021 compensation packages were approved by 99% of voting shareholders.

As the radio industry came back from pandemic-era doldrums, two iHeartMedia executives — Bob Pittman, CEO, and Richard Bressler, president, CFO and COO — were among the top 10 best-paid executives in the music industry. It was new employment contracts, not iHeartMedia’s financial performance, that put them into the top 10, however. Both executives received performance stock awards — $6.5 million for Pittman and $6 million for Bressler — for signing new four-year employment contracts in 2022. Those shares will be earned over a five-year period based on the performance of the stock’s shareholder return. Neither Pittman nor Bressler received a payout from the annual incentive plan, however: iHeartMedia missed the financial targets that would have paid them millions of dollars apiece. Still, with salaries and other stock awards, Pittman and Bressler received pay packages valued at $16.3 million and $15.5 million, respectively.

Spotify co-founders Daniel Ek and Martin Lorentzon once again topped the list of largest stockholdings in public music companies. Ek’s 15.9% stake is worth nearly $4.8 billion while Lorentzon’s 11.2% stake has a market value of nearly $3.4 billion. Both Ek and Lorentzon have benefitted from Spotify’s share price more than doubling so far in 2023. In September 2022, the inaugural Money Makers list had Ek’s stake at $3.6 billion and Lorentzon’s shares at $2.3 billion.

The billionaire club also includes No. 3 HYBE chairman Bang Si-hyuk, whose 31.8% of outstanding shares are worth $2.54 billion, and No. 4 CTS Eventim CEO Klaus-Peter Schulenberg, whose 38.8% stake — held indirectly through his KPS Foundation non-profit — is worth $2.25 billion. They, too, have benefitted from higher share prices in 2023. Last year, Bang’s stake was worth $1.7 billion and Schulenberg’s shares were valued at $2.1 billion.

These top four shareholders and three others in the top 10 have one important thing in common — they are company founders. At No. 5, Park Jin-young, founder of K-pop company JYP Entertainment, owns a $559 million stake in the label and agency he launched in 1997. Another K-pop mogul, No. 8 Hyunsuk Yang, chairman of YG Entertainment, owns shares worth $199 million in the company he founded in 1996. And No. 9 Denis Ladegaillerie, CEO of 18-year-old French music company Believe, has a 12.5% stake worth $112.7 million.

Live Nation’s Rapino again landed in the top 10 for amassing a stockholding over a lengthy career, during which he has helped significantly increase his company’s value. Rapino, the only CEO Live Nation has ever known, took the helm in 2005 just months before the company was spun off from Clear Channel Entertainment with a market capitalization of $692 million. Since then, Live Nation’s market capitalization has grown at over 20% compound annual growth rate to $19.1 billion. Rapino’s 3.46 million shares represent a 1.5% stake worth $291 million.

Selling a company that one founded is another way onto the list. Scooter Braun, CEO of HYBE America, has a 0.9% stake in HYBE worth $69.8 million. That’s good for No. 10 on the list of executive stock ownership. Braun, HYBE’s second-largest individual shareholder behind chairman Bang, sold his company, Ithaca Holdings — including SB Projects and Big Machine Label Group — to HYBE in 2021 for $1.1 billion.

These rankings are based on publicly available financial statements and filings — such as proxy statements, annual reports and Form 4 filings that reveal employees’ recent stock transactions — that publicly traded companies are required by law to file for transparency to investors. So, the list includes executives from Live Nation but not its largest competitor, the privately held AEG Live.

Some major music companies are excluded because they are not standalone entities. Conglomerates that break out the financial performance of their music companies — e.g., Sony Corp. (owner of Sony Music Entertainment) and Bertelsmann (owner of BMG) — don’t disclose compensation details for heads of record labels and music publishers. Important digital platforms such as Apple Music and Amazon Music are relatively small parts of much larger corporations.

The Money Makers executive compensation table includes only the named executive officers: the CEO, the CFO and the next most highly paid executives. While securities laws vary by country, they generally require public companies to named executive officers’ salary, bonuses, stock awards and stock option grants and the value of benefits such as private airplane access and security.

And while Billboard tracked the compensation of every named executive for publicly traded music companies, the top 10 reflects two facts: The largest companies tend to have the largest pay packages and companies within the United States tend to pay better than companies in other countries.

The list of stock ownership is also taken from public disclosures. The amounts include common stock owned directly or indirectly by the executive. The list does not include former executives — such as former Warner Music Group CEO Stephen Cooper — who are no longer employed at the company and no longer required to disclose stock transactions.

