Katy Perry sells her music catalog for $225M

[Sorcerer 10,026]

That doesn't sound good. I wouldn't sell chart-topping, decade-defining music that sold millions of copies for that amount. But at least Katy has more money to venture into something else, maybe even a tour.

[myluis617 5,021]

33 minutes ago, Sorcerer said:

That doesn't sound good. I wouldn't sell chart-topping, decade-defining music that sold millions of copies for that amount. But at least Katy has more money to venture into something else, maybe even a tour.

Exactly what I was thinking. Her catalog is gonna generate so much money 🤯🤯

Her music literally has a generation on hold waiting for those moments of nostalgia. 

[RAMROD 92,220]

By "her catalog gonna make so much money", y'all must mean Teenage Dream and on a stretch Prism songs, right? Cos that's her most recognizable music in her career. 

[Red 85,026]

Just now, RAMROD said:

By "her catalog gonna make so much money", y'all must mean Teenage Dream and on a stretch Prism songs, right? Cos that's her most recognizable music in her career. 

One of the Boys too g0rl

[NATAH 28,689]

1 hour ago, bionic said:

She's basically exchanging the lifetime of royalties for an upfront lump sum. She still controls the music AFAIK (or at least she controls it as far as she did beforehand)

so she gets no future royalties?

[InTheCloset 12,672]

1 hour ago, NATAH said:

what happens when artists do this? do they lose all control of their music?

i need answer to this too

[weed 63,314]

I’d say OOTB $25M, Teenage Dream $100M, Prism $90M, Witness $7M, Smile $3M 

[Myartpopcouldmean 94]

Can't wait for Prism (katys version) 

[LoliLux 1,058]

I don't like the idea how music is increasingly treated like stock prices at exchanges and seen as a financial investment. It should be more art, less commercial. Katy Perry gave away her biggest discography for money, she will no longer own it in juristic terms.

[LoliLux 1,058]

2 hours ago, NATAH said:

what happens when artists do this? do they lose all control of their music?

The buyer is entitled to this:

Rights to the songs

The artist’s royalty percentage

Merchandise revenue

Potential hologram performances (lika ABBA)

"When an artist decides to sell their music catalog, the rights to use and reproduce their songs in any way belong to the buyer. With so many artists’ income tied up in sales of albums and concert tickets, many are looking to make one massive deal instead."

"As far as investors go, they can buy these catalogs in order to make revenue by using songs in radio spots, television, film placements, and any other place that would require media rights. The LA Times says they're "safe bets for institutional investors like pension funds... especially when interest rates are low."

"Other potential revenue for catalog owners could come from creating "derivative works," the Times said. These might be Broadway musicals, coffee-table books, and biopics and documentaries that rely heavily on the actual song content to make compelling shows like those on Netflix."

https://marketrealist.com/media-and-entertainment/how-much-are-music-catalogs-worth/

[bionic 34,840]

1 hour ago, NATAH said:

so she gets no future royalties?

That's right.

Basically, Katy either thinks that the lifetime of royalties on the songs will be less than $225 million, or she'd rather have that money upfront than have it spread over decades. Right now the tax on lump sum payments is lower than the tax on royalties (and this is likely to change in future) so selling can be financially advantageous if that is your incentive.

[Kim Petrus 258]

Some artists only live on royalties when their career are over. I don’t understand this move

 

[Teletubby 107,962]

6 minutes ago, MyARTPOPcouldmean said:

Can't wait for Prism (katys version) 

Katy didn't sell her masters because like many artists she doesn't own them (Universal Music owns masters to her albums). she sold her stake in royalties and the publishing rights (copyright ownership of the melody and lyrics).

[voltron92 1,859]

Music FOR the Bling 

[RAMROD 92,220]

22 minutes ago, Kim Petrus said:

Some artists only live on royalties when their career are over. I don’t understand this move

 

Probably her shoe company actually made millions in revenue, so she does not need that monthly royalties scheme 

Edited September 18 by RAMROD