A friend of mine hit me today and asked me to review a contract he was offered.
Off rip, something felt off.
The pitch looked glamorous. Big names. Travel covered. Video shoot. Percentages. Legal language meant to intimidate. The kind of paperwork designed to make an artist feel like they’re almost in.
But when you slow down and actually read it, the play becomes obvious.
This isn’t a collaboration.
It’s a pay-to-play funnel disguised as an opportunity.
Let’s break it down.
The Setup: Authority + Proximity
The DM starts friendly.
A wife. A husband. A known artist’s name attached.
You’re told:
There’s a song A “major” artist is involved They want you on it You’ll hear it on FaceTime Everything feels personal and exclusive
This is manufactured proximity.
They borrow credibility to lower your guard.
Once you’re emotionally invested, the paperwork arrives.
Red Flag #1: You’re Paying to Be Featured
Read this carefully.
The featured artist is required to pay:
$300 for “mixing and mastering”
Paid to their engineer
With no option to use your own engineer
No stems provided No independent control
That alone tells you everything.
In real collaborations:
Artists don’t pay to be featured
Mixing costs are production expenses, not entry fees
Engineers don’t become gatekeepers for ownership
When the artist is paying to participate, you’re not a collaborator — you’re the customer.
Red Flag #2: Ownership Without Transparency
The contract says:
HMG will handle backend matters including royalties, publishing splits, and clearances.
But it never clearly states:
Who owns the master
How publishing is split on paper
When registrations happen
What happens if the song never releases
“33% of net royalties” sounds good until you remember:
Net of what?
Marketing?
Production?
Legal?
Distribution fees?
“Net” is the most abused word in music contracts.
If you don’t define deductions, you don’t have royalties. You have hope.
Red Flag #3: One-Sided Control Disguised as “Security”
They claim:
Leak protection
Security concerns
Exclusive control of files
Threats of legal and even criminal consequences
This is intimidation language.
Artists are told:
Don’t share
Don’t preview
Don’t question
Don’t move without permission
Meanwhile, the company:
Controls the files
Controls the release
Controls the accounting
Controls the narrative
That’s not protection.
That’s leverage.
Red Flag #4: The “Luxury Experience” Upsell
Then comes the optional mansion recording experience:
Pay extra
Stay at the mansion
Chauffeur Vibes Status
This is classic upsell psychology.
Once someone pays the first fee, they’re more likely to rationalize the second.
That’s not artistry.
That’s sales funnel behavior.
Red Flag #5: Weaponized Legal Names
The contract lists a high-profile attorney and major law firm.
That’s meant to scare artists into compliance.
But here’s the truth:
Real counsel represents parties, not intimidation tactics
Artists should always verify representation independently
Big names don’t automatically mean the deal is fair
Fear is being used as a substitute for clarity.
The Pattern Is the Proof
After seeing this contract, I started digging.
Turns out multiple artists were offered the same agreement.
Same structure. Same pitch.
And now artists are online saying they feel scammed.
That’s not coincidence.
That’s a repeatable tactic.
Opportunity doesn’t need to be duplicated like a template.
Funnels do.
The Lesson Artists Need to Learn
If you’re being asked to:
Pay to collaborate
Pay to be mixed
Pay to be validated
Give up control “for security”
Trust accounting without transparency
You’re not being put on.
You’re being processed.
Final Word
This isn’t hate.
This isn’t gossip.
This is education.
The industry has evolved, but the scams have just gotten better dressed.
Read slow.
Ask questions.
Never confuse access with opportunity.
And remember:
If you’re paying to be on the record,
you’re not the artist — you’re the product.
Kingpaysos.Blog 
Leave a comment