The board of directors of Hipgnosis Songs Fund said on Thursday that the music royalty fund founded by Merck Mercuriadis plans to sell two portions of its song catalog in a bid to increase its stock price and pay down debt.
The proposed sales include one package of assets that consists of 29 catalogs worth roughy $440 million, which the Blackstone-backed entity, Hipgnosis Songs Capital, has agreed to acquire. The second package of assets, worth $25 million, includes songs Hipgnosis Songs Fund acquired in 2020 from Kobalt, and is being shopped to external buyers.

The board introduced the proposed sales, which have a combined value of $465 million, alongside a proposal to buy back up to $180 million of its own stock, to pay down $250 million of its revolving debt and to introduce new, lower advisory fees to be paid to Hipgnosis Song Management Limited. The board says it believes the package of proposals, which must be approved by shareholders, will serve as a “catalyst for a re-rating of the company’s share price … (which) over the last 18 months … has not reflected the fundamental value of the company.”

This follows news last week of Concord’s $469 million bid for rival Round Hill Music Royalty Fund, a move that gave Round Hill and Hipgnosis’ stock prices a much-needed boost. Round Hill’s stock price spiked 65% after the acquisition announcement to $1.13.

“Given the substantial share price discount to fundamental value in recent months, share buy backs enable (Hipgnosis Songs Fund Ltd) to invest further into the remaining portfolio at a material discount to its fundamental asset value,” according to the statement. “These disposals are of the smallest magnitude possible that would provide the required capital to execute on this strategy, whilst ensuring that the ongoing investment case for Hipgnosis Songs Fund remains intact by protecting the strength of the remaining portfolio.”

The board says that the proposed sale worth $440 million that would go to Hipgnosis Songs Capital, a fund run by Mercuriadis’ Hipgnosis Song Management and Blackstone, reflects a multiple of 18.3x historical Net Publisher Share and is “designed to protect the strength of the remaining portfolio” because it will leave the London Stock Exchange-listed Hipgnosis Song Fund with a “concentration of culturally important and successful songs.”

Those songs, it says, represent 81% of the existing portfolio by fair value, including ownership in seven of the Fund’s 10 largest catalogs, and are mostly older vintages, such as 47 of Rolling Stone’s 500 Greatest Songs of All Time (down from the Fund’s current ownership stake in 52 of those songs.

The board says the sales price represents a 51% premium, compared to the asset’s valuation based on the company’s 30-day average market capitalization up to Sept. 13, 2023. It also represents a discount of 17.5% to the fair value of the package of assets compared to the valuation disclosed in the company’s most recent annual report, out March 31.

By comparison, Concord’s cash bid of $1.15 per share for Round Hill’s Music Royalty Fund represented a 67% premium to the share price and a 11.5% discount per-share net asset value ascribed to Round Hill by Citron Cooperman, a leading valuation expert.

With regards to the second proposed sale of rounghly $25 million-worth of songs, the board said it had long anticipated it would need to sell some of what it acquired from Kobalt’s Fund One.

“They were considered non-core as the company does not have perpetual ownership rights or the songs require ongoing accounting and reporting obligations that take up significant bandwidth which can be better focused on active song management,” the board said in the statement.

Billboard reported that a package of non-core assets was being shopped in July.

Hipgnosis Songs Fund will hold meetings for shareholders to vote on the proposals as well as the company’s first continuation vote on or before Oct. 25, according to the statement. If approved, the $440 million asset sale to the Blackstone-backed Hipgnosis fund will result in the the publicly listed Hipgnosis fund paying $6.7 million in corporation tax.

Concord’s $469 million bid for Round Hill Music Royalty Fund, announced on Friday, did more than give Round Hill’s shareholders a tidy premium over the previous day’s closing price. The offer, which must be approved by 75% of Round Hill shareholders at the company’s Oct. 18 general meeting, also provides a vote of confidence in music asset valuations and the ability of the marketplace to seek out value.

Andy Moats, director of music, sports and entertainment at Pinnacle Financial Partners, says Concord’s offer is “a win-win for all parties.” Round Hill, which had been trading at a steep discount to its catalog’s value, was offered a premium over the share price prior to the announcement. Concord gets to pay fair-market value for a catalog of 150,000 songs by the likes of Bruno Mars, The Supremes and Louis Armstrong.

The deal comes as Round Hill’s share price struggled to meet expectations and falls short of it the value ascribed by multiple independent experts. Concord bid $1.15 per share, 11.5% below the per-share net asset value (NAV) ascribed to Round Hill by Citron Cooperman, a leading valuation expert. Round Hill’s shares had been trading at a 47% discount to NAV the prior day and had fallen 11.5% year to date.

But the fact that Concord’s bid is slightly below Round Hill’s NAV shouldn’t be viewed as a negative, says Larry Miller, clinical professor and director of music business program at New York University. “When you see a liquidity event like this at even close to NAV, I think that is a sign of a strong business fundamentals, notwithstanding how some class of investors — in particular investors in alternative assets — might view the value of the catalog to NAV.”

