Connect With Us

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner






« Redefining Success In Music | Main | Preparing For The Studio »

What are the odds of succeeding without a record deal?

I found an interesting Blog post the other day that seemed to cause major disagreement between musicians on the subject of record deals, specifically whether musicians needed a record deal at all nowadays. The original Blog was entitled, Do Social Networks Really Help Musicians? It makes the point (in a round-a-bout way) that social networks create so much opportunity for musicians that overcrowding, by and large, negates the benefits for the masses.

The underlying assertion of the Blog was that the power of social networks for band ‘self promotion’ was generally over rated and could not be compared with the benefits of a record deal, (especially where earning a sustainable income was concerned).

The author went on to showcase three websites that he felt helped reduce overcrowding and thus create more tangible opportunities for musicians. You can view the Blog on the Music-Think-Tank website here: Do Social Networks Really Help Musicians?

For me, the Blog caused confusion because it didn’t present the underlying question succinctly enough. I have to confess, I was tempted to leave a comment to stock up debate further by asking a wishy washy question like, “what is success?”, but I decided instead to exercise the logical and analytical side of my brain by putting together some kind of statistical analysis on the record label vs DIY musician debate.

You may have noticed that the Blog I mention above has prompted a follow up Blog called “Do Social Networks Really Help Musicians? Revisited”. This follow up failed to deliver in some areas of the debate in my mind. I explain at the bottom of this Blog why I wrote this article.

Let’s begin! The question I want to answer is clear and concise; “What are the odds of succeeding without a record deal?”

Before we look at figures, we need to start by reducing any ambiguity surrounding certain facets of the question. I will make the following assumptions;

The word ‘Success’:

To succeed means many different things to different people, including notoriety, personal development, the number of ‘Likes’ on a facebook page etc, but for the purpose of this exercise I am using the word ‘Success’ to describe a level of financial freedom.

My reasoning for this is because most musicians (eventually) give up their art, not due to a lack of notoriety, but due to long periods with little or no income.

Type of musician:

When I speak of ‘musician’ or ‘band’, I am referring exclusively to those who are seeking a professional music career. I understand that there are thousands of musicians who happily play in a band every other weekend without ever thinking of fame or fortune, but this research paper refers to those musicians who aspire to reach a level of fame performing their own original music.

Record deal:

A “Record Deal” means either a major or independent label that has a reasonable marketing budget (and knowledge) to create a national buzz.


This research paper is written with the UK musician in mind. However, it’s findings may loosely translate to USA musicians and other territories.

So, with that all cleared up we have to start with the question, is it possible to quantify the need for a record label at all? Probably not, but it’s fun to assert some basic statistical data into the argument posed on the Music-Think-Tank Blog here.

Unfortunately there is very little ‘official’ data online relating to some aspects of this research paper so please bare with me as I fill the data gaps with ‘most likely’, and ‘probable’ substitutes.

What is a successful band?

Our definition of success refers to a level of financial income, all other notions of success will be too subjective to work in this research paper. So what is a successful amount of money?

I will start by placing the average UK income (for a person between the age of 18 and 30) at £18,200 (based on several recognised national statistics)*. The reason I chose this age range is because it’s the most common range for success in the music industry.

So, for the purpose of this exercise £18,200 will be used as the definition of ‘financial success’.

This amount of money is of course conservative because one would expect ‘success’ to be way above ‘average’, but we will stick with it for now. The definition of success ‘should’ only apply to those bands that can sustain the average income value for more than 5 years. But for simplicity we will accept even a one-off yearly income of £18,200 as a marker of success.

Quick answer to question: £18,200 is our marker of success.

How many musicians and bands in the UK are aiming for success?

This is much harder to quantify. The Musicians Union have approximately 30,000 members. Since they pay a subscription fee we will assume they are serious and aiming for a degree of success. It is my estimation from talking to countless ‘serious’ bands over the years that perhaps only 1 in 20 musicians join the MU. This would immediately raise the number of musicians aiming for success in the UK to 600,000.

