“We’re working hard to confirm this right now, but several sources seem to be pointing towards the same exciting piece of news: Rapper Jay-Z and and singer Beyonce are in talks with Apple to establish a record label. The rumors place the deal as either close to closed or already executed, with an impending announcement on the horizon. Jay-Z, Beyonce, and Matthew Knowles (Beyonce’s father) will chair the label. If true, this could bring unprecedented power, legitimacy, and experience to Apple’s music division,” Joshua Karp reports for The Boy Genius Report.
“Straight from Def Jam and Beyonce’s label Music World Entertainment, we’re gonna’ have to smash this rumor and put it to rest for now. A source directly involved with both parties who wished to stay anonymous told us, ‘This is the first I’ve ever heard of any of this’ and ‘for the time being this is a rumor,'” Karp reports.
Full article here.
“For the time being…” is hardly a rumor-smashing statement. Note that the February agreement between Apple Inc. and The Beatles’ Apple Corps stated that Apple Inc. will own all of the trademarks related to “Apple” and will license certain of those trademarks back to Apple Corps for their continued use. There do not seem to be any legal issues standing in the way for Apple to become a “record label” if the company so wishes. Eliminate the Middlebronfman!
What would be the difference from now?
Recording studios?
I don’t think so
Apple has is all now and indi will eventually kill the suits
Now if they bring in the Stones it might be worth it. But rap?
I don’t think Apple would, or could, do this, because if they did, the Beatle’s ‘Apple Corps’ would sue and this time they would win – hands down!
what the fsck is this about… apple’s music venture a rap label?? is this a joke? (jay-z is anawsome rapper, but the crappy music bieng played now is disgusting, and goes against apple’s “Think Different”… maybe theyll set up for independant artists or indie lables…) this is hardly the way apple goes.
This is actually interesting _if_ the label (Apple Records???–yikes!) existed primarily to sign talent, not create their own music. That way if, say, Green Day was dissatisfied with their current contract, when it ended they could negotiate with the Apple label rather than their current one.
If that became the case, then Apple would have something there. If they’re looking just to create their own music via Jay-Z, Beyonce and a few others, that’s far less interesting or valuable.
This is definitely a joke.
Despite the money potential, Steve Jobs is passionate about his work and ONLY releases products/services that he personally loves. Steve Jobs DOES NOT like Rap/R&B. If Apple were to start a label, it would not begin with those genres.
The evidence is that Apple Corps (the old Beatles tax haven) was pretty much bought off in the last round of negotiations (note the change of name from Apple Computer to Apple, Inc). That could have been in anticipation of such a move.
And while rap is probably not Steve’s favorite genre, I think there’s plenty of evidence that he doesn’t have any disrespect toward any particular musical style, rap or otherwise.
Yeah, why rap? It’s not like there’s a big market for rap. And Apple would never accept any kind of business proposal like this that has a chance to increase their revenue and establish a dominant market position because Steve doesn’t like rap. That’s just common sense.
Not a chance. Apple will not fight Apple records (UK) again, especially by clearly violating their terms. Why would Apple risk their rights to use the name “Apple.”
If there is any truth to this it would be in the form of a Jobs investment in a new record company. But then why would Jobs do that? Even he may not admit it, but he is a capitalist. Why would he invest in a floundering business model? The only reason would be if he thought he could do it in a revolutionary way, but the most logical thing would be to simply eliminate this increasingly unnecessary middle man.
How about a record promotion company – all they do is publicity. Basically an Ad agency that is geared toward music. The non record company – record company.
I bet this is garbage, but it does make one think of what could be. But right now Jobs can’t undercut the record companies because he shoots himself in the foot as the iTunes catalog dries up. Not that he would not love to see the record companies demise, he can’t have his name on it.
I don’t see why this would necessarily be a bad thing. Just because they get Jay-Z and the Knowleses to run it doesn’t mean that it has to be a rap label.
Look at the range of music produced by the majors. Apple is already a major player in the music biz and could easily form a record label that actually produces music that people that people want to buy, whatever the genre, rather than just churn out cr@p.
You can’t argue with the fact that Jay-Z, Beyoncé and her father know a bit about the actual production side of the music biz and Apple knows a thing or two about selling music.
