Quote:
Originally posted by uhoh-ohno
Britney wasn’t on Forbes last year either. So how do you know she made more than Rihanna? Britney should be on the list this year because she toured. And Rihanna doesn’t make most of her money from endorsements. Maybe, at one point she did, like during GGGB era before getting beaten by Chris Brown. Rihanna didn’t make 29M off of endorsements. She made it, mostly off of LGOE tour, and if she makes Forbes list this year, it will be because of what she made on LOUD tour.
|
I wasn't specifically referring to Forbes of last year, or any year. I was just speaking in general. I have never seen Rihanna ranked above her contemporaries on the Celebrity 100, or just gross annual income. Rihanna had a big year with
Loud, but she only made what, $29mil? Beyonce sat on her ass and still made like $80 million not too long ago. Gaga and Britney both had big years a while back and grossed considerably more than Rihanna.
Nowadays Rihanna is being surpassed by the likes of Katy Perry on Forbes and having sold less albums. The difference is that those artists are more involved in the behind the scenes work of their careers from writing to producing. If Rihanna wants to make more money, she's gonna have to pick up a pen and show a bit of integrity.
Quote:
Originally posted by ethan
I don't think that's true. I'm pretty sure you don't have to pay royalties when performing a song in concert unless it's professionally filmed or something. Artists do covers and stuff all the time, I don't think they pay to do them... like, Katy sang "Friday" at her concert... I doubt she had to pay to do that.
|
It is. It falls under contracts. The monies an artist gets from performing the songs are considered royalties to the person(s) who wrote the song. You also have to pay the publisher because you're using the work of another artist to generate revenue. If you don't pay the artist, it's theft. And if an artist has another artist's song in their set list, they have to pay the original writers.