Quick answer to question: 600,000

Income from gigs

Since we are describing ‘Success’ as achieving a gross annual income of £18,200/year (per band member), live gigs must surely play a key role in this. We will not include covers bands, wedding or corporate events bands. For the purpose of this research paper we will use the term ‘band/musician’ for those who want recognition for their own original music.

The average capacity for a venue that houses mainly unsigned bands is 250 in the UK.* The majority of venues will increase ticket sales by hosting 3-6 bands (on average). Assuming that a venue is 80% full and has 4 bands performing, each band would therefore have bought 50 people.

After speaking with approximately 30 diverse bands from London, I have estimated that the average band brings in much less than 50 paying fans on average. I will be setting the average paying fan count (per gig) to just 15.

Bare in mind that this would be the average number of paying fans that turn up to every gig, whether in the bands local town or 500 miles away. Many bands will bring 40 fans to local gigs but find fan counts drop dramatically the further afield they play.

There are several ways that bands can be paid by venue promoters. The average payment however seems to work out at about £6 per fan.

There is no data on the average band size, but I am setting a generic band size of 4 people so that we can work the statistics.

With these assumptions we can see that the average band will be paid £90 per gig (£22.50 for each band member). Based on two (2) gigs per week, the gross yearly income for each member would be £2,340, far lower than the UK average wage. This also pays no mention of travel costs or gear hire etc.

Gigs generally provide more income for signed bands than the sale of records. In fact, the number of people going to gigs has increased over the last 10 years, whilst record sales have decreased. Ticket sales can generate huge incomes for large music acts.

Let’s look at a Robbie Williams gig in August 2003. He performed at Knebworth with 3 other acts and 125,000 tickets were sold. I am not sure on the ticket price but I will set the average tickets sale price at £45. That means on one night they generated a colossal £5,625,000. This doesn’t even factor in the sale of programs, merchandise, food etc.

Quick answer to question: £2,340 per year (per band member)

Money from downloads

The UK average monthly income is £1,517. How many downloads would a band need to sell in order to reach this figure? Assuming, once again, that there are four (4) band members, they would need to make a total of £6,068 per month to match the UK average income amount.

If selling exclusively on iTunes (which pays roughly 60p per single download), a band would need to achieve 10,113 downloads each month. This would equate to 2528 per week.

I am guessing the ‘average’ amount that an unsigned band makes from downloads is £10/month (per band member). If we add £120 from downloads to the £2,340 from gigs, we can guess that the average band member makes £2,460/year.

Quick answer to question:: £120 per year (per band member)

How many unsigned bands make the Top 40?

So how can we tell how many unsigned bands do reach the golden figure of £18,200/year (per band member)? I think the issue here is overall band ‘reach’, ie. how many fans a band can sell tickets, downloads and merchandise to.

Reaching the UK Top 40, for example, shows a clear indication that a band would have a substantial fan base.

So, it begs the question, how many bands have reached the top 40 without a record deal in last 5 years?

In the last 5 years (2006-11) I estimate that there have been no more than 20 bands reach the top 40 without record label backing. This figure is a guess, but is backed up by Ditto music, who are one of the few companies that have successfully broken unsigned acts in the UK.

Ditto go on to suggest that, “without record label backing, you would need substantial financial backing to have a serious shot in the industry”.

So why such a low figure? Mark Robinson, vice-president of Warner Music said that “on average, it costs £621,000 to promote and launch a new band”. This marketing budget would be out of reach for almost all bands.

Certainly, there have been many bands who have succeeded with far lower budgets than this, but breaking an act is undeniably costly. PR plays a role in this cost. A band cannot make it to the higher levels without having media contacts. The whole process is much more time consuming and involved than many musicians think. Unless you employ someone with media contacts and experience many marketing avenues will simply not be available to the average band.

Recording, touring, promotion and PR costs add up. Most DIY musicians struggle to turn enough profit to fund growth and fail to gain enough exposure to generate real momentum.

Quick answer to question: 20 bands

How many unsigned bands make £18,200/year?

