FEES & ROYALTIES
I’m sure you were hoping that I'd be able to tell you exactly what to charge for your services... but the truth of the theatrical industry is far more complicated than a set fee or an hourly rate. At the heart of what I'll talk about is the word FAIR. I put it in bold and capitalised FAIR because it really is the most important word on this page.
This doesn’t necessarily mean that the fee from this particular job should cover all your time and expenses, but you should have other means by which you can subsidise it, which won’t be affected by this extra work. If the answer to this question is a resounding NO, then you should approach the producer and tell them. It may be that they can find some more money for you. If they are unable to be flexible then you should think seriously about whether you should take the job.
This is a really important question to consider. A young, exciting company just starting out will not be able to pay you as much as an established producing house. But there can be huge advantages to getting in on the ground floor of a talented company. Think of companies like Kneehigh, Complicite and Les Enfants Terribles now substantial theatrical powerhouses putting on big budget productions. All started from a small fringe troupe. And in most cases the composer that was with them in the early days is still with them now. I have followed this particular route myself with a few companies that are just now (after years of battling away, touring and making work) beginning to get regular funding. I am fortunate to receive a considerable amount of work through these companies and their connections. In the case of one, I worked for free as part of a collective ensemble, but we quickly moved on to being able to pay ourselves. In the case of others I worked for a fee that I considered to be less than I would have liked to charge but was able to live on the wage and considered the advantages of working with talented newcomers to outweigh the economic difficulties. In both cases this decision has repaid itself countless times over as these companies have grown and continue to hire me to work for them. So consider it carefully. In particular consider the quality of the work a young company is producing, if it excites you as a creative, go for it. If it does not, perhaps let it slide. A larger producing house will be able to offer more in terms of payment and indeed will often be bound by agreements that have been hard won by the Writers Guild of Great Britain but perhaps it will offer less in terms of future opportunity. It may be that they work with you again if you do a great job for them, but remember the pool of composers/lyricists they can offer to is much larger and there are some big name writers out there that they could potentially pull in. So consistency of future work is not something they may be able to offer. What they can offer (in addition to the economics) is the ability to get your work out in front of a huge audience. The larger regional theatres can pack in up to 1000 people per performances. That’s 1000 people hearing your work every night for (perhaps) a lengthy tour. If the work is good then this could be really big for you and could lead to other producing houses seeing/liking your work and offering you jobs as a result. So consider that, consider whether the trade off is fair. My advice with larger producing houses however is that if the amount you are being offered is just not workable for you, it will not do you any harm to come back to them and ask for what you believe is a reasonable amount for your time. Remember it’s not about being greedy, it’s about being FAIR.
It's possible to find out what other creatives on the project are being paid...
You will need to find out this from the producer, some will be unwilling to tell you, but some will let you know. Once you know this, consider the amount of work you will be doing in comparison to them (essentially in hours put in) then see if you think that is FAIR. If you don’t think it is, go back to the producers with your reasons (often they won’t necessarily understand the amount of work that goes into your material, it’s up to you to explain to them how it works. You will be doing yourself and composers everywhere a great service!). In fact this is where it will pay to meet some other creatives and talk to them about what they actually do (lighting designers, sound designers, producers, choreographers, directors, musical directors etc). Because unless you have at least some idea about what amount of work the others are going to be doing you won't be able to figure out what is fair for you.
Whilst I have nothing against the profit-share model (it can be a useful way of getting your work seen) the realities of profit-share can be deceptive. In my opinion (and it is just that!) the only companies who should be doing profit-share are at the beginning of their life and really, for them to survive, any money that they earn from their show should be poured back into the company so they can continue making better quality work. It is my view that if you work for a profit-share production you should be offered an ongoing and irrevocable stake in the work of the company. The first company I worked with (Paper Balloon Theatre) created our first show on the understanding that any money earned would go towards our next production and as soon as we did a production that allowed us to pay ourselves then we would. Paper Balloon is still working as a company today and I still write all the music and lyrics for our work. It’s also worth considering, if you are the instigator (as many writers are) of a profit-share production, am I being FAIR to those who are giving their time to present my work. Am I keeping them informed of the realities of how much they will be getting? Should I offer them a stake in the company? All important things to consider? It is important to note that of all of my actor friends who have taken part in profit share productions, some have gotten agents off the back of them, some have been seen by casting directors and some have even received some profit. But there are no guarantees. Those actors weighed up the advantages and considered it FAIR and that is up to them, you should ask yourself the same question. Having said all that, this is just one persons opinion and I'm sure there are alot of things that I haven't thought of regarding profit shares that are excellent models, write in if you know of other advantages!
