by Marty Khan

Mr. Khan is the Director of Outward Visions, an arts service organization with a twenty-year history of success in curating, developing and touring highly innovative and collaborative works. Mr. Khan has also managed and produced recordings for The Art Ensemble of Chicago, the World Saxophone Quartet, George Russell and Sonny Fortune.

As a 30+ year veteran of the jazz biz I've been following the Pariah's diatribes with great interest. Upon reading Ed Michel's piece I feel compelled to comment. While I have no argument with the factual content of the piece, the general perspective disturbs me for a couple of reasons.

First, referring to Alfred Lion, Milt Gabler, etc. in discussing jazz biz executives is much like referring to Abraham Lincoln in discussing the Republican Party. Today's jazz execs are "beasts of a different color." (Well, the same color, actually, but that's an issue for a separate discourse).

Second, it's about time that we end the Big Lie - that there's no money in jazz. Yeah, yeah, yeah, -- "Jazz product only accounts for 1.873965...% of the marketplace" -- yeah, yeah, yeah -- "There's way too much product" -- yeah, yeah, yeah -- "How do you make a million dollars in jazz? Start with two million." -- yeah, yeah, yeah. Well fuck all that bullshit! Let's look at a few facts.

1. Salaries - Jazz execs make big money. The major label executives are extremely well-paid men. Are we really supposed to believe that big American corporations pay these guys huge amounts of money to run companies that lose money? Not to mention the large staffs working under them. And what exactly do they do. Publicity, promotion and even some marketing are regularly farmed out to outside contractors, leaving the executives more time to do what they do best --- lunch and jerk off.

Oh yeah -- and they have meetings -- or circle jerks, except when they meet with outsiders (managers, agents, musicians), who (you guessed it) usually just get jerked off. The older and wiser person knows when they're being listened to and when they're being stroked. If you want a single, clear reason why the older (40+ for Whites, 30+ for Blacks) musician has little presence among the majors, it could be as simple as this: the discomfort of the executive in looking into the eyes of a man who knows he's being lied to.

Of course, this leaves A & R -- but if nothing is selling, who needs them? How long can a man make one wrong decision after another without losing his job --unless that IS his job. After all, as Max Bialystock learned in "The Producers": "Under the right circumstances you can make a lot more money with a flop than with a hit." Hmmmmm.

The staffs do work hard and are often overworked. This work is divided between production and covering up for the phony promises of their bosses. (Right now, any exec reading this is saying I'm full of shit and any staff worker is saying "Amen, brother").

Whatever the reality, there is lots of money transacting here -- hardly the evidence of no money in jazz, which really translates into "no money for YOU, man."

2. Product glut. This is the most recent excuse for "financial woes". However, the same labels that complain about the glut are creating it. Lots of new product by unknown artists with no promotion competing with their own labels' massive reissue programs. (A sidenote here: if any artist has received artist or mechanical royalties from any of one particular biggie's annual 35CD, one-time only, sell-thru reissue program, please let me know through this site. Maybe I'll stop taking it personally. Oh, and by the way, you'll find many of these reissues available through record clubs by license. Hmmmmm).

Which brings us to record clubs. Let's look at the BMG Jazz Club, where the consumer can purchase new jazz product for under $4 per CD, including postage and handling. 13 CDs for the price of one. Nothing more to buy. Resign at any time after the one purchase. 12CDs at $2.50 (postage and handling) = $30. One CD at $18. (including postage and handling) and if you wait for the right offer you can get two free with your purchase (another $5.00 postage and handling). That totals $53.00 for 15 CDs or $3.53 per CD. Then you quit. Two weeks later you'll receive an offer to rejoin the club and you can start the process again. $14. at Tower - you must be kidding.

Most companies don't count these toward artist sales and there are no artist or mechanical royalties involved, or due --check your contracts for why not. Look under Royalties: record clubs, or under flat-rate licensing.

3. Now, one never knows about dollars and I haven' t seen contracts, bank drafts or such, so the numbers I'm quoting here are by general hearsay. But just the fact that we're likely in the range of reality is staggering, so here goes.

As I understand it, Muse Records was recently purchased for an amount of money reportedly between $2 and $5 million. The figure I consistently hear is $5 million, but even the hardcore cynic in me finds that difficult to swallow. I've worked with many musicians who recorded for Muse and the fees and budgets they received were paltry at best -- very low 4-figures for the whole package. Yet the owner, who I assume drew a salary while running the label and maintained a staff or an assistant at least, and an office, ends up with what amounts to a windfall. No money in jazz. Hmmmmmm.