Moats agrees that Concord’s bid should be seen as a positive despite falling short of Round Hill’s recent NAV. “It was consistent with what we’ve seen in the past” in terms of where deals transact, he says. Not all deals close precisely on valuations, Moats says. Some prices are above valuations and some fall below. The Round Hill price is “within range of what I’ve seen over the last five years where something trades relative to its valuation,” he says.

Other people see additional positives in Concord’s bid for Round Hill’s music royalty fund — which still leaves Round Hill with a substantial publishing and recorded music business. To some, the acquisition reflects a functioning market in which Round Hill’s music assets are moving to Concord’s more efficient cost structure.

Roy Salter, senior managing partner at Virtu Global Advisors, says the deal shows the market is working as intended. “Among the major messages symbolized by the Concord transaction is the continuing advancement of music royalty capital market efficiencies, wherein an increasing number of pension and profit-sharing funds, insurance companies, sovereign funds and similar capital market constituents are steadily entering the market in search of predictable, non-correlated investment returns, and business operations which support music royalty administration continue to be enhanced such as enables optimal market-efficiencies,” he says.

For others, Concord’s bid is an important vote of confidence for firms’ NAV models. “The key takeaway from this Round Hill deal is that it affirms the valuation methodologies that have been used for large music portfolios,” says Michael Poster, an attorney with Michelman & Robinson. “For all the negativity that has come out of a handful of analysts around some of these valuation methodologies, at the end of the day, the market tells the story.”

NAV, a measure of an investment fund’s assets minus debts and liabilities, has been a sticking point for Round Hill and the other publicly traded music royalty fund, Hipgnosis Songs Fund, in recent years. Citron Cooperman, FTI Consulting and other valuation experts employ valuation models that calculate music catalogs’ values by estimating their cash flows over a lengthy period of time. A company’s NAV can improve if the valuation expert believes the catalog merits a lower discount rate, for example, or because favorable industry trends suggest previous revenue forecasts are too conservative.

Some equity analysts have raised questions about not just the valuations but the music industry’s tendency to constantly update NAV. Most funds in other sectors hold their new acquired assets at cost “until there are verifiable reasons” — such as a market transaction — “to suggest a change is warranted,” Stiefel analysts wrote in a Jan. 7, 2021, note to Hipgnosis investors.

Over the last roughly two years, a gap between independent valuation expert’s NAV and Round Hill’s trading price had widened dramatically. The discount to NAV stood at 5% on Dec. 31, 2021, when Round Hill’s NAV was $1.12 per share, and peaked at 51.6% on April 3, 2023, when Round Hill fell to $0.615 per share.

To give the market more faith in its NAV, Round Hill commissioned a second valuation report, by FTI Consulting, that put its NAV within 3% of Citron Cooperman’s estimate. This additional valuation supported Round Hill’s view that its portfolio was being “significantly undervalued” by investors, Round Hill CEO Josh Gruss said at the time.

The move appears to have helped some: Round Hill’s share price rose 19.7% over the following month (Hipgnosis shares, not part of Round Hill’s efforts to change investors’ impressions, fell 4% over that period). But whether investors remained concerned with NAV methodologies or motivated by rising interest rates and other macroeconomic factors, Round Hill’s share price remained well below NAV until last week.

Concord’s bid also provided a boost to Hipgnosis Songs Fund shares that have also been trading at a deep discount to NAV. The day before Concord’s bid was announced, Hipgnsosis shares closed at 0.798 pounds ($1.00), a 58.3% discount to the company’s NAV on March 31 of $1.92. Whether investors regained faith in the NAV or expect Hipgnosis to negotiate a similar asset sale, its shares jumped 15.7% to 0.923 pounds ($1.15) the day of the announcement, peaked at 0.962 pounds ($1.20) on Tuesday and closed at 0.93 pounds ($1.16) on Wednesday.

Had Concord’s bid come in significantly less than NAV, there could have been ripple effects that touched everybody from banks to investors. In such a scenario, people would re-think the value of catalogs and their interest in investing in music assets.

But that didn’t happen. Concord and Round Hill, both widely considered to be smart players in the music asset market, agreed to a price tag close to the often-criticized NAV. If the market was looking for a signal about how to value Round Hill, it received a credible confirmation.

“There’s a lot of stability and consistency in this space,” says Moats, “and this transaction provides that.”

Spotify led a group of high-flying streaming stocks this week by gaining 14.8% to $157.54 per share, increasing its market capitalization by nearly $4 billion to $30.7 billion. The world’s largest streaming company, which boasted 220 million subscribers as of June 30, has clawed back nearly all its losses since its share price dropped 14% […]