# Pump Audio Warning and Darth Vader



## schatzus (May 17, 2009)

*From a post at the Film Music listserv... *
Dear Pump Audio Artist, We would like to thank you for your music and congratulate you on being part of one of the fastest growing music licensing companies inthe world. Since the acquisition of Pump Audio by Getty Images, we continue to hear praises from a wide expansion of our clients on the depth and quality of our catalog and that is a testament to you. As we plan for the future growth of our offering to the global music licensing client base, we have determined that to fully support the 400+ person Getty Images sales staff and invest in marketing and technology needs that we must make adjustments to the current revenue split system. By making these changes, we intend to accelerate the pace of our growth and achieve our goal of becoming the largest music licensor in the world. The new model will be as following: 1) Licensing fees will now be 35% to the artist, 65% to Pump Audio/Getty Images 2) This change will take place as of July 1, 2009. Any royalties payable through June 30, 2009 will not be affected by this change 3) Performance royalty splits will remain at 50% of the publisher's share 4) Those that don't accept the new split will have their music removed from the system no later than December 31, 2009. 5) The rights you granted to us in the original contract do not change If you have any questions, please email [email protected]. Please sign the enclosed amendment and send back to: Artist Relations [email protected] Fax #: 845-757-5556 Mailing Address: Pump Audio Artist Relations PO Box 458 Tivoli, NY 12583 *********************************************************************
So I called my rep at Pump, certain that they'd at least TRY to justify this...... 
1. My rep at Pump couldn't promise me the problems they've been having reconciling all of their databases (including, among other things: incorrect contact, PRO, and direct deposit info) are going to be fixed anytime soon. Even with all the new bodies, none dedicated to admin... 
2. She also informed me that Pump would now be giving their 'clients' UP TO A YEAR to report usage. Not pay, just report! So an artist could conceivably bewaiting for 2+ years for payment if the bi-annual reporting didn't fall in one's favor. 
3. I've also learned from another source that Pump are 15 months behind in registering their PRO info. I have music in the PumpBox and have gotten a placement, but after this and the forced addition of our content to iStockPhoto.com (without receiving the benefits that people who joined iStock of their own volition), I'm beginning to wonder if I need to'beat feet' and let my participation die a natural death... 
Thoughts? Will this start a movement to bail from their mess......? Anybody else worried about this?
The whole thing reminds me of Darth Vader's line...
*"...I have altered the deal, pray I do not alter it further."*


----------



## cc64 (May 17, 2009)

Wow! 

Reading this, many 4 letter words come to mind. Pimp for the company's name being one of the milder ones...

Please guys, if any of you have music with Pump, take it back, send them a message.

Is there anyone on this list that has even ever recouped the cost of one of their cues with pump? Getty, aren't they the people that killed the photo industry with their 1$/image policy? So now they are asking you to support their 400+ staff into killing the rest of your industry and yourself?

Claude


----------



## Lex (May 17, 2009)

sux


----------



## Frederick Russ (May 17, 2009)

Agree Lex. This is really bad news and worse, a very bad trend.


----------



## Illuminati (May 17, 2009)

Hi,

Sorry to hear about the change of service. Hope you find a decent replacement or alternative soon. Unfortunate how they just up and invented their own rate which goes against all the more established library standards and policies.


----------



## cc64 (May 17, 2009)

I really love the part where they say "since we want to become the biggest Library company in the world we'll have a lot of expenses, advertising etc.. so we had this great idea let's break our 50/50 contract unilateraly and shove our suppliers a 35/65 deal down the throat. It's for their own good in the end after all"

Hum...

I don't know about the US, but here in Canada it's illegal to assign more than half to a Publisher.

Anyone?

CC


----------



## midphase (May 17, 2009)

I think it's time that we (composer) start looking at the big picture. This can only hurt everybody in the long run.

Take your music back...there are better ways, trust me!


----------



## lux (May 17, 2009)

yup sounds crap


----------



## Frederick Russ (May 17, 2009)

I truly wish composers could stick together on issues like this. There are those though that will settle to do it for next to nothing just for a chance to do it at all. Without a more unified effort, its doubtful things will change. Its definitely possible with the right organization and leadership but historically not too probable unless its all of us together.