We have made a guess that (20) unsigned bands managed to reach the UK top 40 in the last (5) years. Let’s assume that just (5) of those bands earned £18,200/year (per band member) in the year that they charted.

Let’s also assume that ten (10) more bands in the UK have generated £18,200/year (per band member), this would give us a total of just (15) unsigned bands that earned £18,200/year (per band member).

Sounds dismally low right? I’ll admit that there is precious little data to go on, but do you know any bands making this kind of money who are unsigned? Remember, an original four piece band would therefore need to generate £72,800 per year to qualify, I am guessing that is extremely rare.

With the information outlined above we can begin to answer the question, “What are the odds of succeeding without a record deal?”

The chances of an unsigned band earning £18,200/year (per band member) without a record deal is 0.00025%. (Assuming there are 600,000 unsigned bands in the UK and only fifteen (15) earn £18,200 per year (per band member).

Quick answer to question: 15

Increasing the odds of being successful in music

I feel that this article may give a disproportionate indication of how hard it is to succeed in the music businesses because we are looking at averages. Whilst music is subjective, a good song is (usually) recognised as such by multiple people. This means there is an element is “objectivity” at play. In other words, a band with great music will have much better odds than an ‘average’ band (assuming all other factors such as determination, consistency etc are equal).

So, what action can a band take to increase their chances of success in an overcrowded market? I will revert back to the Music-Think-Tank Blog once more and agree with the author that moving against the crowd can in some cases be very advantageous.

Creating music that is of high quality, yet different in some respects will instantly give you a unique selling point (USP), which is very important in standing out in a saturated market.

What are the odds of getting signed?

The problem with statistics (where unique talent is concerned) is that they can often be way off.

For example, let’s look at the likelihood of securing a record deal in the UK. We will assume the following;

  • There are roughly 700 independent record labels in the UK large enough to ‘break an act’

  • Each signs 1 acts per year

  • There are 600,000 bands vying for their attention

  • 1 in every 4 acts signed make £18,200/year (per band member)

Assuming you are average, you would therefore have a 1 in 3428 chance of being signed (0.029%). However, lets make some further assumptions on the quality of the song submissions;

  • 34% of song submissions are not right for the label (wrong genre etc)

  • 39% of song submissions are of low quality

  • 10% of song submissions are not considered for other reasons

  • 17% of song submissions are considered for signing

This would mean that talented bands would have a more attractive 1 in 582 chance of getting signed. Of course, the record label would be looking for much more than a good song, ability to perform live, being nice people and reliability etc would all go into the decision making process.

Another huge factor in getting signed is getting noticed. Many A&R will not be able to listen to all demo submissions. This would provide a strong argument for submitting multiple demos to a wide range of record labels.

Quick answer to question: 1 in 3428 (for an average band)

Chances of getting signed through a Pitching website

The Music-Think-Tank Blog mentioned 3 websites that the author felt could increase the chances of getting spotted by the music industry. Those websites were, Audio Rokit, Band Camp and Sound Cloud.

Audio Rokit is a ‘Song Pitching’ website.* A basic profile page is free, a full subscription starts at £6.99 per month which gives members access to the listed opportunities. There is no charge for each song submission a member makes.

Bandcamp gives bands the means to sell music online. The basic service is free, there are no signup costs, and no subscription fees. Bandcamp make money via a 15% revenue share on sales. In May 2011 Bandcamp artists made $624,572 USD.

SoundCloud is an online audio platform for music professionals that makes it easy to share and comment on audio files. As well as a free membership tier, SoundCloud has several different annual premium paid subscriptions which offer additional functionality.

*Effectively a song pitching site will show it’s members current opportunities that exist within the music industry and make it easier for them to submit (or pitch) music to those opportunities.

With relation to this article I decided to take a closer look at these websites to see if any data could be gathered.

It makes sense that using a song pitching website would increase the odds of getting spotted by the industry.

