tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1930103.post108655977816537805..comments2024-03-28T09:33:26.444+00:00Comments on No Rock And Roll Fun: Simon Hayes Budgenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07084524317888577404noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1930103.post-1086820017371144642004-06-09T22:26:00.000+00:002004-06-09T22:26:00.000+00:00Well, it depends on how you defined "recouped." I...Well, it depends on how you defined "recouped." If you define it as "made enough in artist royalties to recoup the costs and make the artists payable," then I'll buy the 21, because by that scheme you make around US$1.15 on each unit sold. But if you mean "had a positive net revenue," i.e. the money made from selling the damn thing was more than you spent recording, manufacturing, distributing, and marketing it, then I call bullshit. You make US$9-11 an album after manufacturing costs, and so if you spent US$30k in marketing costs and US$50k in marketing (common for a low-profile debut album) you only need to sell 9k records to make a profit, and there have to have been more releases that did this. Of course, the higher-profile releases that cost US$200k to make and US$1m to market, well, yes, then you need to sell around 140k, which is harder. But still pretty damn possible. How many albums went gold? Guaranteed, ALL of these recouped under the second scheme.Mike B.https://www.blogger.com/profile/06554556290192827166noreply@blogger.com