For those just starting out, these terms can be a little confusing. So, to clarify:
1. Commissioning Fee: Usually this is an amount designed to cover the time it will take you to complete the work prior to production, but also will often include attendance at press nights, and rewrites during previews etc. This is yours to keep and can be anything from £50 through to £25,000 depending on who you are working for.
2. Royalty: This is a percentage of the box office of the production. This will only be calculated either whilst the production runs or on completion of the run. It is important to note that industry standard for the writing team (on Broadway and Westend commercial productions) is 6% Gross Box Office Receipts. This is usually divided in three ways (2% composer, 2% lyricist, 2% bookwriter) although depending on the nature of the collaboration this can be flexible. The important thing to note is that you should always push for Gross Box Office Receipts. This means that you will see the percentage of the actual ticket sales. There is another type of royalty that you may see in your contract called Net Box Office Receipts (which is essentially your percentage after credit card fees and entertainment tax has been deducted from sales). This is a more standard type of agreement. Both of these are acceptable and will still result in you receiving a decent proportion of ticket sales. The one you want to avoid is a percentage based on PROFITS. This means that the producer will only pay you a percentage after they have recouped all of the expenses that they have paid to make the show. These can be substantial and it's possible that a producer will NEVER recoup. So read your contract carefully and always argue for Gross or Net. As you can imagine the difference can be substantial and can be the difference between receiving £1000 in royalty and £0. So it's REALLY important!
Also note that whilst 2% is the standard for commercial musical theatre, your composer or lyricist royalty agreements can vary greatly depending on the level of the producer and their capablility. Particularly if they are adapting a well known book or film, producers will often have to pay considerable royalty to the underlying rights holders which can impinge on the amount that is realistic to pay you. I have taken projects offering everything from 0.25% through to 5% of Gross Box Office. It depends entirely on the amount of work that goes into the production and the ability of the producers to pay the creatives.
It's also possible to be offered an Advance on Royalties in order to make the show. This means that your commissioning fee will come from your expected royalty for the show, which means (if this amount is £1000) that you will receive £1000 to write the show in advance but the first £1000 of any royalties normally due to you would go to the producer.
Ideally you should aim for both. A commissioning fee for the actual writing of the show and then a royalty on any and all future productions. Most of the work that I have done has been a mixture of commissioning fee alone or commissioning fee plus royalties. I believe you should be paid a fee for your work. Sometimes this will be an advance against royalties (in commercial theatre) sometimes it will be yours to keep on top of royalties. I have been paid fees ranging from £200 through to £3000 and everywhere in between for a single job. More established composers get paid much more but I am still making a name for myself and the companies I am working with are taking a chance on an unknown composer and are helping my work get out there, therefore I consider it FAIR to me to be paid less. Some people will disagree with me on this and say that I if I’m doing the same quality work then I should be paid the same. They are allowed to disagree, after all it is not them who needs to consider whether it is fair. I’ll give some examples of splits I have done which I have considered fair:
a) Early career: £250 flat fee plus 3% perpetual royalty on NET BOX OFFICE
I considered this FAIR because the show was by a talented young fellow with a fringe following and two young producers were involved. It was a one man show, easily tourable with small set and one tech guy. It was topical and booked for an Edinburgh Fringe run and a tour afterwards. I considered this fair because it actually was likely to make a profit (and it did) it would have an ongoing life (it has since been seen Off Broadway, in Europe and all over the UK), my work would get alot of attention and press (it has) and it was a young talented group of people with whom I hope to work in the future. And most importantly I was creatively excited by the work. Please note the word NET here, this is an important word, if you can always go for GROSS BOX OFFICE.
b) Later career: £3000 flat fee plus 1% royalty in NET BOX OFFICE.
I considered this fair because it was a fairly big show going on a big tour, the royalty was on box office so I would get an earning regardless of production costs. The commissioning fee was reasonable for the amount of work concerned. I would get the chance to work with brilliant creatives at the top of their game so it would be a brilliant learning curve. My work would get seen by a huge range of people and it would get national press coverage. For someone at this stage in my career I considered that to be a FAIR exchange.
c) Later still career: £4,500 commission fee plus 4% royalty on NET BOX OFFICE.
