The potential merger of BMG Rights Management and Concord Music became the talk of the town during Grammy week. While the possible deal may not result in a new direct competitor for the “Big Three” label groups, it embodies the music publishing sector’s evolution from a minor income source to a major industry force.
Publishing and rights management aren’t as flashy as the hitmaking factories of frontline music labels, but they’re a reliable way to bring in consistent revenue. That fact has been reinforced in the past decade, as streaming has led to longer lifespans for catalog tracks, steadier decay curves for song consumption and smaller but consistent payouts — all paving the way for more royalties in the long term for rights owners.
According to CISAC’s latest Global Collections Report, total royalty collections grew 50% between 2020 ($9 billion) and 2024 ($13.6 billion). This consistent climb has also made music rights an appealing investment, which has spurred a booming catalog acquisition market and more opportunities for companies to raise serious capital.
Though directly comparing music publishers and record labels is a bit apples to oranges — publishing is just one of several key income streams for labels, and a smaller one at that versus something like recorded music — weighing BMG against the publishing branches of just the Big Three (Sony Music Group, Universal Music Publishing Group, Warner Chappell) puts it in a similar playing field.
Goldman Sachs found that BMG claimed 7% of the global music publishing market in 2024, which isn’t far behind Warner’s 12% share.
Even without Concord, BMG is already considered the biggest indie publisher and fourth biggest label group in the world behind the Big Three. Although Concord was lumped into the broader “other independents” category, with a catalog of over 1 million songs worth somewhere in the $5 billion range, it’s certainly one of the larger indie publishers after BMG.
It’s therefore entirely possible that absorbing Concord could put BMG in lockstep with, if not slightly ahead of, Warner’s publishing market share, a shift that would also come just a few years after BMG split with Warner’s ADA Music to handle its own streaming and digital distribution.
The combined company would be a publishing-focused alternative to the majors that may appeal to artists. As the internet eliminated the barriers between artists and fans once mediated by a label, artists increasingly want more autonomy and ownership of their work than what traditional label deals typically allow.
Publishing and distribution deals, usually less comprehensive but more flexible than label deals, became more in demand as a result, and companies like BMG and Concord were happy to accommodate.
Additionally, the lines between label, publisher and distributor have blurred in the digital era, leading to expanded artist services. While BMG and Concord’s bread-and-butter is still established catalogs and experienced artists, both companies have invested in frontline, label-esque services for newer and currently working artists.
Conversely, the Big Three have also increasingly offered artists “hybrid” deals that look more like publishing or distribution deals than an all-encompassing “360” agreement.
To be clear, the companies’ rosters of chart-topping songs and mainstream artists are still smaller than those of the Big Three. But that doesn’t mean they don’t have firepower. BMG has had particular success in country music with artists including Lainey Wilson and Jelly Roll, while Concord had a hand in numerous recent hits thanks to co-writers and producers from its lineup.
Combining forces would allow BMG and Concord to stretch their resources further while still offering more versatile partnerships for artists. So while the merger wouldn’t immediately change the industry’s power balance, it’s a clear sign that the “old” industry models are being pushed further into the past.
