JPF Home Page Forums General Messages Songwriter Message Forum Question for experienced writers

I decided to call these guys myself today to see what was up. After receiving a slew of hate filled emails from a third party about this, I was really becoming more and more suspicious of these guys. I think when you're connected to people who do bad things, it's hard for that stench not to rub off on you. So I wondered why they'd want to be associated with the third party who was launching attacks on me and JPF, but who avoided ever dealing with the issues at hand. So I called them myself. I am glad I did.

I spoke with both main partners at this primarily song plugging service for a long time. (They de-emphasized their roles as publishers to me and said their focus is really as song plugging). Both were extremely polite and professional, though I could sense their feelings had been seriously hurt because of this post. To their credit, they never at any time launched retaliation attacks. (Their friend did, but it wasn't by their request or their fault).

They started by carefully going over the 3 concerns I had point by point. They explained that they called their friend at ASCAP who confirmed my statement and that it is now common and accepted business practice to offer reversion clauses and that publishers who don't offer it are frowned upon. Their feeling was that in the past, they had done business as writers themselves without them, and they modeled their business plan after someone who didn't offer them. Between our statements and concerns and the verification by their own contact at ASCAP, they are changing their policy and now offer reversion clauses. To me, that's a big win for everyone involved. It will remove the stigma from them, it will protect our member who is working with them and it shows that my statements were not off base at all. It also shows that they are willing to adjust their policy to line up with acceptable business practices, something a "scam" artist would not do.

Next, they discussed my second concern that it wasn't appropriate for them to punish D Spence because they were angry at my comments and others who questioned their business practices. They explained that they got upset and bit hot over our comments and let that affect their actions. For them to openly admit this and rectify the situation directly with the parties involved, says a great deal about their class and integrity. It's not easy to do that when you feel you've been attacked. Even though I intentionally did not mention the company name, they knew who we were discussing and I can see how they'd get angry at that if they were in fact, honest guys. Though I would still do the same thing if the same situation came up (after all, my job here is to advocate for our community and help educate and protect them so they don't get ripped off) I also feel the equal responsibility to notify folks when we learn that someone is honest and has done everything within reason to correct the problem. I believe they have done that in this case. Though I still don't personally know these guys, I feel they've gone above and beyond to make all of this right. That's a very rare thing to find these days even with honest companies. And I now believe these guys are trying to do things above board and honestly. Their business practice was the problem, not their integrity and honesty and they've fixed it. I want to be clear that they've demonstrated that they are not scam artists. I am sorry their feelings were hurt, but given the same facts and scenario, I would just as passionately make the same comments again until the problems were fixed. I hope readers here can make the distinction. The problems have now been fixed.

The third concern I posted has ALSO been fixed. The text has been adjusted to make it clear what the information on their site is saying and what it means and doesn't mean. I especially appreciate that they did this. I know companies have to struggle to find their place in the market. Everyone tries to paint themselves in the most positive light they can. After all, this is business and more often than not, the competition is using every trick in the book to make them look like the best possible option in their business sector. I've always believe that honest companies don't need to mislead if they have the goods. I think they guys have a lot of years of experiences, a lot of real contacts in the business (and as we were talking, we learned we share some of the same friends and business associates). They've adjusted the text on their site so that the very real and credible successes are properly highlighted, while it will be much harder for someone to make the wrong assumptions about their part in those successes. That's the honest thing to do and the fact they changed it promptly is a great sign that they also want to be represented on honest terms. Good for them and I am glad for our part in clarifying that. They said they weren't aware of any confusion, which is not uncommon when you look at things internally. Their actions speak volumes about their integrity there as well.

Through our conversation I gained a lot of insight and respect for who these guys were. Though their business practices had some problems, they were quick to adjust them when they verified through other sources that our concerns were valid. They said they understood that perception is reality and unlike the many REAL scam artists who come here and simply attack the messenger, they instead investigated the claims and made very appropriate changes very quickly. That's what honest business do. For those who read about the REAL scam artists who come through this site, you'll see that the dishonest ones NEVER do the right thing. They just launch counter attacks, they get cronies to post objections or even come here under false pretenses to try and defend their dishonest practices. They guys were the opposite. I am quite satisfied that they are both honest and good guys who simply needed to adjust a few things to improve their business processes. And even though they got a bit hot under the collar, they already smoothed over the ruffled feathers of everyone involved, including me. I would feel comfortable doing business with these guys personally going forward. I hope they also feel the same in return. So, in my opinion, everything has turned out very positively for everyone involved. Except for 1 thing.

The one negative thing that has come out of this is the fallout with our coordinator Terri Lynn. She was put in the middle of all this. What made it worse is that her business partner escalated everything significantly with a series of insulting personal attacks directed towards myself, Mike Dunbar and JPF overall. I verified with the guys today that they did not ASK him to do that on their behalf. He made the attacks and threats and insults on his own. I've since been told he's a hothead and can even cross over to violence (he broke his own hand when he got angry and punched a wall over not getting what he wanted) and frankly, another good thing that has come out of this is that I know we don't want to associate with anything this guy does. I doubt I could ever trust him nor could I let any member I know do business with him without full disclosure. He stated he felt JPF was a scam. He offered no evidence or support of this. If he felt we were a scam, why has he been voluntarily involved locally with JPF and why has he been trying to earn studio income by working with our members and offering discounts? I wouldn't intentionally do business with someone I believed was a scam artist or with an organization whose members were (and I quote him exactly here)

"an organization primarily made up of whiners, complainers, wannabe's, and amateurs."

Since he feels that way, but was still happy to do business with us, it really puts his integrity in question. Would any of you reading this voluntarily do business with a group of people you felt that way about? Would you voluntarily do business with, host events for and associate daily with the local rep of a scam artist? I would hope not. Apparently for this guy, it was not a problem until just now.

The fact that he inserted himself in a confrontation that had nothing to do with him personally and he actually made everyone look far worse by his actions, I have no interest in ever having him involved in anything JPF related going forward. Though I am sure (based on his comments) that he doesn't care what I think, it sadly makes it impossible to reconcile with Terri Lynn who is in the middle as his business partner. It's a sad fallout that he escalated the situation when it wasn't his battle, that he was the only party to make direct personal attacks and insults on specific people and that he was profiting from using the JPF name to generate studio business by offering discounts to members without my knowledge or endorsement. After all is said and done, in my opinion, he's the ONLY bad guy in this scenario. But I am glad I know his true nature so I can avoid him in the future. It's just too bad that Terri Lynn is the baby in his batch of nasty bathwater.

So, unless the primary participants here have more comments, I think this has been resolved. Mike Dunbar is also going to meet with these guys face to face and I will likely drop in to meet them next time I am in town.

As they said to me at the end of our conversation, they had far more contentious starts with the women they eventually married. Yeah, they have a sense of humor as well.

Brian