This doesn’t necessarily mean that the fee from this particular job should cover all your time and expenses, but you should have other means by which you can subsidise it, which won’t be affected by this extra work. If the answer to this question is a resounding NO, then you should approach the producer and tell them. It may be that they can find some more money for you. If they are unable to be flexible then you should think seriously about whether you should take the job.
This is a really important question to consider. A young, exciting company just starting out will not be able to pay you as much as an established producing house. But there can be huge advantages to getting in on the ground floor of a talented company. Think of companies like Kneehigh, Complicite and Les Enfants Terribles now substantial theatrical powerhouses putting on big budget productions. All started from a small fringe troupe. And in most cases the composer that was with them in the early days is still with them now. I have followed this particular route myself with a few companies that are just now (after years of battling away, touring and making work) beginning to get regular funding. I am fortunate to receive a considerable amount of work through these companies and their connections. In the case of one, I worked for free as part of a collective ensemble, but we quickly moved on to being able to pay ourselves. In the case of others I worked for a fee that I considered to be less than I would have liked to charge but was able to live on the wage and considered the advantages of working with talented newcomers to outweigh the economic difficulties. In both cases this decision has repaid itself countless times over as these companies have grown and continue to hire me to work for them. So consider it carefully. In particular consider the quality of the work a young company is producing, if it excites you as a creative, go for it. If it does not, perhaps let it slide. A larger producing house will be able to offer more in terms of payment and indeed will often be bound by agreements that have been hard won by the Writers Guild of Great Britain but perhaps it will offer less in terms of future opportunity. It may be that they work with you again if you do a great job for them, but remember the pool of composers/lyricists they can offer to is much larger and there are some big name writers out there that they could potentially pull in. So consistency of future work is not something they may be able to offer. What they can offer (in addition to the economics) is the ability to get your work out in front of a huge audience. The larger regional theatres can pack in up to 1000 people per performances. That’s 1000 people hearing your work every night for (perhaps) a lengthy tour. If the work is good then this could be really big for you and could lead to other producing houses seeing/liking your work and offering you jobs as a result. So consider that, consider whether the trade off is fair. My advice with larger producing houses however is that if the amount you are being offered is just not workable for you, it will not do you any harm to come back to them and ask for what you believe is a reasonable amount for your time. Remember it’s not about being greedy, it’s about being FAIR.
It's possible to find out what other creatives on the project are being paid...
You will need to find out this from the producer, some will be unwilling to tell you, but some will let you know. Once you know this, consider the amount of work you will be doing in comparison to them (essentially in hours put in) then see if you think that is FAIR. If you don’t think it is, go back to the producers with your reasons (often they won’t necessarily understand the amount of work that goes into your material, it’s up to you to explain to them how it works. You will be doing yourself and composers everywhere a great service!). In fact this is where it will pay to meet some other creatives and talk to them about what they actually do (lighting designers, sound designers, producers, choreographers, directors, musical directors etc). Because unless you have at least some idea about what amount of work the others are going to be doing you won't be able to figure out what is fair for you.
Whilst I have nothing against the profit-share model (it can be a useful way of getting your work seen) the realities of profit-share can be deceptive. In my opinion (and it is just that!) the only companies who should be doing profit-share are at the beginning of their life and really, for them to survive, any money that they earn from their show should be poured back into the company so they can continue making better quality work. It is my view that if you work for a profit-share production you should be offered an ongoing and irrevocable stake in the work of the company. The first company I worked with (Paper Balloon Theatre) created our first show on the understanding that any money earned would go towards our next production and as soon as we did a production that allowed us to pay ourselves then we would. Paper Balloon is still working as a company today and I still write all the music and lyrics for our work. It’s also worth considering, if you are the instigator (as many writers are) of a profit-share production, am I being FAIR to those who are giving their time to present my work. Am I keeping them informed of the realities of how much they will be getting? Should I offer them a stake in the company? All important things to consider? It is important to note that of all of my actor friends who have taken part in profit share productions, some have gotten agents off the back of them, some have been seen by casting directors and some have even received some profit. But there are no guarantees. Those actors weighed up the advantages and considered it FAIR and that is up to them, you should ask yourself the same question. Having said all that, this is just one persons opinion and I'm sure there are alot of things that I haven't thought of regarding profit shares that are excellent models, write in if you know of other advantages!