Steve DOES love music though. The biggest issue with iTunes now is that labels don’t want to sing long deals. So they become a Label, sign the artists that are getting ripped off by current Labels. The income from iTunes sales stays the same, but only gets split twice. Part to Apple to cover costs and some profit. Some to the artist. Sounds like a good plan to me.
kennyyy921:
would it have been better if it was a rock or country label? :rolleyes:
I think IF there was some kind of deal in the works, then it would most likely be to have Apple as the exclusive digital distributor for their own labels or a new joint venture between Roc-A-Fella (Jay-Z’s label) and Music World Entertainment (Beyonce’s label).
What you all need to understand that many artist nowadays do indeed have their own “labels” and use the majors mostly for distribution. In Hip-Hop this is generally the rule; but more and more Pop, Rock and Jazz artists are doing this as well, and this is probably the biggest influence that the Hip-Hop world has had on the music industry. Jay-Z sold MILLIONS of records worldwide for years before DefJam asked him to run things.
Hip-Hop had taken the notion of “selling records from the trunk of your car” to a whole new level. Russel Simmons, Jay-Z, Jermaine Dupri, LA Reid and other music moguls were all DIY’ers before they became the heads of their respective labels (Def Jam, Island, BMG America).
Before there’s more Hip-Hop dissing here (which is bound to happen, if I know my fellow MDN posters) please consider this: In this time of so-called declining CD sales, the only genres of music that HAVE NOT seen a significant sales decline are Hip-Hop and R&B. If it weren’t for these 2 genres, the music biz would be dying a lot faster than it is already.
Hip-Hop is a bit like Apple, really: rumors of it’s demise have always been greatly exaggerated.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” /> The Germans have a great saying, “Totgesagter leben länger”, meaning “those declared for dead live longer.”
Apple Corp might not be able to sue and win … it’s RAP, not music. One for MikeR, one against Charko.
Perhaps they are thinking of forming a “division” to “promote Indies” … officially? No studios, no big promotions, no long-term contracts … just an agreement-to-brand-and-sell.
Or, perhaps, they will BUY Apple Corps?
DLMeyer – the Voice of G.L.Horton’s Stage Page Pod-Cast
Happy iCal Day
Oh yeah. And obviously, the label would only be a rap/R&B label because Apple’s basic business strategy has always been to find an adequate rut and never consider change.
And first prize for stupid rumour goes to…
isnt apple still just a software hardware company?, i dont think it would be the right step for apple to create a music label right now. just my 2 cents +)
I love the smell of subtle racism in the morning. Those who think that Jay-Z is only about rap should do some research into some of the groups he has worked with… Sure, HE made rap records, but he is into many types of music, and is all about business and would promote all types of music for sure.
THERE IS NOT ENOUGH ROOM ON THIS PAGE TO BEGIN LISTING THE REASONS AS TO WHY THIS IS NOT EVEN REMOTELY POSSIBLE
ALTHOUGH IT IS FUN READING LAYMAN’S REASONS WHY THEY THINK THIS MAY HAPPEN
I don’t believe it.
Unless Apple created a subsidiary company (not using the Apple name) that was wholly owned by Apple, as to avoid the problems with the Beatles…
I read that Pfizer is working on a new SUV. It will have airbags on the exterior as well.
Oh come on guys doesn’t anyone see the huge conflict of interest. Selling your competitors’ music and selling your own from the same site. Why am thinking that this might just be a teensy-weensy anti-competitive. This is way out of my field but if you service 75 percent of the market and then start directly competing. Jeez!
a few points:
– Apple could provide a medium for big name artists to unshackle themselves from record label control. If you want, google for stories about David Bowie and Prince buying their own catalogues back from record labels so that they could control what was being done with their music. An Apple label would obviously not be viable for artist who rely on the huge publicity resources of the big labels. This seems explicitly aimed at well established artists who are going sell a ton of records no matter which label they are on.
– this is not about rap. this model would be just as appealing to the Rolling Stones or U2.
– Apple could be involved only in the digital distribution end of things. Many record labels sub-contract out the production of physical discs. Apple would not have to get involved in that end of things in order to be involved in the digital end.
