I don’t really see labels as the enemy either, but I know from my own experience, the label looks out for the label, even in the short-term. For example, I used to manage an artist who got signed to a new label (before I came on board as manager and booking agent). He was their launch artist, which is a pretty big vote of confidence. The owners of the label were also members of one of the top-selling groups in the genre (it wasn’t country) and their first promotional idea was to take this artist out on their 4-month tour to open. One month before the tour another band on another label came and offered them a good sum of money to open the tour. So the label had to decide. Take the cash upfront for this new band to open for them, or let their own investment open for them, both artists being brand new. They took the money upfront. That’s just one example of how some of these labels work.

But, I’m not trying to argue with you whether these are a good or bad idea, just sparking conversation to try to weigh what difference this is going to make in how we get, listen to and enjoy music.

What everyone agrees on, though, is that without labels there can be few, if any, genuine “stars”. And without sales, in the current scenario, there can be no labels.

And what everyone in the industry knowns, but few are willing to admit, is that no matter what steps are taken, sales are going to keep going down as long as there is a free alternative to buying music.

So something has to change; the revenue has to come from the ancillary sources.

Either way you look at the 360–as an intrusive contract or as a non-intrusive contract–there are potential concerns.

It’s hard to argue that the demise of the megas as a whole is a good thing for the industry. So I’m in favor of the kind of deals that at least provide some benefits to the artist.

But you’re absolutely right–we don’t know how all of this is going to shakedown. I guess I just don’t automatically see the label as the enemy. Labels generally have the best interest of their artists in mind–always in a commercial sense, and often in an artistic sense.

They do bad things sometimes. But who doesn’t? The industry has to work together to solve the very real problems that it faces.

But regardless of that fact, I don’t see the consolidation of all aspects of an artists career as necessarily positive, especially in an indie label situation. Let’s say for example you are on an indie label with four other artists. Let’s say that all of the artists are receiving their fair share of attention (which Brody asked about). There are several scenarios that are entirely possible, but I won’t go into them all. Let’s say that one of the artists hit with a big song. It is only naturally that that artist will receive most of the attention. This is a historical fact even without 360 deals. Flippo mentions Hank WIlliams’ 360 deal and I was told by Charlie Louvin that he and Ira got off of MGM because “if you were Hank or Patti Page, you didn’t have a chance.” Same thing happened to Capitol artists during the Garth years. Now that’s good for the label and the top selling guys, but what about the artist on the bottom who depends on that concert revenue?

Another scenario is that the label gets swallowed by a bigger label and they, as they often do, make cuts you have an artist not only without a record label, but with out a booking agent and, possibly, proper management.

And there are of course more extreme situations I won’t go into, but you see my point. Once all industries (music, that is) consolidate, concert venues are held by one group, the labels by a few groups and the radio by a couple, it becomes a trading game and the artist loses again.

I think this kind of deal works especially well on the indie scene because it can help create regional stars. The small label now controls distribution, publicity, and promotion in a narrow market in the same way that a mega controls those things in a national and global market.

For the major label artists, I think this has major benefits because it creates less debt and less pressure to sell 350,000 units.

If we’re talking about the 360 deal as just a label pulling money away from an artist without offering a fundamental benefit, then I guess I don’t believe that’s a genuine 360 deal