Studio Album #16 - Rumours and Speculation (New Info 27.02.15)
- Thread starter Perun
- Start date
- Status
And how much does an average bloke in the UK earn?
Well the thing is, Maiden still go the old fashioned route of renting a studio, getting a producer, and they still record on analog tape right? I remember DOD was recorded this way at least. It's still a highly expensive process and to top that off album sales aren't what they used to be. At least in the 80s the albums would sell big and they'd get all that money back. Now not so much.
CriedWhenBrucieLeft
Meme Only Account
About £25K.
Touring is touring, though. They ain't going to tour ME for three years if they weren't making serious cash; over & above whatever they pay all the roadies, etc.
So what did they do for cash in the 90's? They didn't tour any more then, than they do now. Did NPftD, FotD, XF, & VXI sell particularly well? I know older albums have been on sale for longer (and therefore figures can be a little misleading), but like-for-like what are sales figures for albums like? Are they really falling? Are they making less per album sale now, than in the 90's, or 80's? Is studio time even more expensive now than in the past?
I dunno, my gut feeling is that they are still making money from album sales i.e. that they are more of a long-term investment, with the money continuing to come in long after the initial financial outlay of making them. Did the sales of, say, TFF over the first few months offset the cost of making it? I have no evidence to back this up, but I reckon so. Does anyone have any solid information on any of this anyway?
Let's assume average, though. 25k in today's money is 38,000 in USD. 38,000*60 = $2,280,000. So that's our minimum per year to pay the guys.
Before renting the plane, designing and building the sets, shipping them, paying for fuel, paying for food, paying for hotels, taxis, etc. Security, before ordering merch, before shipping the merch, before they pay themselves dime 1, Iron Maiden is millions in the hole.
These numbers are extremely low. They don't take into account Rod's salary, which by all accounts is expansive. He moved to LA. Haven't' you seen his number plate?
Before renting the plane, designing and building the sets, shipping them, paying for fuel, paying for food, paying for hotels, taxis, etc. Security, before ordering merch, before shipping the merch, before they pay themselves dime 1, Iron Maiden is millions in the hole.
These numbers are extremely low. They don't take into account Rod's salary, which by all accounts is expansive. He moved to LA. Haven't' you seen his number plate?
Yes. No Prayer was #2, Fear of the Dark was #1 and The X Factor was #9 on the British charts alone. The former two were massive sellers around the globe, X Factor still fared reasonably well. VXI didn't, and guess what they did afterwards.
And then the clouds parted, and He descended into the band.
harrisdevot
Priest of the Holy Wristband
Hickinson ?
It probably doesn't add anything to this debate, but I'd be very surprised if the majority of crew were on that kind of rate. Well under £20k pro rata, I would have thought, unless this line of work pays significantly better than other industries.
harrisdevot
Priest of the Holy Wristband
All those figures are intended for one year of work ? Maiden does not tour more than 3 months a year. A few members have done some extra work with British Lion last year, some have surely been involved in the writing and recording process of the album (see Loopy for the 5 first albums), but most of the others don't work for them more than a couple of months per year.
I assume he meant pro rata.
SirRobbins
Ancient Mariner
hmmm.... they are not as rich as you would think. I remember reading Steve was the richest (obviously) at 28 million pounds about $40 million USD. Some artists make that in a year now. The amount of money they spend touring with stage sets, their own plane and so on can be a lot and no new album in 5 years means they are relying on that and merchandise alone which I'm certain is where most of their money comes from like KISS. Don't get me wrong, $40 million USD is a lot and when you factor they tour so damn much, they aren't exactly spending it all.
CriedWhenBrucieLeft
Meme Only Account
Agreed.
Yes, I meant pro rata. The last time I read, the average UK full-time (I assume working ~40hrs, or more, a week) salary was about £25k/year. I've no doubt none of the guys working for Maiden, for the reasons cited, get paid anywher near this.
Travis The Dragon
AFTERGLOW!!!
Yes, touring does cost a huge ton and the band probably would lose money if the tour didn't go well, but they are definitely getting paid more for each show they play than what it costs them to do the tour or they wouldn't tour in the first place. Plus, if they know how to invest the money wisely, they can really make a lot from it. I'm sure they've found a way to cover themselves if a tour didn't go well. However, the original point of this was the budget for the new album and there's no way they don't have enough money to cover that. LOL
Like Perun said, those albums were big sellers. This was also before the internet age and people were still buying albums. Sure they weren't popular albums, but people still bought them. Fear of the Dark in particular is actually one of Maiden's more successful albums isn't it? And when Bruce was still in the band the concerts were still huge and they were headlining Donnington and all that good stuff. To my point, when sales started to take a dip in America with Bruce out of the band, they started playing smaller shows.
Is studio time more expensive now? I'm not sure. If you factor in inflation and the fact that album sales aren't what they used to be, I don't get the impression that making an album is a very lucrative process.
Does anyone know the first week sales of some of Maiden's older albums? I was able to find every reunion album (TFF being the highest first week seller at 63,000) but nothing earlier than that.
It's been a few years since I was in the music business, but the idea that Maiden lose money on the studio output is just not correct.
Granted, their album sales are down, but when you still shift 1+ million albums per release with an album that just takes a month or two to record....that's going to be a healthy profit. True, studio albums are no longer their main source of income, but neither is it a loss maker.
The fact is, countless other acts are releasing studio albums in today's markets and turning over profits on just the tens of thousands of sales.
RALFPL
Atlas Arena, Lodz
Maiden records still reaching million mark sales, you must add the reissues, special offers, box packacages, all the marchendise, the special incom from enterprises jist like "Trooper Ale" and the wages for band members from every show. Musician of IM aren't so wealthy just like pop megastars, but they are rich, as I read somewhere in the press, one of the richest metal musicians in the world. You must know that for the Producer's hire and recording main payment is in the competition of record label, not just musicians.
Fear Of The Dark was bit odd in its success (and lack of). The album was huge across Europe and other markets where it enjoyed sustained chart runs.
But in the UK and USA, the success was much more restrained despite a great start. FOTD made its debut at number 12 on the Billboard chart which was the highest debut a Maiden album had achieved up till that point. However, on its second week, the album fell to number 30 on the Billboard charts and was out of the top 40 the following week and out of the 100 after 9 weeks of release - this was a very short chart run compared to previous albums that comfortably enjoyed longer chart runs, even if not charting higher than FOTD.
In the UK the album made its debut at number 1 but spent only 5 weeks inside the top 75 (less than half the chart run of any prior Maiden album with Bruce on vocals)
Still, the album shipped more than 1 million copies worldwide in its opening week and has probably done around 3.5 worldwide today (educated guess). But, by no means was it one of the bigger sellers from Maiden's catalogue worldwide- the US and UK sales from its first year of release are just too weak compared to that enjoyed by the 80s albums and subsequent back calatlogue sales globally are not as strong as the recognsied classics.
In contrast, TFF has enjoyed much better chart runs than FOTD almost everywhere and it's opening sales of the 63,000 you quote is indeed Maiden's best debut week but relates only to the USA market. Worldwide, the album shipped 800,000 in its opening weeks. Not that much less than FOTD.
Of course, it has no chance of catching up with the overall sales count of any of the 1980 - 1992 albums, the market is just too weak. But the post-2000 Maiden albums are still comfortably selling at least 1 million per title, a perfectly healthy number.
- Status