One can only hope that if, for some insane reason, this label business is indeed true, that Apple wouldn’t build the foundation with these pop clown acts. The music industry is notoriously sleazy. J-Z and Beyonce are just two of the countless acts that continue to capitalize on and promote said sleaze.
Smart business move. Helps the artists, Apple and the consumer.
There are some words which should never be in a sentense together:
Jumbo shrimp
Micro$oft Works
Bush & intellegence
and, of course
rap & music
no way this is gonna happen
Hardly interesting to me- I have no desire to listen to any of these celebrities’ sad version of so-called music. And I highly doubt Apple would get on board with such lightweight talent.
Charko: I don’t think Apple would, or could, do this, because if they did, the Beatle’s ‘Apple Corps’ would sue and this time they would win – hands down!
Did you read MDN’s take? Apple now owns all trademarks in both computer and music service businesses and license it back to Apple Corps.
No Rap for Jobs.: Despite the money potential, Steve Jobs is passionate about his work and ONLY releases products/services that he personally loves. Steve Jobs DOES NOT like Rap/R&B. If Apple were to start a label, it would not begin with those genres.
Really? Eminem is a rapper and Steve Jobs said that his music was growing on him. Besides, personal taste should not prevent business opportunity, should it? Jobs is smart enough to see that. Either way, the evidence was the use of Eminem’s song for iPod ad.
——-
There are many reasons why I think this is just a nonsensical rumors. There is no need to invent new ones or rehash old ones that are no longer valid. I also don’t agree with MDN’s take. Creating a new label only partially solve the situation with getting new and popular music. However, the huge library on back catalog must still be licensed, so Apple must still deal with the likes of Bronfman.
Well, like investing in the market, whatever happens happens. Conjecture and opinion mean nothing.
Personally, I think it’s a good move. Since Apple makes so little on the songs sold on iTunes, my guess is that they can guarantee the artists a larger percentage than Universal (or whatever label) is offering, while at the same time guarantee themselves more than just 5 or 10 cents a song. Also, since there will be a record of every song downloaded, the accounting would be much more transparent to the artist — Apple won’t be able to obscure the actual numbers the way the record labels probably are. I think it’s a good deal all around.
And rap music or hip hop music? I can’t stand the stand it, but there are many people out there who love it, and you have to start somewhere. I’m a huge fan of Arlo Guthrie but I doubt many would rejoyce if he were the first artist signed to a potential Apple label. That’s one of the wonderful things about music — there’s something out there for everybody.
Regarding the deal with Apple Corps, who knows? Perhaps part of the agreement covered this possibility. Perhaps Apple Corps would get a small cut of the profits.
As always, time will tell — this might all wind up being rumor, and nothing more.
Anybody see Bronfman last night on (what was it, CNBC…?) a piece about the music industry and iPhone and such? I just watched a few minutes of it but I saw Bronfman, revealing yet again his complete misunderstanding of the music buying public and (surprisingly) the realization that it might just be too late for his product to continue to sell.
Funny.
“Eminem is a rapper and Steve Jobs said that his music was growing on him.”
He probably meant it’s growing on him like an irritating fungus (Genus Caucasoid, Species bee-yotches) that needs to be scrubbed off and avoided.
Is Bronfman secretly moving to Pakistan?
“Warner’s Bronfman cashes in, sells home for $50-million-plus
Bloomberg (July 13, 2007)
Edgar Bronfman Jr., chairman and chief executive officer of Warner Music Group Corp., agreed to sell his New York City Upper East Side townhouse for more than $50-million (U.S.), The New York Observer reported.”
I kinda see iTunes as a type of record label, just not one that endorses specific artists, but one that supports all artists and supplies the easiest and fastest distribution of the artists songs, etc.
Perhaps they could sign an artist or artists who are not currently under contract and make more money on the sale of songs for that artist. That would cut out the middle man…the record labels and all their leverage. Wouldn’t it be cool if many of the major artists would jump ship and sign with the iTunes label for digital distribution??
As CD sales dwindle and become prehistoric, iTunes could fill this void and become the label themselves and split everything 50/50 with the artist…both would make more money and the record labels would do the death spiral. Sounds like a good future to me.
