Summary of Key Points
Cai Yilin was fined 70,000 yuan for the Changsha concert due to the organizer's violation of regulations by transferring the rights to operate the event. The significant discrepancy between the artist's reported earnings of 2 million yuan and the 54.66 million yuan in ticket sales revenue shared with the brokerage company has sparked speculation about the use of "double-sided contracts." However, lawyers have clarified that the 2 million yuan represents the artist's personal service fee, which is subject to tax, while the 54.66 million yuan is the operating income of the brokerage company as a partner in the project, making them distinct entities and not constituting a double-sided contract. The incident also exposes the long-standing issue of unauthorized subcontracting of event management rights within the entertainment industry. Organizers often rely on local resources and face low legal consequences, leading to a pattern of shifting responsibility and difficulties for audiences to protect their interests.
Dispute over Double-Sided Contracts: 2 Million Yuan in Earnings ≠ Total Income
Many people assume that the 2 million yuan in earnings and the 54.66 million yuan in brokerage company profits constitute a double-sided contract, but these are two separate types of income:
- 2 million yuan is the artist's service fee: This is a fixed payment for Cai Yilin's performance, subject to tax (more than half of which has already been paid as taxes).
- 54.66 million yuan is the company's operating income: This money comes from the concert's ticket sales and belongs to her brokerage company, Yongdaoxing, as a partner in the project.
- Common industry practice: Top artists often opt for a lower fixed fee plus a share of ticket sales revenue. If ticket sales are good, they earn more; if not, they may not receive the fixed amount. This arrangement is a risk-sharing agreement with the organizer.
The Real Reason for the Fine: The Organizer's Failure to Maintain Control Over Event Rights
The nominal organizer, Nanjing Yisike, was fined not for a double-sided contract but for illegally transferring the rights to operate the event:
- Regulatory requirements: Organizers must oversee all core responsibilities, such as cultural approval, security clearance, and ticket sales settlement.
- In this case: Nanjing Yisike only handled cultural approval and delegated other crucial tasks (such as security and artist compensation) to Shenzhen Fenglin Yingyue, effectively shirking responsibility.
- Difference between legal and illegal practices: A legal arrangement allows the organizer to retain control while outsourcing minor aspects like stage setup; illegal transfers result in complete disconnection of responsibilities, which is strictly prohibited by regulations.
The Persistence of Unauthorized Subcontracting
This practice persists due to three main factors:
1. Dependency on local resources: Touring requires cooperation with local companies, which are familiar with local authorities and can expedite approvals.
2. Low legal consequences: Fines (e.g., 70,000 yuan for Nanjing Yisike's violation) are negligible compared to potential profits.
3. Multiple parties' interests: Local companies seek to boost their reputation by co-organizing events; organizers want to reduce their responsibilities and increase profits; brokerages aim to gain more from ticket sales. All parties benefit, leading to the acceptance of this decentralized model.
The Risks of Subcontracting
This decentralized structure harms audiences and artists:
- Audience rights: Difficulties in seeking compensation for issues like refunds or safety breaches.
- Artists bear the burden: Organizers may cancel performances at will, and artists face public criticism despite having no control over the event.
- Difficult supervision: Multiple parties make it challenging for regulators to determine responsibility.
How to Improve the Industry
The key is to ensure that responsibilities are clearly aligned with authority:
- Enhanced qualification checks: Regulators should verify whether organizers truly oversee events, beyond just reviewing paperwork.
- Higher legal penalties: Fines should be proportional to ticket sales to deter violations.
- Clear responsibility assignments: Events must have a designated responsible party to address all issues.
In summary, the speculation about a double-sided contract is unfounded. However, the industry's problem with unauthorized subcontracting needs to be addressed. Audiences care most about safety and their rights when purchasing concert tickets, not who gets the money.
(Commentary: Do you think Cai Yilin's 2 million yuan in earnings constitute a double-sided contract? From a legal perspective, no, as the 2 million yuan is a taxed service fee, and the brokerage company's share is separate. The industry's issues deserve attention. What's your opinion?)