NextIncome |

Richard Ashcroft wrote Bitter Sweet Symphony, one of the biggest songs of the 1990s. For the next 22 years, the only publishing money he got from it was $1,000. The song opens on a four-second string loop. The Verve sampled it from a 1965 orchestral version of the Rolling Stones' The Last Time. Their label cleared the recording with Decca. Nobody cleared the song underneath it. That composition belonged to ABKCO, the company of Allen Klein, the Stones' former manager. By then the album was pressed and the single was a hit. Bassist Simon Jones said they were told it would be a 50/50 split. Then: "We want 100 percent or take it out of the shops." The settlement gave ABKCO 100% of the publishing, including Ashcroft's share as composer and lyricist. Jagger and Richards went on the credits. Ashcroft got $1,000. That is the clause that moved the money: whoever owns the song you sampled sets the price, even after your record is in the shops. Then the song went to work. Nike used it in a 1998 ad, and the band said it would never have allowed it. It got a Grammy nomination with Jagger and Richards on the ballot. Billboard estimates it earned almost $5 million in publishing. Keith Richards, 1999: "If the Verve can write a better song, they can keep the money." In April 2019 Jagger and Richards agreed to hand Ashcroft their songwriter royalties and drop their names. He announced it on May 23, 2019. ABKCO kept the publishing. The whole deal, number by number, is in the file. Klein had the paperwork. Ashcroft had the song. Who should have been paid?

YOU SANG "HAPPY BIRTHDAY" FOR FREE. WARNER BILLED A FILMMAKER $1,500 FOR IT. THE BILL ENDED UP COSTING WARNER $14 MILLION. In 2013, Jennifer Nelson was making a documentary about the song itself. Warner/Chappell, Warner Music's publisher, wanted $1,500 for the license. That bill was routine. By some estimates the song earned up to $2 million a year, and Warner admitted charging up to six figures for a single film or TV use. All of it rested on one paper: a 1935 copyright registration by the Clayton F. Summy Co. Warner bought Summy's successor in 1988 and said the copyright ran until 2030. The split: a third of the profits went to a charity Patty Hill helped found. The rest stayed with the publisher. Mildred Hill, who composed the melody in 1893, died in 1916. She was gone 19 years before that paper existed. Nelson says she paid first, then started asking who owned the song. She sued. Singer Rupa Marya joined after paying $455 to release her own fans singing it on a live album. On September 22, 2015, Judge George H. King ruled the Hill sisters gave Summy the melody and piano arrangements, "but never any rights to the lyrics." Second fight: the Hill charity stepped in and claimed the words were its own. In February 2016, Warner agreed to a $14 million fund to repay people who had bought licenses. The lawyers asked for $4.6 million of it. That June, King approved the deal and declared the song public domain. Do the math: one $1,500 bill, 27 years of collecting, a $14 million settlement. How many bills are you paying just because nobody asked for proof?

YOU SEE A $750 MILLION MICHAEL JACKSON DEAL. HIS OWN SONGS AREN'T WHAT HIS ESTATE SOLD. In 2016, Sony bought the Jackson estate's remaining 50% of Sony/ATV, a music-publishing business. The deal's total payments were $750 million. But the estate kept his recordings and the company holding the songs he wrote. In the clip, Paul McCartney recalls advising Jackson to get into music publishing. Jackson's response, as McCartney remembers it: “I'm gonna get yours.” The story began long before Jackson's death. In 1985, he bought ATV, a catalogue that included publishing rights to Beatles songs. He hadn't written those songs. He hadn't sung on the original records. He had bought the business that held their publishing rights. McCartney, his former collaborator, was now on the other side of that arrangement. Jackson combined ATV with Sony's publishing business in 1995. The investment grew into something far larger than the catalogue he originally bought. He died in 2009. Seven years later, his estate sold its half of that expanded company. The $750 million was a deal for the estate, not a payday Jackson personally lived to collect. His executors said the transaction would help maximize the estate's value “for the benefit of his children.” And the assets excluded from the sale matter as much as the price. His master recordings stayed with the estate. So did Mijac, the publisher owning his own songwriting catalogue. The estate could sell that enormous publishing investment without including his own recordings or the company holding his own songs. His business legacy wasn't only the music he made. It was the music he learned to own.

YOU LEFT AN INHERITANCE. YOUR FUNERAL IS NOW A FUCKING SHAREHOLDER MEETING. One dramatic entrance. One furious objection. Nobody’s even read your will yet. You thought leaving money would bring everyone together. Technically, it did. Just not in the way your lawyer hoped. If this is the farewell, imagine the fight over the house.