We discussed earlier that ordinarily many A&R will not be able to listen to all demo submissions, especially those that are unsolicited. Pitching websites however, have (in theory) secured legitimate listings from record labels (and a variety of other music companies) that are actively in search of new talent. This would therefore put weight behind the argument that pitching websites dramatically increase the chances of a band being listened to and spotted.

I managed to glean (after many telephone conversations with pitching sites) that the average percentage of members that get their music listened to by A&R is about 85% (very loose estimate) and the average percentage of members that end up signing a deal using a pitching service is about 1% (even looser estimate).

The main problem that pitching sites have in providing useful data is that they are not always aware when one of their members has success. I took the total number of successful feedbacks and added 20% to get the figures above. I can not give a success rate for individual websites because my figures may not be 100% accurate and thus would be unfair.

If it is true that 1% of artists sign a deal (record, management or publishing) using a song pitching website, that would suggest that the pitching website would increase the odds of success by 34 times, or 3400% (compared to an equivalent band submitting unsolicited music via email or post).

I find it hard to believe that 1 in 100 bands get signed using pitching websites, but even if I were to slash the success rate by half, that would still make song pitching sites a pretty indispensable tool for musicians.

Quick answer to question: 1 in 200 (for an average band)

Chances of success through Bandcamp/SoundCloud

I would love to be able to give you some data here but it is simply impossible. On Bandcamp there are musicians making no money at all and others who are making thousands a month. I tried to find out if the people making over £18,200/year (per band member) on Bandcamp were already signed by a record label. Bandcamp replied to my email saying that there would be no way to find that information out.

Same issue with Soundcloud, they said that they couldn’t even guess to what percentage of users go on to sign any kind of deal. To be honest I wasn’t expecting an answer at all, I can fully appreciate we are roaming into the hypothetical here.

The social network debate could not even be answered by taking a sample of users and using that as a base count. For example, if I asked 1000 social network users if any of them had manage to earn £18,200/year as a result of using a social network, I bet none would have.

However, it would be wrong for me to conclude that social networks have helped no one. 1000 social network users is a lot, but proportionately it is too small a number compared with their user base. It would be like asking 1000 people if they have won the lottery and concluding that no one ever wins the lottery because they all replied no!

Final thoughts

The assumption that social networks are great for building followers, but don’t deliver much of real substance for a band wanting to make money may indeed be true, but social networks should be used in ways that they were designed for. Facebook and Soundcloud certainly play a large role in becoming part of the ‘eco-system’, but they should be used alongside other tools.

We know that gigging is vital to the success of a band, but with such low income available to the average musician, it would make sense to build a local following before going too far afield. The benefits of ‘breaking’ new ground is usually overestimated and costly. Build a loyal local fan base and extend your gig radius slowly but surely. Keep fans updated and offer interesting give-aways (behind the scenes video footage) to build loyalty and interest).

Think about using song pitching websites (AudioRokit, MyHitOnline, TAXI) to focus your song submissions.

I want to make my own opinions clear that I genuinely believe that musicians are better off (on the whole) signed to a record label. Sure, they will take a big cut, but they will almost certainly generate more income for you than they take.

Let’s say a label takes 50% of your income. Going on the statistics in this research paper, that would mean that so long as they increased your annual income by £1,230, they would have paid for themselves (since you were only earning £2,460/year to begin with).

Yes, you might have gone on to sell millions of copies of your album on our own (and therefore lose 50% of potential profits), but the odds are against this happening – and even if it did happen, the record label would simply capitalise on your new found success and increase your success further, possibly making up for the percentage they take.

There is a clue in how successful unsigned bands seem to end up signing a record deal, there is great advantages with joining forces with a label, I don’t think anyone would disagree. Fundamentally a record label is like a music manager an accountant or even a hairdresser. You pay to have a professional do the jobs that you don’t have time to do, are not trained to do, or simply do not have the natural inclination to do.

I would argue that a band that is supported by a record label will have more scope for success than a band that shuns all notion of signing a deal.

