Any significance? Axl switches from ASCAP to SESAC

[Spirit]

Axl is no longer registered as an ASCAP writer/composer. As far as I can tell he was with ASCAP up until a couple of weeks ago.

Apparently he is now with SESAC.

Some info about SESAC:

Whereas ASCAP and BMI operate on a not-for-profit basis, SESAC retains some income as profit. While ASCAP and BMI distribute all income from performance royalties to their composer and publisher affiliates (less an administrative fee), SESAC retains an undisclosed amount of performance royalty income. SESAC is also unique among the U.S. performing rights organizations in that it does not offer open membership ? one must be approved to join.

[Voodoochild]

Didn't get it. What's the benefit to be with SESAC?

[COMAMOTIVE]

I don't have any clue what you're saying

[Mysteron]

Axl is considering how new songs written in the future are managed at a time when the band have reformed.

One would guess there is an intention to write new material, so, nice find Sherlock 

ASCAP / SESAC et al are music publishers. Educate yourselves here; http://www.ascap.com/Home/Music-Career/articles-advice/ascapcorner/corner1.aspx

[pilferk]

Not to disagree with mysteron..but they really aren't publishers. We are likely disagreeing over semantics, though.  They are essentially clearing houses (along with bmi), called PROs (performing rights organizations), that grant use licenses to places like radio stations, music halls, restaurants, venues, etc. This allows those places to play any/all songs from that entities (ascap, sesac,bmi) catalog of authorized material...and pay one fee, rather than per song. The size of the fee corresponds to the reach of the entity...so a radio station, say, pays more than a restaurant.

The pros track this stuff by reviewing playlist (for radio stations, etc) and by polling about music type (restaurants, bars, etc) played.

The answer to the original question is: because seacs distribution schedule, even keeping a portion of the proceeds, is more advantageous than ascaps, largely. Especially if there is current (post 2005) music being considered.

http://www.artistshousemusic.org/expert/what+is+the+difference+between+ascap+bmi+sesac+music+reports

http://blog.songtrust.com/songwriting-tips/pros-whats-the-difference/

[Mysteron]

Not to disagree with mysteron..but they really aren't publishers. We are likely disagreeing over semantics, though.  They are essentially clearing houses (along with bmi), called PROs (performing rights organizations), that grant use licenses to places like radio stations, music halls, restaurants, venues, etc. This allows those places to play any/all songs from that entities (ascap, sesac,bmi) catalog of authorized material...and pay one fee, rather than per song. The size of the fee corresponds to the reach of the entity...so a radio station, say, pays more than a restaurant.

The pros track this stuff by reviewing playlist (for radio stations, etc) and by polling about music type (restaurants, bars, etc) played.

The answer to the original question is: because seacs distribution schedule, even keeping a portion of the proceeds, is more advantageous than ascaps, largely. Especially if there is current (post 2005) music being considered.

http://www.artistshousemusic.org/expert/what+is+the+difference+between+ascap+bmi+sesac+music+reports

http://blog.songtrust.com/songwriting-tips/pros-whats-the-difference/

Not going to disagree. I was just keeping my post short (typing on my phone)

I always count on you for the educational additions

[ice cream sand pig]

Not to disagree with mysteron..but they really aren't publishers. We are likely disagreeing over semantics, though.  They are essentially clearing houses (along with bmi), called PROs (performing rights organizations), that grant use licenses to places like radio stations, music halls, restaurants, venues, etc. This allows those places to play any/all songs from that entities (ascap, sesac,bmi) catalog of authorized material...and pay one fee, rather than per song. The size of the fee corresponds to the reach of the entity...so a radio station, say, pays more than a restaurant.

The pros track this stuff by reviewing playlist (for radio stations, etc) and by polling about music type (restaurants, bars, etc) played.