YOUR FACE. YOUR VOICE. AN AI MOVIE—WITHOUT A PAYCHECK. Grimes chose that deal. For Gods Don’t Give Gifts, she authorized her AI likeness and recorded her own dialogue. This isn’t a stolen face or a synthetic copy of her voice. The surprising part is the money. Director Zack London says she refused a fee and asked him to put it toward the other actors and the film. Her spokesperson confirmed the no-fee license. The US release is planned for December 4. Would you charge for your digital double—or give this one role away to back the people making it?

YOU’RE LOOKING AT THE DRESS. THE BUSINESS IS IN HER NAME. Paris Hilton didn’t just pose beside a perfume bottle. In 2004, her company licensed the PARIS HILTON name to fragrance maker Parlux. The deal included royalties tied to sales. By 2007, CNBC reported her cut for licensing that name: 5%. That’s a historical figure—not a claim about what she earns today. Parlux took on production costs. Her side retained approval over the fragrance and packaging. She wasn’t simply being paid to appear in an advertisement. Her name was part of what the company was paying to sell. The video is her own ICONIC fragrance campaign. The dress gets your attention. The bottle carries her name. Getting noticed and getting a share of sales are two different businesses. If your image could sell a product, would you take a guaranteed campaign fee—or negotiate a cut of what it sells?

ASA AKIRA COULD EARN $4,000 FOR A STUDIO SHOOT. THEN $0 IN ROYALTIES. 𝗬𝗢𝗨𝗥 replay could keep the product alive. Her paycheck didn't keep coming with it. The adult star's answer wasn't to quit. It was to build income that didn't require another day on set. In 2012, The Hollywood Reporter followed her agent negotiating a shoot. Her fee: about $2,000. She was already a recognizable name. She drove a Toyota Prius. The money was real. So was the limit: a shoot paid for that shoot, not a permanent share of what it earned. By 2014, she was spelling out the arrangement to Complex: “We don't get royalties, we're paid for the scene and then we're done and that's it.” Not a claim that someone stole her pay. The business model. Her plan was to make the camera work a smaller part of her income. A website. Licensing deals. Writing. Businesses that could keep earning when she wasn't filming. She told Bobby Hundreds that her website made money every month, whether she shot for it or not. One month, writing gigs nearly covered all her bills. The same woman who sold time on set was learning to sell something that outlasted it. And she wasn't treating every check like permission to spend. She told Complex that moving money into savings felt like buying a new purse. In the video below, Asa and other performers explain the business behind the camera: upfront expenses, no employee benefits, production crews, sales teams, accounting. Asa says much of her job is marketing, sitting at a desk. By 2025, she told WIRED that her peak studio pay had reached $4,000 for some scenes. But studio work generally didn't bring another payment after the shoot. Publishing her own content let her keep a bigger cut. She did not disclose her current earnings. No imaginary net-worth number needed. Being recognizable and getting paid repeatedly are two different businesses. One pays you to make the product. The other keeps paying because you have a stake in it. If it were 𝗬𝗢𝗨𝗥 name selling the work, would you take the bigger guaranteed fee today — or a smaller upfront check with a share of future sales?

YOUR GREAT-GRANDFATHER MADE $100 MILLION SHORTING THE 1929 CRASH. YOU'RE 50 AND JUST SAID YOU'VE NEVER MADE MORE MONEY. Jesse Livermore. Wall Street called him the Boy Plunger. He built and blew fortunes that would be billions today. He died in 1940 after going broke more than once. His great-granddaughter is Brandi Love. In the video below, she sits on Randall Kaplan's In Search of Excellence podcast and says it flat: "I've never made more money. I'm hitting my stride and I'm 50." Before adult film she was Harley-Davidson's top salesperson every month. Then her husband had a heart attack. They quit corporate life, tried a wine label, and in 2003 started posting their own videos online. Two decades later she has seven revenue streams. Live cam. A studio exclusive with Vixen. Her own site. A second fan platform. Paid calls. Product royalties. And OnlyFans — which she calls her biggest. She says a studio day rate pays once and you never see another penny of that scene. On her own platforms she can make three to seven times that day rate off the same film over its life. She and her husband put 90% of every month into investments. They bought a Ferrari F8 and leave it in the garage as a reminder of the grind. Same bloodline that bet the market. She bet on owning the content. If your great-grandfather built and lost Wall Street fortunes, would you trade stocks — or build seven adult revenue streams like she did?