My Background

I am studying music law in London, UK. I have a passion for data and was able to exploit the information I have gathered for this Blog and use parts in a larger paper I am working on. Ordinarily I may not have gone into so much detail!

I played guitar for many years and it wasn’t until I moved away from playing an instrument that I really saw where I had been going wrong with my music. I had always followed the crowd and moved in common circles, instead of trying to position myself as unique in some way. I felt like I had wasted many years which is why this Music-Think-Tank Blog really struck a chord in me (pun intended).

The first follow up Blog Do Social Networks Really Help Musicians? Revisited seemed a little self promotional to me - although I see nothing wrong with that provided the content addresses the correct issues. I didn’t see much connection between the original Blog and the revisited Blog. The revisited seemed more of a ‘How-to’ rather than revisiting the social network debate.

Odds of success - Bands DATA table image

Feel free to post this image on your website!



References for this post

Venue capacity - To come up with this figure I looked at almost 100 UK venues and averaged out the capacity for a standing audience.

Average earning statistics:

Reader Comments (61)

When we play with statistics, we cloud things further. I think a big point is how one can now FIND success without a label FIRST, via artist based web domains. For example: Deadmau5 was a member of and others. He did all his own PR work. He also managed to redefine Electro dance with his own brand of sound, thus he found success in musical progression first and THEN he ultimately signed to a major label. Who would not? They can do all the world wide foot work for you and market you on a massive scale. That is their job.
In the data statistics, did you consider how many band sign to a label, make a lump sum (Down payment) and are never heard of again? Balance the statistics in that regard! The chance of becoming a known artist commercially can happen overnight via social networks far more rapidly than ever before.

Social networking does today what The Cavern and word of mouth had done for the Beatles back in the 60s but, on a far grander scale.

The point is, no longer does a musician HAVE to waste time sending demos and generating a fan base via dirty clubs and bars in order to (1) Progress musically and (2) Find overnight success financially. in a sense, things are just as they always have been fundamentally and in principle, except now things are a little better and more channels are open to reach that success.

July 9 | Unregistered CommenterHeatseeqerz

@Don Austin - sell 150K and "probably get dropped"? I don't think so - no-one with their finger on the pulse of the industry in its current state would make such a ridiculous statement. Most labels (including majors) would be quite happy with sales of that number and likely wouldn't have over-extended themselves on an artist financially in that situation, meaning they would be making money. Don't be ridiculous.

July 14 | Unregistered CommenterDrKillpatient

In 2011, there is NO NEED for an artist to sign a record deal. In fact, in a few years from now, most of the record labels worldwide will close down.

As a indie artist all you have to do is to keep creating great music and build a strong following. That's all.

Also, keep in mind that paying to submit your music to someone you do not know personally, not knowing the competition you're up against, is completely wrong. You will lose a lot of money, and the results -if any- will be extremely poor.

July 31 | Unregistered Commenterindie artist

Ok I have been sending tracks to Music Xray just 3, over the past 6 months, of the 3 I have had really good feedback, honest, but there is more to this, and I am starting to see some bothering trends.

The emails they send about your track meeting the criteria of some dodgy program is just fantasy world, all they are doing is trying to get you to spend your money. You know some of us are so gullible in life.

I think the real big down for me is, if you listen to the so called success’s, having your music played in a shopping mall that sort of thing :Is that a success”?. As far as I can hear the music here is just totally second rate and it looks like some of these so called experts are grabbing anything that sounds close to music. Some of these songwriters are just , I really hate to say it, cause I know its like walking on broken glass, total crap.

There is now so many movie,tv opps you have to wonder who the hell are these people, there cannot be that many tv shows. I have come a cross a few of these type’s and they will rape and pillage so in the end you cut of the fee would not cover the cost of producing the track.

The other incredible money tree for the disallusioned songwriter is the meet with the major label A&R, big bucks involved here. man Music Xray should be screening the writer/artist before they are allowed to meet these people, the ones I have heard are well below par. What this means is that these A&R guys are going to expect more of the same , and everyone suffers , including Music Xray’s reputation, more than anything this is the one that has tarnished Xrays’s credibility for me.