The answer to the original question is: because seacs distribution schedule, even keeping a portion of the proceeds, is more advantageous than ascaps, largely. Especially if there is current (post 2005) music being considered.

http://www.artistshousemusic.org/expert/what+is+the+difference+between+ascap+bmi+sesac+music+reports

http://blog.songtrust.com/songwriting-tips/pros-whats-the-difference/

Not going to disagree. I was just keeping my post short (typing on my phone)

I always count on you for the educational additions

isnt he amazing? hes our resident genius. cant have a good forum without one.

[TheBaconman]

Not to disagree with mysteron..but they really aren't publishers. We are likely disagreeing over semantics, though.  They are essentially clearing houses (along with bmi), called PROs (performing rights organizations), that grant use licenses to places like radio stations, music halls, restaurants, venues, etc. This allows those places to play any/all songs from that entities (ascap, sesac,bmi) catalog of authorized material...and pay one fee, rather than per song. The size of the fee corresponds to the reach of the entity...so a radio station, say, pays more than a restaurant.

The pros track this stuff by reviewing playlist (for radio stations, etc) and by polling about music type (restaurants, bars, etc) played.

The answer to the original question is: because seacs distribution schedule, even keeping a portion of the proceeds, is more advantageous than ascaps, largely. Especially if there is current (post 2005) music being considered.

http://www.artistshousemusic.org/expert/what+is+the+difference+between+ascap+bmi+sesac+music+reports

http://blog.songtrust.com/songwriting-tips/pros-whats-the-difference/

Not going to disagree. I was just keeping my post short (typing on my phone)

I always count on you for the educational additions

isnt he amazing? hes our resident genius. cant have a good forum without one.

I thought that was my roll


Hahahhahaha

[ice cream sand pig]

Not to disagree with mysteron..but they really aren't publishers. We are likely disagreeing over semantics, though.  They are essentially clearing houses (along with bmi), called PROs (performing rights organizations), that grant use licenses to places like radio stations, music halls, restaurants, venues, etc. This allows those places to play any/all songs from that entities (ascap, sesac,bmi) catalog of authorized material...and pay one fee, rather than per song. The size of the fee corresponds to the reach of the entity...so a radio station, say, pays more than a restaurant.

The pros track this stuff by reviewing playlist (for radio stations, etc) and by polling about music type (restaurants, bars, etc) played.

The answer to the original question is: because seacs distribution schedule, even keeping a portion of the proceeds, is more advantageous than ascaps, largely. Especially if there is current (post 2005) music being considered.

http://www.artistshousemusic.org/expert/what+is+the+difference+between+ascap+bmi+sesac+music+reports

http://blog.songtrust.com/songwriting-tips/pros-whats-the-difference/

Not going to disagree. I was just keeping my post short (typing on my phone)

I always count on you for the educational additions

isnt he amazing? hes our resident genius. cant have a good forum without one.

I thought that was my roll


Hahahhahaha

everybody knows bacon and geniuses are of equal importance. you lose either one and the world goes to shit. japanese bacon sucks.... no fat, no grease. you have to actually add oil to the pan to cook it.

i guess you would be canadian bacon, being from canada and all? canadian bacon is good, but i really miss that american bacon.

[Voodoochild]

The answer to the original question is: because seacs distribution schedule, even keeping a portion of the proceeds, is more advantageous than ascaps, largely. Especially if there is current (post 2005) music being considered.

So it's a hint that he may have changed to be better suited in case of new music?

[sky dog]

good job Spirit....always interested in the business side of things....helps kill the time between albums! 

[Mysteron]

The answer to the original question is: because seacs distribution schedule, even keeping a portion of the proceeds, is more advantageous than ascaps, largely. Especially if there is current (post 2005) music being considered.

So it's a hint that he may have changed to be better suited in case of new music?

Pilferk will know for certain, but I think swapping to SESAC will only benefit newly released songs. Any older songs will still be paid through ASCAP

[Voodoochild]

The answer to the original question is: because seacs distribution schedule, even keeping a portion of the proceeds, is more advantageous than ascaps, largely. Especially if there is current (post 2005) music being considered.

