Since our inception in 2013, our vision has been clear: we want to elevate as many upcoming artists as possible to the next stage of their musical journey. Our founders—a musician and an engineer—didn’t come with preconceived notions from the record label industry. Instead, they built a model grounded in logic and an ethos of mutual benefit. We aimed to create a deal where success for the project meant success for everyone involved.
Artists often ask us, “Why should we choose you over a ‘real’ record label that finances everything upfront?” or “Why not work with a PR company where we can keep all our royalties?”
We understand these concerns and appreciate the questions. Our approach is different—we don’t claim to be a traditional record label, nor do we assert that our deals are the best fit for every artist. However, many artists resonate with our philosophy, especially those who have navigated the traditional label landscape before.
Over the years, we have refined our model, developing various types of deals tailored to the unique needs and progress of each artist. We have called us artist friendly, but what is that anyway? We realized that a good deal is good for everyone, balancing incentives, risks and rewards in many different scenarios.
As artists chart their path forward, it’s crucial to weigh all options. We believe in transparency, ensuring that artists understand the pros and cons of each alternative. What’s right for one artist may not be right for another, and there’s no single correct path. Each approach has its own strengths and weaknesses.
From our perspective, here are the primary routes an emerging artist might consider:
- Do Nothing: Sometimes, the best move is to pause and reassess.
- DIY Approach: Many artists thrive by managing their careers independently.
- PR Company (or other consultants): A PR firm can help with visibility while retaining full control over royalties.
- Traditional Record Label: Provides upfront financing but often involves sacrificing some control.
- The Hybrid Model (Rexius Records): A balanced approach that combines elements of both traditional labels and independent strategies.
The optimal path depends on your unique needs and circumstances. To determine the best course, it’s essential to understand the dynamics of each option—scope, margins, incentives, risk, ownership, and attainability.
Consider more than one factor
When evaluating your options, it’s essential to look beyond a single factor. If you only consider who covers the initial costs, it might seem straightforward to favor a traditional deal and dismiss a PR company. Conversely, if you focus solely on the royalty rate, a PR company might appear the best choice, with the traditional deal seeming less favorable. However, the reality is more nuanced.
We’ve meticulously analyzed each alternative and its key characteristics, presenting our findings clearly and concisely.
We hope you find this information insightful. While we’ve made every effort to remain objective, it’s natural for us to advocate for our hybrid model. Nevertheless, it’s crucial that you reflect on your needs and goals.
Use this information as a guide to make the best decision for your unique circumstances.
DIY (Do It Yourself)
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| + You are in charge of your music career | – You have to do everything on your own |
| + You receive all revenue | – Lack of objective advice and feedback |
| + Full creative control | – Uncertainty about next steps |
| + Faster decision-making without a team | – Must finance everything independently |
| + Can extend efforts with a team for areas lacking experience | – Not taken seriously by influential industry actors |
PR Company
| Scope | Margins | Incentives | Risk Distribution | Ownership | Attainability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Predefined scope or hourly | 30-50% | Create a correct and relevant scope; work with established artists, make profit upfront | PR Company: 2/10, Artist: 8/10 | Artist owns 100% | More attainable than a record label but still selective |
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| + Adjustable scope based on budget and needs | – Artist finances 100% |
| + Can work with multiple firms for different regions/functions | – Potentially expensive |
| + Good network, knowledge, and competence within niche | – Requires significant project management from artist |
| + Can assist with artist-beneficial aspects not tied to master’s rights | – PR Company has no skin in the game |
| + Free for upcoming opportunities | – Incentives lie in creating a bigger scope, not necessarily in monetizing the artist’s career |
| + Sometimes the only option to progress in a career | – Typically avoid working with unknown artists unless they have a compelling story |
Traditional Record Label
| Scope | Margins | Incentives | Risk Distribution | Ownership | Attainability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Loosely defined, adjusts with project traction | Profits from successful releases, approx. 1/5 need to be big successes | Work with already profitable, established artists | Label: 7/10, Artist: 3/10 | Label owns the master | Generally available for established or highly promising artists |
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| + Can proceed without a budget | – Shrinking budgets if revenue potential is low |
| + Flexible project scope | – Creative control often compromised |
| + Label has significant industry experience and credibility | – Artists bound in long-term contracts |
| + Potential tax benefits | – Fees and advances recouped from artist royalties |
| + Builds extensive resources and connections | – Low royalty rates (typically 5-20%) |
| + Utilizes PR companies if necessary | – Lack of transparency in royalty calculations |
| + Quality stamp if label invests | – Legal details in contracts may have significant future implications |
Hybrid (Rexius Records)
| Scope | Margins | Incentives | Risk Distribution | Ownership | Attainability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flexible according to artist’s needs | Typically covers costs + risks, profits if releases successful | Create best scope for successful releases, aligned risks and rewards | Label: 4/10, Artist: 6/10 | Label owns or exclusively licenses songs in the scope | More attainable than traditional labels, less than PR companies |
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| + High royalty rates (50-85% to artist) | – Artists still need to finance part of the project |
| + No recoups, royalties from day one | – No advances |
| + Can work with projects that may not have immediate profitable goals | – Higher risk requires ensuring it will be worth it |
| + Record label has skin in the game | – Giving up some control over the master rights |
| + Flexible and artist-beneficial project scope | |
| + Subsidized projects, sharing financial risk for royalties | |
| + Aligns profit incentives for both artist and label | |
| + Artists retain creative control | |
| + Quality stamp, as the reputational risk for the label is high | |
| + Builds resources and connections beneficial for many artists | |
| + Long-term stake in master rights without binding artists to long-term contracts | |
| + Agreements made on a project basis, ensuring flexibility for future releases | |
| + Utilizes PR companies if necessary | |
| + Attainable for new, upcoming, and niche artists based on talent and drive, not just royalty or social media metrics | |
| + Can serve as a bridge to a traditional record deal if desired |
Commentary
Each model offers distinct advantages and drawbacks, and the best choice depends on the artist’s individual circumstances and goals. The traditional record label may provide substantial resources and credibility but often at the cost of creative control and higher long-term financial obligations. PR companies offer flexibility and network access but require full financial commitment from the artist. The hybrid model of Rexius Records combines elements of both, providing a balanced approach with shared risks and rewards, high royalty rates, and creative control, albeit with some financial investment from the artist.
Artists should carefully evaluate these factors to make informed decisions about their music careers. Our goal is to provide the information needed to make the best choice, whether that involves us or not.