Really guys there is only a handful of really great writers out there and the majors have them all tied up, there will be finds but will be like finding a needle in a haystack. So are you that needle.

Fortunately I have contacts outside of Xray that tell me how it is, and my latest track has blown them away, but guess what, a certain opp which I thought looked a bit dodgy came back with the famous not quite what we are looking for
I just laughed.

I can guarantee one thing , you will not see a Music Xray track on a major label CD for many years, take a look at TAXI :)

OK here is my last gripe and it is not about Xray.

Lots of people moan about the majors, why, these are the guys offering the dream, and threes are the guys with all the good artists , writers , producers sewn up. There is talk of the majors failing , this will be a disaster and I for one do not want to have to listen to the 99% second-rate music done by the bedroom amateurs. Do you !!!, all we will be listening to in the future is Rappers with 4 bar beats.

November 5 | Unregistered CommenterDavid Bander

@David Bander: I feel most of your gripes are objective views of subjective issues.
You seem to have missed the actual root of the statement here. The point is how an industry that was worth billions upon billions, not to mention all the other perks that come with being involved in the music industry, has now began to loose it's negative influence and stronghold over the individual and independent artists who would have to mould themselves into what the industry required and was looking for. That market dictatorship has all but gone.
As for your comment about the future: Dude, you need to look back over time, we have always had "Crap" music dominate the airwaves and this still goes on (Justine Bieber) If you feel that this is the way to keep going in this age, you are well behind times in your thinking.

As for the problems you have had: That is your own experience/s and those negative aspects to the industry have always existed as in ANY other business out there. Those "Bedroom" musicians independently and collectively changed, not only music, but the technology used in music today and still have the greater influence over what the major industry signs up. They are the heart and very pulse of the ever changing and progressing medium.
To quote Tony Wilson: He said: " I was not interested in bands who was of virtuoso and perfect, i wanted to take on bands who could change musical history and influence it's future"
And to quote Pete Waterman, when someone said how crap the new underground rave music culture was, he said: " Without those artists, we would not have any industry, we would still be listening to the same music"

Music is music in any form. Even IDM noise has to be produced as an art. It can be done good or bad. Musicians progress, too. I have watched many evolve from bad to good to composing great music but awful production work to being singed up and i know many who make a lot of money by working damn hard to make, distribute and promote their music.

Some rules will never change: There will always be the "Cut throat" aspect to any business and individuals need to be shrewd and wise and a little bit clever as well as having to be determined and persevere, etc, etc. No one is saying these things have changed. It is just that now, more doors are open. More pathways exist.

To say other peoples music is "Crap" is frivolous and silly as well as of no consequence here.
Music is a subjective medium and without the Crap being able to come through, it will not progress as music, but instead as a man made/influenced money spinning product without any balls and no other purpose outside of it's corporate potential.

These are all points outside of the original blog. The facts are there to see. Youtube overnight success's, etc. You said if a track is played in a mall: "Is it a success" ? Yes, it IS A success. A success. But that is all. It is like saying: If someone gets to the 5th rung of a ladder, is it A success? Just because they have not got to the top of the ladder, it is not to be discounted.
There are many who got to the top with a number 1 hit who are now broke and was never heard of again.

Dude, just keep doing what you do, and with a little more insight and less ignorance about others around you. Pay more attention to what you do and not what others do. And also, try aiming for the smaller goals first. Try promoting from the bottom of the ladder and sell via more distributers that MusicXray. Target your market of choice. I would not try to sell Blues on a site that is dominated of designed for artists to target DJ's who are looking for new tracks to play in a club in Ibiza.

I was signed when it was still on plastic and it was HARD back then. I would NEVER do it again.


November 5 | Unregistered CommenterHeatseeqerz

Hi Bryden Haynes. Finally, an article that is worth reading. I just wanted to command you for doing just a great job on your research. I agree with most of the comments on here.

