Marketing cd

[norway]

If the company has spent 13 mill. on the album\ will they be the responsible for getting the money back by advertising and promote the product?

Is it axl or the company who is in deep shit if the sales don't make up to the effort?

[Dave_Rose]

Axl 2 me would be in deep shit

[ClintroN]

Dont know mate but i'll bet ya they'll never let this ever happen again

ever!!

Axl has truelly fucked with the system!!

[norway]

I'm thinking which part is risking financial hell, axl or interscope?

[nesquick]

regarding the exellent sales figures of the "greatest hits" (one of the best selling album of 2004 for the moment) AND WITHOUT SINGLES VIDEOCLIPS AND TOUR, I think "chinese democracy" is very likely to be a success with a huge promo in add (singles, videoclips and tour)

[guitarpatch]

Usually, the record company gives the artist a non recoupable advance. So basically they give axl 13 million dollars to make the album. Whether or not he uses the entire amount of money or half of it, its up to him, its his money. Now, if the album doesn't sell enough to make back the 13 million dollars, then axl won't collect any of the royalty payments until the album makes it's money back. If axl has any money left from the 13 million dollar advance, he still keeps it. So if CD doesn't make enough to cover its cost, its the record company's lost. Axl could very well make money on the loss.

[ccorn69]

Usually, the record company gives the artist a non recoupable advance. So basically they give axl 13 million dollars to make the album. Whether or not he uses the entire amount of money or half of it, its up to him, its his money. Now, if the album doesn't sell enough to make back the 13 million dollars, then axl won't collect any of the royalty payments until the album makes it's money back. If axl has any money left from the 13 million dollar advance, he still keeps it. So if CD doesn't make enough to cover its cost, its the record company's lost. Axl could very well make money on the loss.

i had no idea thats how it worked cool thanks man

 hopefully cd sells tons and puts axl on top again and interscope gets its money, but if axl used the money (the 13 million from the label) for say three albums like its rumored then they would only have to recoup approx 4.3 million per album to meet the 13 million advance so what im wondering is that if its a 13 million advance for multiple album type deal does axl only get money when they meet the 13 million total or when the particular album meets its share of the of the 13 million, say the 4.3 million if its a 3 album deal? (sorry i hope it makes sense)

[jabba2]

Im guessing Axl will eventually release 2 or 3 records from music GNR created over the years for CD. Whenever he decides to add vocals i guess will be when Interscope gets their money back, and they will probably make a few million more. It just depends how many years from now 

[Mr Cowbell ?]

Usually, the record company gives the artist a non recoupable advance. So basically they give axl 13 million dollars to make the album. Whether or not he uses the entire amount of money or half of it, its up to him, its his money. Now, if the album doesn't sell enough to make back the 13 million dollars, then axl won't collect any of the royalty payments until the album makes it's money back. If axl has any money left from the 13 million dollar advance, he still keeps it. So if CD doesn't make enough to cover its cost, its the record company's lost. Axl could very well make money on the loss.

i had no idea thats how it worked cool thanks man

 hopefully cd sells tons and puts axl on top again and interscope gets its money, but if axl used the money (the 13 million from the label) for say three albums like its rumored then they would only have to recoup approx 4.3 million per album to meet the 13 million advance so what im wondering is that if its a 13 million advance for multiple album type deal does axl only get money when they meet the 13 million total or when the particular album meets its share of the of the 13 million, say the 4.3 million if its a 3 album deal? (sorry i hope it makes sense)

I would think that the 13 is the money in contract for CD. Once he delivers CD thats it for that 13 million wether or not it grosses 13 million. Because he was contracted for that one album and the money was given for that, If Axl wanted to blow the 13 million on buying an island somewhere or a new mansion, or use it to record a few more albums thats his choice, its his money. The record company can come after axl for CD, but they can't take everythign he has created with that money.

[norway]

With other words:

The company will really back up the release, band and other gnr related stuff...

Can't hardly wait for the release man

[guitarpatch]

Usually, the record company gives the artist a non recoupable advance. So basically they give axl 13 million dollars to make the album. Whether or not he uses the entire amount of money or half of it, its up to him, its his money. Now, if the album doesn't sell enough to make back the 13 million dollars, then axl won't collect any of the royalty payments until the album makes it's money back. If axl has any money left from the 13 million dollar advance, he still keeps it. So if CD doesn't make enough to cover its cost, its the record company's lost. Axl could very well make money on the loss.

i had no idea thats how it worked cool thanks man

 hopefully cd sells tons and puts axl on top again and interscope gets its money, but if axl used the money (the 13 million from the label) for say three albums like its rumored then they would only have to recoup approx 4.3 million per album to meet the 13 million advance so what im wondering is that if its a 13 million advance for multiple album type deal does axl only get money when they meet the 13 million total or when the particular album meets its share of the of the 13 million, say the 4.3 million if its a 3 album deal? (sorry i hope it makes sense)

That would depend on what's in the contract between the two parties. Is it possible? Yes, but it wouldn't be in Interscope's best interest to have seperate costs for different albums, because certain album's might make their cost and another album wouldn't. 

The most likely scenerio is that Interscope collects the band's royalty payments until it is paid off. This would be in effect for any album the band releases in the future. So if CD and the other 2 possible albums don't cover their cost, they can still collect the royalty payments on all future releases until the amount of money paid in advance has been covered. Hope this makes sense.