360 Deal Explained: Why FOF Records Doesn’t Use Them

The term 360 deal music gets thrown around constantly—but rarely explained clearly. Artists hear “360 deal” and either panic or assume it’s just how the industry works now. The truth is more nuanced. A 360 deal is not automatically evil, but it is one of the most misunderstood—and often misused—contracts in modern music.

This guide breaks down what a 360 deal actually is, why it became popular, why it’s controversial, and why labels like FOF Records intentionally avoid using them.

What Is a 360 Deal in Music?

A 360 deal (also called a “multiple rights deal”) is a contract where a record label takes a percentage of multiple revenue streams, not just music sales or streaming.

In a traditional record deal, the label typically earns from:

Master recordings (streams, sales, licensing)

In a 360 deal, the label may also take a cut of:

Touring income

Merchandise sales

Brand partnerships

Publishing

Sponsorships

Sometimes even acting or influencer income

The idea is that the label participates in everything the artist earns—hence “360.”

Why 360 Deals Became Popular

360 deals didn’t appear out of nowhere. They emerged in the mid-to-late 2000s when physical album sales collapsed and labels needed new ways to reduce risk.

From the label’s perspective:

Marketing costs were rising

Streaming payouts were uncertain

Artists were earning more from touring and merch

Labels wanted upside beyond records

The logic was:

“If we’re investing in the artist’s brand, we should share in all the revenue that brand generates.”

On paper, that sounds reasonable.

In practice, it often wasn’t.

Why 360 Deals Are So Controversial

The controversy around 360 deal music isn’t about sharing revenue—it’s about misalignment.

Here’s where problems usually show up:

1. Labels Take Revenue Without Adding Value

Many 360 deals give labels a percentage of touring, merch, or branding income without the label actively contributing to those areas.

If a label takes 20% of touring but does not:

book shows

fund tours

handle logistics

build touring infrastructure

…the deal becomes extractive instead of collaborative.

2. Artists Lose Incentive

When artists give up slices of every revenue stream, motivation can drop. Why push merch or brand deals aggressively if a large percentage disappears?

This can quietly cap growth.

3. Long-Term Wealth Is Undermined

Touring, merch, and brand partnerships are often where artists earn the most sustainable income. Giving those up early—before leverage exists—can cost millions over a career.

4. Deals Are Often Signed Too Early

The worst 360 deals are signed when artists have:

no leverage

no understanding of revenue flows

no legal guidance

By the time success arrives, the contract is already locked.

When (Rarely) a 360 Deal Can Make Sense

To be fair, 360 deals are not always bad.

They can make sense when:

The label is fully funding the artist’s career

The label provides touring support, merch production, branding, and staffing

The artist receives a large, non-recoupable advance

The artist already has leverage and negotiates fair percentages

The deal is time-limited and clearly defined

In other words:

A 360 deal only works when the label is truly a partner across all verticals.

That is rare—especially at the independent level.

Why FOF Records Doesn’t Use 360 Deals

FOF Records intentionally avoids 360 deals because they conflict with the label’s core philosophy: ownership, clarity, and long-term leverage.

Here’s why.

1. FOF Records Separates Responsibilities

FOF Records focuses on:

music releases

branding systems

content execution

catalog growth

infrastructure and education

If the label is not directly running tours, merch operations, or brand negotiations, it does not claim those revenues. That keeps incentives clean.

2. Ownership Beats Overreach

FOF Records believes artists should retain control over the revenue streams they build—especially touring and merch, which often become the backbone of financial independence.

Instead of taking everything, the label builds artists who understand how money flows and how to scale responsibly.

3. Education Over Dependency

360 deals often create dependency. Artists rely on the label for everything—and lose the knowledge needed to operate independently.

FOF Records prioritizes artist development and education. Artists are taught how to manage revenue streams, not surrender them.

4. Long-Term Trust > Short-Term Percentages

A label that doesn’t grab every revenue stream builds more trust. That trust leads to:

longer relationships

better execution

stronger catalogs

optionality for future partnerships

Trust compounds. Overreach kills it.

Alternatives to 360 Deals (What Modern Indie Labels Use Instead)

Instead of 360 deals, independent labels increasingly use modular structures:

Licensing Deals

Label licenses masters for a fixed term

Artist keeps ownership

Revenue split applies only to recordings

Joint Ventures

Label and artist share costs and profits on specific projects

Clear scope

Clear exit points

Label Services Agreements

Label provides marketing, strategy, or distribution

Artist pays a fee or limited percentage

No claim on touring or merch

Project-Based Partnerships

One EP or album at a time

Performance determines future collaboration

These models align incentives instead of trapping artists.

The Bigger Picture: Control vs Convenience

360 deals are attractive because they simplify things. One contract. One company. One decision-maker.

But simplicity often hides cost.

Artists who understand the business realize that control is more valuable than convenience—especially early in a career.

That’s why ownership-first labels are growing faster in 2025 than ever before.

Final Takeaway: 360 Deal Music Explained Clearly

A 360 deal is not automatically bad—but it is high-risk for artists without leverage.

Before signing one, artists should ask:

What value is the label adding to each revenue stream?

Is this percentage fair for the actual work done?

Is the deal time-limited?

Do I understand what I’m giving up long-term?

Labels like FOF Records avoid 360 deals because they believe:

Artists win when ownership is preserved

Partnerships work best when incentives are aligned

Long-term leverage beats short-term control

In 2025, the smartest move isn’t signing the biggest deal—it’s signing the cleanest structure.

Because careers aren’t built in one contract.

They’re built over time, with clarity and control.