----------



## Jaap (May 17, 2009)

Just got through the whole procedure of acceptance and sending a cd etc and then suddenly I got this news....

I am withdrawing my music immediatly.


----------



## kdm (May 17, 2009)

I completely agree with the sentiments here. This kind of abuse of music is only going to kill the composing industry, at least in many formerly lucrative markets. 

It's a game of odds - if you think you can get enough exposure and enough placements, you make decent money, but the question is - are you making a profit over the year, or just adding a little extra income? If the latter, then your main source of income is being jeopardized by your secondary source. Not a good business plan imo. You work, you get paid for your time, expertise and investment - skilled artistry should never come cheap. It's that simple.

Yes, it is time composers stood up to this.


----------



## Brobdingnagian (May 18, 2009)

Makes my left buttock twitch. Always chipping away fees from us, a little at a time. What will be next?

The admin snafu described above is also concerning.

THEY need our content NOW, but WE are made to wait ad infinitum for our dinero.........

Relieved I have nothing to do with this library, although I considered applying to their premium services on a friend's suggestion. Seemed like a great deal....past tense is imperative here......


----------



## synthetic (May 18, 2009)

The guy cleaning toilets is probably an unpaid music industry intern. 

Yeah, a surprising turn for them. They do earn it with all that work of, um, printing CDs and having a website. That's worth 2/3rds, right?


----------



## kdm (May 18, 2009)

synthetic @ Mon May 18 said:


> Yeah, a surprising turn for them. They do earn it with all that work of, um, printing CDs and having a website. That's worth 2/3rds, right?



It seems to me that too much of society (US only?) considers the ability, or more likely the chosen position of "selling" of more value than the product itself - hence 65/35 now. Imo, it should be 80/20 or even 90/10 in the composer's favor, esp. for online/larger libraries that exist on size, general advertising and volume sales alone. For an individual agent working directly for you, a better cut makes sense.


----------



## rgames (May 18, 2009)

kid-surf @ Sun May 17 said:


> How does one plug these holes with so many composer hopefuls willing to bend over backwards to work for nothing?



Two options:

1. Convince people that the product delivered by the true professionals is worth the price difference.

2. Get rid of the composer hopefuls.

IMHO, #2 will never happen. Modern music production makes it too easy to write to the level of mediocrity required by most customers. So it's the classic problem of a flooded market because of low barriers to entry. It's made worse by the fact that production music is basically a commodity.

Remember the recent survey that showed that 90% of composers make their primary living doing something else? That's a lot of hopefuls... I still have a day job, but I don't compose for free. However, my guess is that there are huge numbers of folks willing to do so.

I guess we can find solace in the fact that most of history's great composers had little in the way of material wealth. The difference now is that others are making big profits off of our music while continuing to allow most composers to live as starving artists.

So, should we take pride that, nowadays, at least someone is making money from our music? Nah - screw that. I want my cut!

rgames


----------



## kid-surf (May 19, 2009)

*synthetic -- * you may be right in both instances.

*kdm --* That is something I was pondering recently. Regarding the industry, there's definitely a grey line one must cross before they are "considered" more valuable than those selling him. Let's take agents for example: As a newly signed artist your agent is way more important than you. You're only as fancy as your representation. Once you cross the grey line your agent is only as fancy as you. And at that point you are making more $ than your agent. 

It's an interesting prospect for me in that: As an artist I feel that 10% is too much. But I wouldn't want my wife to make less than 10% off her clients. 

So I agree w/you -- until one can make a name for themselves the person selling them is holds more value. After all, they are selling to other folks just like themselves who consider what we do to be a commodity and little else. Particularly in this economy.

65/35 is a fucking joke. 90/10 sounds bad enough. 

Here's a shitty situation for you. As a screenwriter, let's say you write a script, you get it to a buyer you trust and know on a personal level. You make the deal yourself. You still have to give someone 10% for what is probably a cut and paste deal when they did little else. Why? Perception. Only because it would look bad if you did the deal yourself.

*rgames --* that sounds like an up hill battle. I'm interested to follow this story [plugging leaks] but it's not something that keeps me up at night. I don't want to be a great artist who is penniless, that is, for me, a hollow victory. I aim to be very comfortable (commercial crap $$$) while doing my art on the side (pretentious Indie).


----------