Some years ago, Sweet Basil, and under-150 occupancy New York club, was sold for a figure supposedly in excess of $2 million. No artists, no product, just a name and a lease. No money in jazz. Hmmmmm.

So let's face it. The poverty cries of the jazz business is one big lie. No, check that - ONE BIG LIE. No, let's make that ONE BIG, PHONY JIVE ASS SCUMBAG, RACIST, ARROGANT, HELL-PAVING, MANIPULATIVE LIE. The big question is WHY? Why the lie? Could it be the Great White Daddy Syndrome (or in the case of the younger execs: Great White Daddy-O Syndrome) where the artist is made to feel that one man is his personal savior, thereby allowing that executive the self-delusion that allows him to sleep at night? Is it from guilt over the obvious imbalance they exploit from an art form that they once, and purportedly still love? Is it resentment over their failure to successfully play music and their inability to be accepted by musicians the way other musicians are? Or is it simply the mutation process that virtually every jazz executive goes through when they find themselves in the position of the exploiter?

Well, whatever it is, let's put it all aside and simply view the jazz business as exactly what it is: good old-fashioned American capitalism. To quote (as memory serves) from "Ninotchka": "Capitalism -- a system by which men make enormous profits by taking loss after loss."

The relationship of jazz, the art form, with the jazz business has always been fragile. It's the nature of an art form that's so REAL trying to thrive in a system that values quantity over quality. Fine. No problem. USA! USA!

But the jazz record business has set a trend throughout the entire industry. A few artists receive enormous fees drained upward from the middle-range fees, much like the rich are draining the middle-class (they've already drained the poor).

Those gigs were the bread and butter of established artists' touring, allowing them to bring their music to a live audience in the country where they live. Those gigs are few and far between now. The reasons for this would take too long to explain here, but it is the truth. More on this next time.

What we're seeing here is plain old "American good business" as cemented in place thru the Reagan regime. Corporate diversification, contractual manipulations, the impracticality of contract enforcement by the artist are all part of what is considered good business practices. The whole concept of artist royalties enables a label to make 400 to 1500 percent profit on their initial investment before the artist sees any money beyond his or her advance. This is a boilerplate reality in even the most enlightened of record companies. Nobody said life was fair.

But it doesn't have to be this way. Let's look at Nonesuch Records. Here is a label that is part of a huge corporate conglomerate - WARNER COMMUNICATIONS. They are structured like other labels with sizable staff, well-paid execs, big offices, etc. But there are major differences -- regular, detailed, timely royalty statements (with all sales, including exports, record clubs, etc.), excellent marketing, creative promotion, a willingness (and preference) to work with artist management, artistic continuity and commitment and above all, pride in their success and in their artists.

Now Nonesuch is not a jazz label, but they do issue some jazz product and the sales figures are staggering when compared to the figures given (usually verbally) by the jazz companies. The fact that Nonesuch can function this way proves it is possible to do so, regardless of what the jazz guys say. All it takes is the willingness to do so.

So what can the artist do? The need of the artist to express and perform allows these predators to exploit them. And something is better than nothing, right? WRONG. Sometimes nothing is better than something.

Take a look at John Sayles' "Eight Men Out". An excellent portrayal of baseball's 1919 "Black Sox" scandal. The exploitation and manipulation of baseball players for the benefit of the owners has much in common with the jazz business.

"We give you the opportunity to perform so why shouldn't we get the money" is the bottom line here.

God bless the soul of the late, heroic Curt Flood who put free agency in motion and, like so many reformers and revolutionaries, never got the benefits for his sacrifice but cleared the path for others who followed. He refused to perform at the height of his ability, because he would not be a slave. Jazz needs a Curt Flood. But failing that,other things can be done.

Strike - Unionize (a real union for jazz artists, not jingle and wedding players)-- Learn how the business works -- Incorporate -- Diversify -- Create and Distribute your own product.

A CD that sells only 3000 copies still generates between $18,000 and $35,000. Don't go for the okey-doke or the head fake.

Let's relieve these jazz businessmen of their altruistic toil and let them concentrate heir highly developed skills on handling products that actually sell.

Our organization and many others with shared concerns have been developing an alternative means of product distribution as well as educating artists to the realities of the music business and pragmatic solutions to their problems. If you're interested, keep your eyes on this site.

As for the executives I'm talking about, don't waste your or my time with silly little responses. If you wish to address these statements, I'll debate any three of you in a public forum in front of an open audience. I'll answer any questions put to me and you'll have to do the same.

Everything I've stated here is a personal opinion developed through my direct experience over the past 30 years. I can back up everything here with facts (except for that Muse and Sweet Basil stuff). If you want to hear more, email me. If you're looking for a ray of light throughout the murk, stay tuned to this site.