For those just starting out, these terms can be a little confusing. So, to clarify:
1. Commissioning Fee: Usually this is an amount designed to cover the time it will take you to complete the work prior to production, but also will often include attendance at press nights, and rewrites during previews etc. This is yours to keep and can be anything from £50 through to £25,000 depending on who you are working for.
2. Royalty: This is a percentage of the box office of the production. This will only be calculated either whilst the production runs or on completion of the run. It is important to note that industry standard for the writing team (on Broadway and Westend commercial productions) is 6% Gross Box Office Receipts. This is usually divided in three ways (2% composer, 2% lyricist, 2% bookwriter) although depending on the nature of the collaboration this can be flexible. The important thing to note is that you should always push for Gross Box Office Receipts. This means that you will see the percentage of the actual ticket sales. There is another type of royalty that you may see in your contract called Net Box Office Receipts (which is essentially your percentage after credit card fees and entertainment tax has been deducted from sales). This is a more standard type of agreement. Both of these are acceptable and will still result in you receiving a decent proportion of ticket sales. The one you want to avoid is a percentage based on PROFITS. This means that the producer will only pay you a percentage after they have recouped all of the expenses that they have paid to make the show. These can be substantial and it's possible that a producer will NEVER recoup. So read your contract carefully and always argue for Gross or Net. As you can imagine the difference can be substantial and can be the difference between receiving £1000 in royalty and £0. So it's REALLY important!
Also note that whilst 2% is the standard for commercial musical theatre, your composer or lyricist royalty agreements can vary greatly depending on the level of the producer and their capablility. Particularly if they are adapting a well known book or film, producers will often have to pay considerable royalty to the underlying rights holders which can impinge on the amount that is realistic to pay you. I have taken projects offering everything from 0.25% through to 5% of Gross Box Office. It depends entirely on the amount of work that goes into the production and the ability of the producers to pay the creatives.
It's also possible to be offered an Advance on Royalties in order to make the show. This means that your commissioning fee will come from your expected royalty for the show, which means (if this amount is £1000) that you will receive £1000 to write the show in advance but the first £1000 of any royalties normally due to you would go to the producer.
Ideally you should aim for both. A commissioning fee for the actual writing of the show and then a royalty on any and all future productions. Most of the work that I have done has been a mixture of commissioning fee alone or commissioning fee plus royalties. I believe you should be paid a fee for your work. Sometimes this will be an advance against royalties (in commercial theatre) sometimes it will be yours to keep on top of royalties. I have been paid fees ranging from £200 through to £3000 and everywhere in between for a single job. More established composers get paid much more but I am still making a name for myself and the companies I am working with are taking a chance on an unknown composer and are helping my work get out there, therefore I consider it FAIR to me to be paid less. Some people will disagree with me on this and say that I if I’m doing the same quality work then I should be paid the same. They are allowed to disagree, after all it is not them who needs to consider whether it is fair. I’ll give some examples of splits I have done which I have considered fair:
a) Early career: £250 flat fee plus 3% perpetual royalty on NET BOX OFFICE
I considered this FAIR because the show was by a talented young fellow with a fringe following and two young producers were involved. It was a one man show, easily tourable with small set and one tech guy. It was topical and booked for an Edinburgh Fringe run and a tour afterwards. I considered this fair because it actually was likely to make a profit (and it did) it would have an ongoing life (it has since been seen Off Broadway, in Europe and all over the UK), my work would get alot of attention and press (it has) and it was a young talented group of people with whom I hope to work in the future. And most importantly I was creatively excited by the work. Please note the word NET here, this is an important word, if you can always go for GROSS BOX OFFICE.
b) Later career: £3000 flat fee plus 1% royalty in NET BOX OFFICE.
I considered this fair because it was a fairly big show going on a big tour, the royalty was on box office so I would get an earning regardless of production costs. The commissioning fee was reasonable for the amount of work concerned. I would get the chance to work with brilliant creatives at the top of their game so it would be a brilliant learning curve. My work would get seen by a huge range of people and it would get national press coverage. For someone at this stage in my career I considered that to be a FAIR exchange.
c) Later still career: £4,500 commission fee plus 4% royalty on NET BOX OFFICE.