"I WOULDN'T RELY ON LISA ANN BECAUSE SHE'S A JUNKIE." That's what one woman told NBC at the final call for a role on 30 Rock. Lisa Ann was set to play herself. NBC gave the part to someone else. Lisa Ann says she doesn't even do drugs. Her real crime was a number. The woman was from a company that wanted her cheaper. Lisa Ann never gave her a break on her rate. "My rate is my rate. You're gonna make a million comps. This money is my money." She had already seen what her name was worth to other people. 18 years ago today, on Election Day 2008, Hustler released Who's Nailin' Paylin? with Lisa Ann as Sarah Palin. Flat fee. No backend. She says she spent more on the wardrobe than she made shooting the movie. A couple of weeks later, Eminem's director called. She played Palin in "We Made You." She learned early that studios resell your scenes in compilations forever. So she put $25,000 to $30,000 of her own money into each movie she produced. Today she says she owns about 80% of her library. In the video below, she sits down with The Joe Vulpis Podcast and tells the whole story. She walked up to Alec Baldwin at her gym and asked him to tell Tina Fey she's not a junkie. Years later, at SiriusXM, she told Tracy Morgan the story. He said they all felt bad for her. "We heard you were a junkie." You've been her. You said no to working for less. And someone made sure you paid for it. Would you have taken the discount and the role, or kept your rate and let them call you a junkie?

Riley Reid was 32 when she let engineers clone her. They fed an AI hundreds of hours of her videos, podcast interviews and her entire social media history. Fans paid $30 a month to talk to the copy. By February 2024 it had passed 10,000 subscribers. She started in adult films at 19. By 2016 she was AVN's Female Performer of the Year. By 2024 she had 21 AVN Awards. Then the money moved online. She joined OnlyFans in 2020. Two years later she was in the top 0.01% of earners on the platform. Other creators paid her to promote them. $2,200 for a 7-day shoutout. She was booked two months out. In 2023 her dad, a programmer, told her his job was becoming obsolete unless he learned to work with AI. That changed her plan. "If I'm not partnering up with it, then someone else is going to steal my likeness and do it without me." So she co-founded Clona.ai, built on a heavily modified version of Meta's Llama. Five free messages, then $30 a month for unlimited chat and voice notes. She fact-checked the bot's answers herself. Her reason was time: "I'm married. I'm a mother. I'm trying to do multiple businesses. This gives me an opportunity to immortalize myself." In the video below, on a podcast in December 2023, she admits the copy isn't her yet. "It still needs work." She hoped a year online would teach it how she'd respond, because "it's hard to teach an AI to be a human." She told AVN a user once opened up to the AI about a stressful week. The next day it had no memory of the conversation. Now she's planning her exit. "I'd rather quit before people are like, oh my God, did you see Riley Reid?" Next: stand-up comedy, animation, voice acting. In 2026 her X feed is still selling "my AI Twin." The woman is leaving. The copy never has to. Is Riley Reid's AI clone the smartest retirement plan in the industry, or did she just sell the one thing she can never take back?

Belle Delphine sold jars of her bathwater to strangers online. PayPal kept the $90,000 and hit her with a $2,500 fine for every jar. One explicit video later, she says she made "around 5 million." Her own father googled her and cut her off. Now she has a price to disappear: $20 million. She was born in South Africa, grew up in England and dropped out of school as a young teen. When she switched to sexier photos, her first Instagram account hit a million followers in about a month. Her only goal, she says, was enough money to move out of her mom's place. In early 2019 she bought her first house with Patreon money. Her dad came over, saw it and wondered how she'd paid for it. She says he googled her and, that evening or the next day, "just went wild." She hasn't seen him since. That summer she launched "GamerGirl Bath Water." Hundreds of jars at about $30 each sold out within days. It made news around the world. The money never arrived. She later revealed PayPal closed her account, counted every sale as a rules violation worth a $2,500 fine, and kept the $90,000. Shipping one jar to the US cost her $11. "Not only did I not earn any money selling my bathwater, I in fact lost money doing it." PayPal only released the money in May 2024, five years later, after her post went viral. In late 2020, at the peak of her fame, she posted her first fully explicit video. She told Louis Theroux it brought in "around 5 million" and paid for an 8-bedroom country house. When he put her income at about a million pounds a month, she said yes. She also told him: "I wish there was a way to kill me on the internet and just like somehow delete everything." In the video below, Philip DeFranco asks what number would make her leave for good. Her answer: start a GoFundMe, raise $20 million, and she'll go away. The internet made her rich for being weird. It won't let her leave. Would you chip in to make Belle Delphine disappear, or is she the smartest businesswoman the internet ever produced?

