[Scott Dorsey]

HiC wrote:
Someone gets a record deal with a major label. Their album gets onto
shelves at the major retailers. They have an initial splash of
exposure - numerous national TV shows that you've all heard of and
other high (and low) profile venues. Anywhere there's an audience big
or small they've been there - including local-yokel parades, minor-
league sporting events, small amusement parks, store openings, etc.
I.e. they haven't been lazy or snooty about doing their bit to make
their career happen.

Okay.

What I'm told is that their manager has basically abandoned them and
is spending most of their time with some other act. That this manager
hasn't been in communication with the label and the label has put the
artist on the back burner.

This is bad. The problem with this is that it's the band's fault,
because the band has _hired_ the manager and is expecting to get service
from the manager. And they aren't getting what they are paying for.

What's not clear to me is why the record label would allow this
manager to not actively manage this artist's career since they've
apparently made an investment in recording and promoting the artist.
Isn't there someone at the label who watches and says okay, what's
going on with so & so, what efforts are being made in their behalf, is
everyone doing what they should to make their career happen, etc.

That would the A&R guy. Thirty or forty years ago, you could expect the
label A&R guy to take an active interest in a band, and to help along a
band that isn't doing so well in the market. Times have changed, and
A*R guys are seldom people who are music enthusiasts these days. They
are more apt to be interested in short term profits than anything else.

Now, this isn't true everywhere, and there are some labels that are
very different (even some big ones like Deutsche Grammophon), but
it's pretty common.

It's made worse by the fact that most labels today are hemhorraging
money right and left and a lot of them, big and small, are on the verge
of collapse.

I guess there are issues regarding the relationship between the
artist, manager and the record label I don't quite get. I'm told this
manager was assigned to this artist by the label, so doesn't the
management company in a sense work for the label? Isn't the label in a
position to light a fire under them? Or no? And if they determine the
manager is dropping the ball, wouldn't it be in their interest to find
someone else?

That doesn't sound like a real manager, that sounds like an A&R guy.
Does the band actually HAVE their own manager? If not, they might want
to get one really fast.

What also strikes me is how vague the management company seems to be
about the whole thing if the situation as described to me is correct.
They don't come out and have a chat with the artist saying why they're
not expending any efforts in their behalf, they just basically quit
communicating with them. They're overseas, don't seem to have a phone
or computer they can get to, which is obviously nonsense. This seems
like kind of a b.s. way to do things.

Thoughts, experiences, etc.?

Who is paying the "manager?" Where is his money coming from?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."