Rap/Hip-hop is the sewer of music, populated by jellyfish and chameleons, misogynists, and racists. Rap/hip-hop is an amplifier for the toilet-mouthed underclass; it is fuel for the destroyers, and a recruiting tool for vice. It has contributed precious little to the music community and it destroys everything that it touches. Worthless is the music and worthless become those that listen to it.
If it happens, it’ll be with Jay Z, Beyonce, and the Beatles (!) Who else? How many other top artists b**** about the majors?
An easier question with a much shorter answer might be “Which artists like the major loan sharking, demi-mob organization they’ve sold their soul to?” Not too many…void(0);
Direct-to-Market distro is becoming Apple’s coup d’etat(sic) in all markets it does business. How would this be any different?
btw…for those that like to wrap their personal bigotry in false monikers like “taste” or “knowledge”… get OVER yourself. Jazz wasn’t considered “real music” by the industry doom-mongers, and Rock n Roll is what brought record burning to the masses.. You people are no better…
Anagrams of “Paul McCartney” (of Apple Corps):
My pact unclear
Can rectum play
Mr Clean-Cut pay
Can crumpet lay
Apple has become a major player in the music business through the iTunes Store WITHOUT getting involved in the down and dirty parts of the business. It has managed to stay at arm’s length. “We sell your product, we share the profits.”
I don’t think Apple would want to risk stepping into the messy, often-sleazy cesspool that is the engine room of the music business. It would involve setting up a whole new kind of operation, spending untold millions just to get going, and having to start dealing with lots of shady characters and institutions.
Having said that, however, Stevie J. always seems to have a unique perspective on things and a master plan, so conventional wisdom may not hold true . . .
not a chance. I can’t see Apple paying for studio time, high priced producers, marketing, tour support etc. for artists.
They will simply allow direct distribution deals for major independents, instead of them having to go through the slow approval process of an aggregator.
@ BustingTheSkullsOfIdiots
Exactly what the last generation of social conservatives said about rock and roll. Keep it up.
I think there are a lot of older white people on this site. Everyone that thinks that what you hear on the radio in terms of rap is all that rap is about, is dead wrong. That music is, for the most part, fabricated and engineered by greedy men in suits exploiting music. Real, true hip hop music has a point, great beat, and ingenuity. I’d suggest listening deeper rather than just on the surface.
And C1 is right, that is exactly what the last generation said about rock and roll. You’re all about that huh? Seems a little hypicritcal to me pal.
And, Jay-z is into far more than hip hop, he has rock, pop, and rap acts signed to his labels. He did a song with Chris Martin from Coldplay. You guys are generalizing something you know shit about. Congratulations for showing your ass and acting like a jerk.
What if someone such as Jay-Z, Beyonce, and Matthew Knowles wanted to start their own label and bypass the majors’ distribution. They would need deals with Apple, Amazon and Walmart. Apple doesn’t have to start its own label and it’s doubtful they will.
This will never happen.
I cant see Apple ever becoming a content creation company, there just isnt any real innovation in that sector.
I know content creators hold all the cards compared to a distribution service (like iTunes), but I really cant see this happening and if it did I think Apple would go into the movie creation business 1st anway and not the music business.
I think Apple would just buy up the record labels instead of starting one up from scratch.
Makes good business sense to me.
Pay the $millions of dollars, and you get the acts, the talent, the people who know the business, the distribution – the whole package.
SJ then goes in and puts his people in and clears out all the label’s leachers and slackers – just like when he came back to Apple in the 90s.
If a musician uses Pro-logic to create their music, creates a label of their own, use the manager of the label to negotiate a deal with Apple inc. to distribute their music through itunes with the a similar revenue return as the major labels are getting……
Then Apple inc. have not broken any agreement with Apple Corps. However…inn the settlement to the lawsuit in which Apple Corps lost to Apple Computer, Apple Computer bought all the rights to the trademarks and are now licencing some of those trademarks back to Apple Corps.
Do the sums!
So if the rumour is true…….DO THE SUMS!
@ Petey, Last Sunday, Prince distributed his latest album free of charge in the Sunday Mirror Newspaper in the United Kingdom for an undisclosed sum of money……
The major record labels especially Universal gnashed their teeth and tried to spread FUD over that action claiming that music would be divalued if musicians gave it away free…..It is alleged that Prince made more money from the deal than if the record labels had distributed it for him. Recorded media shops get all their music on a 100% sale on return basis, which means that teh shops make the most money, the labels make the second most because they offset the returns against the fees to the musician.