I'm based in Hollywood, California. USA. Here is more about what I do:

Arnold Garcia aka Arnold G, a member of The Recording Academy-Grammy, he is well respected in the music industry as a recording artist, songwriter, dancer, performer and music producer.

Arnold is the founder of A&G Entertainment Productions (AGEP) in Hollywood, California as a creator, producer and director.

AGEP has been successful in offering undiscovered talent (musicians and artists) the opportunity to embark on a professional career path in the entertainment industry. AGEP’s goal is to help growing talent to overcome the numerous obstacles they encounter and to assist them in developing skill sets in all areas of the industry so they can rise to the top.

Arnold wants to help other artists make it big in the industry, so he developed “ShineOn” and “BringItOn” programs to let artists perform and compete for the opportunity to be mentored by a major recording artist. Eventually, the winner will be awarded a recording contract with a major record label or through A&G Records Music. Thus, the artists have to know more about everything in running their own ‘business’ today and to integrate all levels of knowledge, applications, competition, strategies and information into comprehensive communication packages to brand, sell and manage their talent. AGEP recognizes that the entertainment industry is changing the way in which one hires talent and will help talent learn all the facets of how to become successful.

More on LinkedIn:

Please drop me a comment. We're always looking for new ways to partner up with people in the music industry. Solution, solution and result!

Arnold Garcia

A&G Entertainment Productions (AGEP-Music)
Hollywood, California, USA


December 13 | Unregistered CommenterBryden Haynes

Unsigned musicians can make a nice sum from royalties if they gig regularly as well...

April 9 | Unregistered CommenterCK

I think this is the most perfect that we can feel the charm of words.It is a very helpful for me.

How can $18,200 be your marker of success for bands? If the average INDIVIDUAL between 18 and 30 make that amount and your talking about a BAND of 4-5 people, you have to multiply that $18,200 by at least 4 for that to even work ($72,800). Just because the average person in the UK between 18-30 is making that amount does not mean they are making a LIVING or financially STABLE or INDEPENDENT on that amount. Based off what $18,200 gets you in most parts of the US, I would assume many young people are probably working yet living with their parents in the UK. Even if they were independent financially, chances are their financial status still wouldn't be described as 'successful' by the average person.

July 12 | Unregistered Commenterdestiny84

I’m Mrs Florence,i am from California USA, married, i have been searching for a genuine loan company for the past 2 years and all i got was bunch of scams who made me to trust them and at the end of the day, the took all my money and left me moneyless, all my hope was lost, i got confused and frustrated, i lost my job and find it very difficult to feed my family, i never wanted to do anything with loan companies on net anymore, so i went to borrow some money from a friend, i told her all that happened and she said she can help me, that she knows a loan company that can help me, that she just got a loan from them, she directed me on how to apply for the loan, i did as she told me, i applied, i never believed but i tried and to my surprise i got the loan in 10 hours, i could not believe my eyes, i am happy and rich today and i am thanking God that such loan companies like this still exist upon this fraud stars all over the places, please i will advise everyone out there who are in need of loan to go for Mr hillary william By Email , they will never fails, your life shall change as mine. God bless you all.

December 17 | Unregistered CommenterI’m Mrs Florence

Sounds like the music industry is writing this article to discourage any and all bands from making a career in the industry with out depending on them

The biggest fault in this article is depending on digital sales and not on tour income..

if 72k is the target (sorry I understand Canadian dollars better)
then here is the simple path to reaching these sales..

7200 album sales at 10$ = 72k income
12 gigs a month at mininum, 12 months, 144 shows. 500$ a show.

If you could pull in a fan base in every city(circle 3-4 times) of just 100 fans at 5$ then that number is easily made. By saying bands only bring 15 people to a show is looking at the beginner type band, but a serious band that puts on a top-tier live show and knows how to connect with the crowd.

Now between those two numbers alone you can cut things in half to hit that 72k even easier!

Mine is a quick scratch argument but worth stating this article was too quick to say it cant be done. I additionally don't believe the top 40 is even necessary.

April 3 | Unregistered CommenterCarson

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>