So it's a hint that he may have changed to be better suited in case of new music?

Pilferk will know for certain, but I think swapping to SESAC will only benefit newly released songs. Any older songs will still be paid through ASCAP

Thanks. Hopefully it will be for a purpose.

[Spirit]

The answer to the original question is: because seacs distribution schedule, even keeping a portion of the proceeds, is more advantageous than ascaps, largely. Especially if there is current (post 2005) music being considered.

So it's a hint that he may have changed to be better suited in case of new music?

Pilferk will know for certain, but I think swapping to SESAC will only benefit newly released songs. Any older songs will still be paid through ASCAP

I don't think so actually. Axl is registered as an SESAC writer now, meaning any royalties he gets when any of the old songs are played will be managed through them.

[Mysteron]

The answer to the original question is: because seacs distribution schedule, even keeping a portion of the proceeds, is more advantageous than ascaps, largely. Especially if there is current (post 2005) music being considered.

So it's a hint that he may have changed to be better suited in case of new music?

Pilferk will know for certain, but I think swapping to SESAC will only benefit newly released songs. Any older songs will still be paid through ASCAP

I don't think so actually. Axl is registered as an SESAC writer now, meaning any royalties he gets when any of the old songs are played will be managed through them.

I think the older songs are still registered with ASCAP even though Axl has moved. I think he still gets paid through ASCAP as an expired artist. Again, not 100% on that, I could be completely wrong. Someone told about all this years ago and half of it went in one ear and out the other 

I saw Bob Dylan listed on the SESAC related site, so I think Knocking on Heavens Door could be a SESAC song

[Spirit]

The answer to the original question is: because seacs distribution schedule, even keeping a portion of the proceeds, is more advantageous than ascaps, largely. Especially if there is current (post 2005) music being considered.

So it's a hint that he may have changed to be better suited in case of new music?

Pilferk will know for certain, but I think swapping to SESAC will only benefit newly released songs. Any older songs will still be paid through ASCAP

I don't think so actually. Axl is registered as an SESAC writer now, meaning any royalties he gets when any of the old songs are played will be managed through them.

I think the older songs are still registered with ASCAP even though Axl has moved. I think he still gets paid through ASCAP as an expired artist. Again, not 100% on that, I could be completely wrong. Someone told about all this years ago and half of it went in one ear and out the other 

I saw Bob Dylan listed on the SESAC related site, so I think Knocking on Heavens Door could be a SESAC song

If you search up any GNR song on ASCAP's register, Axl is registered as an SESAC writer for all songs.

[Mysteron]

The answer to the original question is: because seacs distribution schedule, even keeping a portion of the proceeds, is more advantageous than ascaps, largely. Especially if there is current (post 2005) music being considered.

So it's a hint that he may have changed to be better suited in case of new music?

Pilferk will know for certain, but I think swapping to SESAC will only benefit newly released songs. Any older songs will still be paid through ASCAP

I don't think so actually. Axl is registered as an SESAC writer now, meaning any royalties he gets when any of the old songs are played will be managed through them.

I think the older songs are still registered with ASCAP even though Axl has moved. I think he still gets paid through ASCAP as an expired artist. Again, not 100% on that, I could be completely wrong. Someone told about all this years ago and half of it went in one ear and out the other 

I saw Bob Dylan listed on the SESAC related site, so I think Knocking on Heavens Door could be a SESAC song

If you search up any GNR song on ASCAP's register, Axl is registered as an SESAC writer for all songs.

But the songs are still on ASCAP I presume

[Spirit]

But the songs are still on ASCAP I presume

Yes, because people like Slash is registered with ASCAP.

Also, Black Frog is still an ASCAP publisher.

[raindogs70]

Axl's publishing deal is probably expiring soon, the one he originally made with Sanctuary.

[HBK]

Good Info Thanks Gunners