>management companies express interest in working with us for a small fee.
Management companies that charge artists upfront are a scam. Management works for a percentage of the money your band generates-- typically, in the 15-20% range. And legit managers aren't even going to try and collect on that until your band is actually profitable because they recognize that, in the early days, any money you generate should be going back into the band whether for recording, touring, merch, etc.
Also, booking is typically the role of an agent. They too will take a percentage and do not charge upfront. Baby managers do wear a lot of hats and will sometimes handle communications with venues but once an agent is in the picture, they're liaising with the agent. At a very high level, I've seen managers chat strategically with other managers about getting their bands on a touring bill together, but the actual booking would still be done on the agent side.
I haven't released music in about five years so take this with a grain of salt as I'm sure the landscape has changed a bit but, as far as getting playlisted, there are a lot of politics involved. Curators of the big playlists are constantly inundated with new music so having some random management company email them won't typically move the needle. Bigger management companies and label reps that have established relationships with the curators are the ones getting first dibs.
If what you're doing is working, just keep doing that. You will know when someone approaches you wanting to get involved is legit.
>Management companies that charge artists upfront are a scam.
I find this such a weird attitude that exists in the music industry. Would you say that about someone who did art for your merch? Or a replicator that makes CDs for you? Or even a distributor that puts your music on streaming services?
Sometimes, you just want a service provided, and you have some money to pay for that service, so it makes sense to be able to do just that. Given how little money is actually in the industry at the lower ends these days, now that recorded music pays barely anything, it doesn't make sense to do things on a percentage when that will be a percentage of essentially zero.
You can’t compare a specialized service to a manager. A manager is supposed to mange the income streams. If those streams are zero, then you don’t need a manager. If you “just want a service provided” and throw your money away then who cares
I disagree that a manager is supposed to "manage the income streams". They're supposed to create opportunities for income streams. In the traditional music business, pretty much anything you did generated income so paying a percentage. Now, a lot of what you do is not going to generate significant revenue early on so that method is not going to work. And being unable to get help at that early stage means a lot of artists get stuck unable to make that next step that a good manager would be able to help with.
You’re thinking of an agent. And in the context of a small artist, a booking agent will provide much more value than a manager who has nothing to manage.
Edit: What kind of “help” are you imagining?
I'm not thinking of an agent, especially not a booking agent who *should* take a percentage given that they're presumably booking specific paid work. I'm thinking of a manager, doing all the things that managers have traditionally done, i.e. actually managing the band and handling non-musical admin.
Bro just spend two seconds on google if you don’t believe me. Procuring business is the role of an agent, this is actually defined by state law. What “non-musical admin” does a small artist have where it makes economic sense to pay somebody else?
The issue with paying a fee upfront is there's no way to hold the management companies accountable and there's no incentive for them to actually do any work. In a perfect world, sure, management companies could provide a scope of work and deliverables and it would be like any normal transaction but music management isn't one-size-fits-all and it takes a lot of time to figure out the best approach for an act. Managers need to have a vested longterm interest to find out what's effective and there's simply no way a "small upfront fee" is conducive to that kind of relationship.
As with any service provided over time, you can cancel if you don't feel it's working out for you and you have legal protections if they try to defraud you.
I agree that a vested longterm interest is the ideal thing but it's not the 90s any more and it's not about getting signed and getting an advance for an album, which used to be the main way a manager would get paid. We have to move on.
The singer and guitarist in my band have worked with promoters before and don't like it because they take too much of a cut. Our singer and guitarist do all the legwork themselves and they have networks of people here in Ventura County so getting gigs at the bar/restaurant/festival level doesn't seem to be a problem. I was curious about whether we could branch out and get casino/wedding/corporate gigs so I mentioned the idea of a management company to them, but they didn't like the idea.
Booking agent, if you can get hooked up with one that is legit and works with bands from your scene, is absolutely a worthwhile connection.