If Apple distribute the music through itunes, for starters they are not making hard copies of discs, so the issue of Sale on return becomes redundant. The musician gets a higher royalty return because two GREEDY BASTARD middlemen agencies are out of the equation. The profit margin is hihger because studio fees are negated by Logic pro and only one copy needs to be delivered to Apple inc. to download onto itunes!!!!
THINK DIFFERENTLY!
I’m not a big fan of hip-hop – there are certain individual songs that I like – but as a genre, I’m not much of a fan. I belong to the older generation, so my tastes run more to old-time rock.
However, my biggest disappointment is to find that even the followers of rock, especially classic hard rock, include so many doorknobs these days.
I recently went to see a Deep Purple concert – decades after seeing them the last time – and I was very disappointed by the crowd around me.
It was full of brain-dead anal cavities – biker-wannabes with their leather jackets, ponytails, chains and obviously empty (other than containing liberal portions of THC and alcohol) skulls.
A whole bunch of them kept screaming, “Highway Star! Highway Star!” throughout the concert, even while the band was playing other songs. Jeez, we’ve heard of one-hit wonders, but you pay 50 bucks just to hear that one, ancient chestnut?
When somebody shouted back, “That’ll be the encore, idiot! Come back then,” it led to a back-and-forth shouting match with all sorts of obscenities being thrown about. (It WAS the encore)
And then there were those who insisted on playing guitar solos loudly with their mouths (“See? I’m a Deep Purple expert!”). It was especially irritating during the softer passages of songs.
Never used to be like that. Good rock used to attract a loud, boisterous, but generally classy and involved crowd back in the day.
Or maybe I am just an older fuddy-daddy out of touch with the times.
gzero’s comment shows the most undertstanding of how the music industry works.
Labels today provide several functions. The front the money required for the recording, they front the money required for marketing, and the provide distribution. It used to they did this for almost all music — recording was so expensive that there was no way for an artist to afford to make a record. However, as recording becomes more computer-based, especially in styles such as hip hop and R&B than lend themselves to computer-based creation, artists are creating their recordings with their own money. Further, most of them also work their own marketing via myspace and other internet-based efforts. For artist who puts in the work and achieves success at these first two areas, all they need is distribution. And many artist now are doing “distribution only” deal with labels.
*This* would make sense for Apple. Not that Apple is going to be a label that fronts money for recording or marketing, but that just does distribution. Actually, they almost do that now. Several artists that record at my studio have their music on iTunes — they got in through CDBaby, a “label” of sorts, that artist sign with for distribution only. CDBaby takes a 10% cut, leaving 90% for the artist, and in return CDBaby gets the music on iTune, eMusic, etc. While CDBaby is a great deal for artists as it is, why not let artist sign for distribution on iTunes directly?
Of course, for artists that can’t afford to make their own albums (e.g. some styles cost a lot more to produce, e.g. rock costs more than hip hop because you need a larger room, more mics, etc), traditional labels will still be needed to front the cost of recording. However, if Apple became a major player in the distribution game, labels could get reduced to just fronting money to pay for recording and maybe marketing. Basically, they get reduced to being musical venture captitalists*.
marc
blue on blue recording studio
* the way it typically works today is that labels pay the full cost of recording and assumes all the risk in case the album is a financial failure. Most people are not aware that 9 or out 10 albums produce are total financial losses, but in that case, the artist does not have to pay the label back — the financial lose is the label’s problem. But in return, the label takes a majority of the profit if the album happens to be a financial successful. Of course, most of that profit goes to cover the lose from the other 9 artists who were financial loses. The label hopes hope that they pick well enough that the profit from the 1 successful artist covers the loses of the other 9.
THINK The Sword of Damocles!!!!!!
I see a lot of people here thinking of an “Apple” label working in the way that the OLD labels work… which is the reason the old labels are dying. Apple wouldn’t need to do ANY of that. They’ve already put the music making tools in the hands of the artists. They wouldn’t need (or want) to print physical CD’s at all. The only thing Apple would need to do would be to provide online distribution — which they are already the kings of. Old label rip off the artists and the consumers. Apple currently receives about 20 cents of the 99 cents charged for each track, and that mostly covers their costs. The artists get, what, about 5 cents? The rest goes to the labels, and it is almost ALL profit, as there is nothing spent on distrubution or physical product. An Apple label would probably mean Apple takes 30-40 cents of the 99, the artist makes the music and gets the rest of the 99.
