Back
~
2
min read
· Posted on
February 21, 2024

Taylor Swift just re-released Red and should we check on Jake Gyllenhaal?

Taylor's been making headlines - and memes - since she re-released her 2012 hit album Red a few days ago.

What's the key learning?

  • After Taylor Swift's masters were sold to another label, she's been re-recording a bunch of her own tunes
  • This move puts the royalties back in Swift's hands
  • The balance of power between record labels and musicians is on the shakiest ground yet...and it's largely thanks to Taylor Swift causing a royalty revolution.

Background: Taylor Swift's been making headlines - and memes - since she re-released her 2012 hit album Red a few days ago.

What happened: In 2006, Swift signed a 13-year contract with a record label, which gave them ownership of the masters (aka the original recordings of her songs and music videos) of her first six albums. In 2019, the masters were sold to another label...and in 2020, sold again.

What else: Fast-forward to 2021, and Taylor's taking her revenge. She's been re-recording a bunch of her old tunes...and these new bangers are getting a lot more attention than their older versions. So now, the royalties are back in Swift's hands.

So what's the key learning?

💡The balance of power between record labels and musicians is on the shakiest ground yet...and it's largely thanks to Taylor Swift causing a royalty revolution.

💡Historically, a record label takes ownership of the master recordings. In exchange, they would produce the physical album and do all the distribution and sales.

💡In 2002, when over 95% of the music industry’s revenue came from CD’s - this was VERY important. But now, 75% of music revenue comes from streaming. And artists can literally put their song on the internet in seconds - making the role of recording labels less valuable.

Ready to win at money?

Sign up for Flux and join 100,000 members of the Flux family

A button to App StoreGoogle Play store button
Excellent  4.9 out of 5
Star rating
No items found.