XM agrees to higher performance royalties

By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published December 4, 2007, 6:42 PM

In what could signal the beginning of the end of the performance royalties debate, XM says it has agreed to an annual fee based on a gross revenue scale -- what Internet streamers would prefer -- rather than a listener-hour scale.

XM Satellite Radio today agreed with the US Copyright Royalty Board to a performance royalties rate that's an escalating flat percentage of its adjusted gross revenues. Up to this point, the service was paying a third of a cent for every listener who pays attention for an hour.

The XM agreement is particularly important for Internet streaming broadcasters, who continue to await the fate of a bill being debated in Congress that would reject the higher rates set by the CRB, replacing them with rates based on the scale XM and Sirius had already been paying.

A rate hike for the satellite broadcasters could mean a similar hike in the base rate for Internet broadcasters, if the bill's supporters adhere to their goal of equalizing rates for all music services.

The final rate to which XM agreed today is significantly higher than what it had been proposing -- although XM's proposal was widely acknowledged to be so low as to be unattainable -- and also somewhat higher than it was already paying.

Last May, XM informed the US Securities and Exchange Commission that it was seeking a royalties rate of 0.88% (less than one percent) of its annual adjusted gross revenue. As it turns out, it agreed to a rate that begins at 6.0% up until 2008, then escalating by half of one percent per year to 8.0% by 2012.

By BetaNews estimates, XM may have agreed to royalty rates that are more than double what it most likely currently pays, based on the service's current ratings as estimated by Arbitron. Its first official report of satellite radio ratings computed to the same standard used for terrestrial radio, states XM has about 253,000 listeners for any given 15 minutes of time (aggregate quarter-hour). Based on those figures, it's likely that XM pays about $29.2 million annually in performance royalties to the SoundExchange organization.

Under the new scale, XM would pay royalties based on its adjusted gross revenue, not its ratings. In the third quarter of this year, it reported revenue of $287 million. Assuming that quarterly revenue is roughly flat for the year, the service could find itself paying nearly $69 million in royalties for 2007 -- 236% of BetaNews' estimate of its current royalties.

The alternative royalties rate XM proposed to the CRM would have it paying only $2.53 million for this year, by BetaNews estimates.

The agreement evoked this comment from XM chairman Gary Parsons this afternoon: "The music performance fees set by the CRB are in the range projected by many financial analysts who cover this industry."

Comments

View comments by with a score of at least

I'm sure as a consumer the extra cost won't be passed on to us.

Score: 0

|

LOL Higher fees for the win...

Sorry I don't and never will pay for radio (PATHETIC). I would rather shove a screwdriver down my ear canal and never hear another thing again.

Score: 0

|

Better to pay royalties based upon a percentage of annual income, rather than guessing how many people are listening to the radio. Most of that XM and Sirius audience is not getting their services on-line; so nobody knows how many others are really tuned in at a given time...

Score: 0

|

You guys are missing the big picture... Sirius agreed to the same thing, and in reality is the last step to getting a merger completed. This story is a lot bigger than you're giving credit for. At the very least, it should be reported that both of them agreed to the same thing...

Score: 0

|

Will Firefox beat IE9 to Direct2D rendering?

Just days after Microsoft executives gave conference attendees a peek at a new rendering technology, a Mozilla contributor revealed he's working on the same thing.

AOL's decision to rebrand as Aol. takes a bad brand and makes it worse

The idea behind the social Web is to crowd source before bringing out something new. But not at AOL, which new logo debuted with a cry of "fail!" across the blogosphere and Twittersphere today.

Microsoft's Bob Muglia and Ray Ozzie on Silverlight vs. standards

Bob Muglia: "We're trying to provide people with an environment that has capabilities that you just simply can't do today in the standards-based world."

Uh-oh, netbooks -- not Windows 7 -- will lift 2009 PC sales

Santa may bring a lump of coal to the Windows PC industry this holiday season. Netbook sales will sap PC margins, while weak Windows 7 PC sales could further drive down average selling prices.

Kindle 2 update adds battery life, native PDF reader

Amazon has pushed out an update to the Kindle 2 e-reader that lengthens battery life and adds a native PDF viewer.

Safari on iPhone gets competition from a $1 browser app

Apple likes to say it gives iPhone users a full browsing experience, but a new competitor tries to incorporate more desktop browser features.

Action Replay maker sues Microsoft for Xbox 360 'predatory technological barriers'

Third-party video game accessory maker Datel has filed an antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft over the Xbox 360's recent Dashboard update.

Where there's smoke: Apple warranty stance raises troubling questions

Carmi Levy | Wide Angle Zoom: Smoking can be dangerous not only for your lungs, it appears, but for your Apple hardware warranty.

Microsoft's .NET Micro Framework is now free and open source

The latest version of Microsoft's .NET Micro framework is now in the hands of the FOSS community.

Google's value proposition for Chrome OS: Should we feel insulted?

For a search engine that has direct access to all the world's online history, it appears to have taught Google nothing about selling a machine.

E-book readers will be in short supply this holiday season

E-readers are hot this year, and a lot of compelling new products have been released, but are there enough electrophoretic displays to go around?