As for legal problems, uhm, why don’t you folks actually READ the article. Apple, Inc. OWNS the Apple Records trademark. They have the rights now to do whatever the fsck they want with regards to music.
I’m sure I’m simplifiying this whole thing, but not by much. Stop thinking of a “label” like the ones that are failing now. An Apple label would most likely be nothing like those dinosaurs.
@ marc, That is what the labels would like you to believe, meanwhile they do not allow singer songwriters to front their own work because they would demand a higher cut than plastic faced boy & girl bands who are paid next to nothing for fronting someone else’s work.The original creators of the music are kept in a dark sweat shop writing and creating music!
Time they broke free like successsful sports personalities who can now command more money than some musicians.
Err the last stats I saw Hip Hop / Rap accounted for 2/3 of US music sales.
MW writing as in the writing is on the wall for the record labels.
Black people invented rock and roll.
Black people invented jazz.
Black people invented the blues.
Black people invented house music.
Black people invented R&B.
Black people invented rap.
Black people invented gospel.
Black people invented all of the modern music that defined and actually created “youth culture.”
Just because rap sucks (for the most part) does not mean that this is a brilliant idea for Apple.
Jay-Z and Beyonce are both very rich and influential. If they make the move, people like Prince and David Bowie and other music mavericks are sure to follow. Linkin Park (who had huge problems with their record label) would go for this.
This will make iTunes THE music destination of the future. This is something we Apple fans should embrace.
The sad part is… if the announcement came that Linkin Park and Coldplay were going to open an Apple label, all you Apple fanboys would be jumping for joy.
But because it’s “that rap crap,” you think it’s worthless. Sad.
And by the way, 95% of rap worldwide is consumed by Europeans and Asians.
I believe if there are any negotiations going on-it is not about Apple becoming a label. It would be about Apple’s involvement in distribution.
For those spouting Rap is 2/3 of all music sold, blah, blah, blah-windows has a 90% market share, So Rap is the musical equivalent of windows?
According to this story from CBS, the discussion is about a line of computers, not a music deal:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/20/business/main1736024.shtml
I’m disappointed to see such racial hatred show its ugly head in a Mac forum.
I can’t believe how shallow some people are. I’m not a Jay-Z fan, but I guarantee the label is not going to be rap only. I’m betting that would be a small part of it at all. If the morons on here who think these rappers are dumb. Tell me again how many millions did 50 cents make on his investment in Vitamin Water. They are much smarter than you think.
Also have people forgotten that EA (Electronic Arts) started their own label. I’m betting its so they don’t have to deal with all the legal bullshit that the labels put them through just to use an artists song in a game.
There’s a paradigm shift happening that should have happened a long time ago. The old school record labels are really just a marketing vehicle, that has been outdated by the internet. I won’t go on an on about it, but its about time there is change.
That would be stupid.
Galloway, I essentially agree with your comments. However, what you describe can happen via the current system, so it would not really fit the description of the story, which depicts a traditional “lablel”. In the current system, Apple can act as a distributor for not only the traditional label, but for an individual that owns all the rights to their music and recorded the music on their own.
The parts of a label that are missing here – marketing, etc – are things that Apple should not get involved in, anyway.
@DRM sucks
I pretty much agree with you points too, and I think that someone way back in the reporting of this story must be misinterpreting something. Essentially, for Apple to start a “label”, at least the way I think it should be done, they’d have to do nothing more than what they are doing. Maybe set up some minor administration so the artists would have someone to actually talk to on a regular basis if said artist wanted to forego the entire traditional label idea and do all their own production, marketing, etc. Although “marketing” is more or less what Apple does now with placement on the iTunes home page, the “Just For You” tailoring feature, and the iTunes “what’s new” e-mails and podcasts.
This would help to stop piracy in the distribution process and maybe create a tighter grip on the problem; but not stop it all together. But at least stop it until the album release date. Digital is the way to go and may just save the music industry.