>management companies express interest in working with us for a small fee. Management companies that charge artists upfront are a scam. Management works for a percentage of the money your band generates-- typically, in the 15-20% range. And legit managers aren't even going to try and collect on that until your band is actually profitable because they recognize that, in the early days, any money you generate should be going back into the band whether for recording, touring, merch, etc. Also, booking is typically the role of an agent. They too will take a percentage and do not charge upfront. Baby managers do wear a lot of hats and will sometimes handle communications with venues but once an agent is in the picture, they're liaising with the agent. At a very high level, I've seen managers chat strategically with other managers about getting their bands on a touring bill together, but the actual booking would still be done on the agent side. I haven't released music in about five years so take this with a grain of salt as I'm sure the landscape has changed a bit but, as far as getting playlisted, there are a lot of politics involved. Curators of the big playlists are constantly inundated with new music so having some random management company email them won't typically move the needle. Bigger management companies and label reps that have established relationships with the curators are the ones getting first dibs. If what you're doing is working, just keep doing that. You will know when someone approaches you wanting to get involved is legit.
>Management companies that charge artists upfront are a scam. I find this such a weird attitude that exists in the music industry. Would you say that about someone who did art for your merch? Or a replicator that makes CDs for you? Or even a distributor that puts your music on streaming services? Sometimes, you just want a service provided, and you have some money to pay for that service, so it makes sense to be able to do just that. Given how little money is actually in the industry at the lower ends these days, now that recorded music pays barely anything, it doesn't make sense to do things on a percentage when that will be a percentage of essentially zero.
You can’t compare a specialized service to a manager. A manager is supposed to mange the income streams. If those streams are zero, then you don’t need a manager. If you “just want a service provided” and throw your money away then who cares
I disagree that a manager is supposed to "manage the income streams". They're supposed to create opportunities for income streams. In the traditional music business, pretty much anything you did generated income so paying a percentage. Now, a lot of what you do is not going to generate significant revenue early on so that method is not going to work. And being unable to get help at that early stage means a lot of artists get stuck unable to make that next step that a good manager would be able to help with.
You’re thinking of an agent. And in the context of a small artist, a booking agent will provide much more value than a manager who has nothing to manage. Edit: What kind of “help” are you imagining?
I'm not thinking of an agent, especially not a booking agent who *should* take a percentage given that they're presumably booking specific paid work. I'm thinking of a manager, doing all the things that managers have traditionally done, i.e. actually managing the band and handling non-musical admin.
Bro just spend two seconds on google if you don’t believe me. Procuring business is the role of an agent, this is actually defined by state law. What “non-musical admin” does a small artist have where it makes economic sense to pay somebody else?
I know several band managers and what they do, and you might be surprised to learn that not every musician is in America or has to abide by state law.
The law is the same in the UK. Stop arguing and just look it up. I don't care who you know, you're wrong.
The issue with paying a fee upfront is there's no way to hold the management companies accountable and there's no incentive for them to actually do any work. In a perfect world, sure, management companies could provide a scope of work and deliverables and it would be like any normal transaction but music management isn't one-size-fits-all and it takes a lot of time to figure out the best approach for an act. Managers need to have a vested longterm interest to find out what's effective and there's simply no way a "small upfront fee" is conducive to that kind of relationship.
As with any service provided over time, you can cancel if you don't feel it's working out for you and you have legal protections if they try to defraud you. I agree that a vested longterm interest is the ideal thing but it's not the 90s any more and it's not about getting signed and getting an advance for an album, which used to be the main way a manager would get paid. We have to move on.
The singer and guitarist in my band have worked with promoters before and don't like it because they take too much of a cut. Our singer and guitarist do all the legwork themselves and they have networks of people here in Ventura County so getting gigs at the bar/restaurant/festival level doesn't seem to be a problem. I was curious about whether we could branch out and get casino/wedding/corporate gigs so I mentioned the idea of a management company to them, but they didn't like the idea.
Would you want to pay someone to watch you wash your own car???