STOP REWINDING HER HIPS. You’re not watching the form. You’re watching a register that already cleared. One locked face. Same eyes. Same jaw. Same slight smile. 30–40 posts already queued across platforms. Zero actress. Zero mood. Zero “we need to talk about the rate.” The actual numbers from one folder: Day 1 → $90 Day 11 → $3,280 Day 19 → $9,150 While your thumb is still on the pause button, the next 8–12 posts from that exact face are already loaded and the DMs are being answered. Pretty motion is disposable. A face that never clocks out and never renegotiates is not. Most people keep feeding other people’s accounts every time they stop. The ones who put the same locked face on the conveyor stopped rewinding and started compounding. How many times did you pause on something like this this week without realizing the face was the product? Drop the number. The ones who answer usually stop being the audience.

SHE WON’T SAVE YOU WHEN YOU’RE ALREADY DONE While most people wait for someone else to figure it out - she acts. While others say “you should have known” and compare you to the past - she just does what needs to be done. No excuses. No “someone else did it better.” No games. Either you know how to solve problems, or you don’t. Either you take responsibility, or you wait to be rescued. She shows exactly what that looks like: no extra words, no drama, just action.

SHE TAKES THE BITE. YOU ALREADY STOPPED. Hot dog in her hand. Sunglasses on. Eyes somewhere between the food and the lens. You told yourself it’s just lunch. Same face. Same slight smile. Same exact look that already ran 30+ posts across platforms. No actress. No “I’m not in the mood today.” No reshoot. No rate increase. While your thumb is still on the pause button — the next 8–12 posts from that identical face are already queued and the DMs are being answered. Pretty bites are cheap. A face that never clocks out and never renegotiates is not. You’re either putting locked faces on the conveyor and letting them run, or you’re still paying with your eyes every time you stop. How many times did you pause on something like this this week? Drop the number. 🤖

ONE FACE. ZERO RENEGOTIATION. THE MONEY COMPOUNDS ANYWAY. Most people see a pretty clip and move on. The accounts that actually clear money see a locked asset. Same eyes. Same jaw. Same slight smile. Same exact face that already ran 30–40 posts across platforms without a single reshoot, rate increase, or “I’m not feeling it today.” No actress to book. No mood to manage. No rest days. No “we need to talk about the rate.” While you’re deciding if the angle looks real, the next 8–12 posts from that exact face are already queued and the DMs are being answered. Pretty motion is cheap and disposable. A face that never clocks out and never renegotiates is not. Day 1 is almost nothing. By day 19 the same locked folder is usually already past the point where most people still think it’s “just content.” You’re either putting a face on the conveyor and letting it run, or you’re still paying with your eyes every time you pause. How many locked faces are you actually running right now vs just watching? Drop the number. 🤖

WHILE THE CREAM HITS HER LIP — THE ACCOUNT ALREADY CLEARED $9,150. She bites. Cream stays. Tongue slow. Eyes never leave the lens. You already paused. Already rewound. Already told yourself it’s just cream. Day 1: $90 Day 4: $640 Day 11: $3,280 Day 19: $9,150. One locked face. One folder. 40 posts. 7 platforms. Zero real girl. Zero camera. Zero “not in the mood.” Zero rest days. You’re not watching the cream. You’re the register. Pretty lips are cheap. A face that never clocks out is not. Put the same face on the conveyor. Or keep feeding someone else’s account every time you stop. While your thumb is still on that lip — the next 8–12 posts from the exact same face are already loaded. How many times did you pause on something like this this week? Drop the number.

SHE’S HOLDING THE BRIDGE. Blonde ponytail. Blue leggings. Hands planted. Hips high. Eyes still locked on the camera even when the body is completely inverted. Most people see a gym clip. The accounts that actually print see something else: a face that never drops form, never needs a rest day, and never has to renegotiate the angle. The reason these locked AI personas keep clearing real money isn’t the flexibility or the outfit. It’s that the same exact face can run the identical pose (and 39 others) across platforms for weeks without a single reshoot, mood swing, or rate increase. One folder. Consistent look. Content that never clocks out. While you’re deciding whether the form looks real, the next 8–12 posts from that exact face are already queued. How many of these “normal gym moves” have you already rewound this week without realizing the face was the product?

She stepped out onto the terrace like it was nothing. Bare feet on the patterned rug. Light catching the water on her skin. One slow turn toward the camera. You already rewound it once. Probably twice. Here’s the part most people miss: That exact face has been locked for 6 weeks. Same eyes, same jaw, same slight smile. It already ran 37 posts across platforms. No actress booked. No “she’s not feeling it today.” No reshoots. While you’re deciding if the angle is good, the folder is already scheduled for the next 10 days. The DMs are being answered. The offers are live. The difference between the person watching and the person getting paid is usually just one decision: whether the face stays locked and keeps moving, or you keep treating every clip as a one-off. How many times have you paused on a face like this and still walked away without owning one? Drop the number. I’m curious who’s actually running them vs who’s still just watching.