Biz news: AskonasHolt is sold

Biz news: AskonasHolt is sold

News

norman lebrecht

December 09, 2022

The largest British classical artist agency sold 100 percent of its shares last night to an unlikely buyer – the San Francisco Conservatory of Music.

The deal marks a quantum leap into the major league of the music biz for the SFCM, which already owns New York-based Opus3 agency and the Dutch record label Pentatone. SFCM President David Stull believes this will give his students and faculty greater opportunities to pursue careers in all sectors of the music industry, not just as performers.

Although the two agencies will maintain separate identities in London and New York respectively, Askonas Holt chief executive Donagh Collins will oversee both management companies, reporting to Stull and his board.

The terms of the deal have not been disclosed but we understand that one of SFCM’s major donors stumped up all of the cash. Collins is insistent that AH did not need to sell, but that the opportunity was ripe for his agency to move into new relationships and new fields, including film composing and jazz. ‘It makes us more of a producing company,’ said a source close to the deal.

Collins, 48, is a one-company man, have been on the AH payroll since 1999. His agency is strong on conductors, singers and orchestral touring. Its clients include Simon Rattle, Yannick Nézet-Séguin, Ed Gardner, Joyce DiDonato, Julia Bullock and Sarah Connolly.

Opus3 will continue to major on instrumentalists, amid a broa roster of artists that includes Marin Alsop, Anthony Roth Constanzo and Yo Yo Ma.

AskonasHolt artists and managers will adopt ad hoc teaching and mentoring roles for students at SFCM. some disquiet has been rippling through SFCM’s faculty at its greatly expanded role.

The deal, which will be announced later today, is a ball-breaker for the music biz, challenging traditional agencies to become bigger players in the industry and hidebound conservatories to plant a size-10 pair of trainers in the business world.

Watch this space.

And remember you read it here first.

Comments

  • Wallace says:

    Dead industry.

  • A.L. says:

    This smells of rotten eggs. A music conservatory owning a record label and two artist agencies, one a major player in the industry, smacks of corrosive corruption and of something gone amiss. It is sufficient to make anyone carefully scrutinize their choices involving anyone associated with the conservatory and its satellite sausage factories.

  • Chen Mae says:

    Predicting it here first, Askonas Holt and Opus 3 will be one company within five years, that’s how conglomerates operate – take two companies serving different markets and smash them together until they sort of fit.

    Mega agencies have come and gone before and the only people it benefits are those who run them, never the artists.

    What does San Francisco actually have to gain from this?

  • Hang on… says:

    This is one of the agencies that got a government bail out during COVID-19!

    Are the shareholders who sold to San Francisco going to be paying the arts council back that money, or just profiteering off the taxpayer?!

    • Legal Beagle says:

      Unless ACE put in a covenant against that grant, it is unlikely they have done anything legally unsound.

      Morally though, if true, this would be reprehensible.

      @Norman have you asked?

  • A.L. says:

    And in what state of anti-competitiveness and diminished morale does this leave all other music conservatories everywhere?

  • Ex-Askonas says:

    I felt a small tremor this morning. At first I thought it was a big lorry going past my window, but now I am convinced it was Harold, Lies and Sir Ian collectively rolling in their graves…

    One of the greatest agencies in the world has lost its independence today and will now be the willing puppet of its new American paymasters. As the industry continues to shrink, I would expect significant cuts to servicing and an unhealthy push for profits…

    I hate to say it about a company to whom I am indebted for the career they gave me, but if I were an artist on their books, I would be incredibly concerned by today’s news.

    • Peter San Diego says:

      Pardon my naivete, but I’m genuinely ignorant of this aspect of the music business. How would SFCM ownership of AH affect the bookings obtained for AH’s musicians, and the day-to-day artistic lives of the musicians? I’m genuinely curious and would appreciate enlightenment on the matter.

      • Industry Insider says:

        On a day-to-day basis, only time will tell.

        Agencies tread a thin line between being commercial entities and providing an important element of the talent development pipeline.

        Generally speaking, the small boutique agencies (and even some of the bigger ones) operate by having a mixture of high profile talent, who expect strong services, and new talent who require extra support to get them to build their profile.

        A fully independent agency can act with more agility and respond to both the needs of their artists and the needs of the sector, whereas for an agency which is having its income expectations set by a third party, profit reigns supreme. It is likely to see the quality of services cut, its staff stretched to breaking point, and young artists not given the level of support they need.

        The reason why many with AH are especially narked is that since the pandemic there has already been a massive drop in service, staff are unhappy and key initiatives that were set up in 2018 have fallen by the wayside. DC now stretching his workload across two agencies is not likely to help things.

        The fact that many artists found out about this on SD is really poor.

    • Phoebe says:

      I’m ex Askonas too. I left the company a long time ago but was surprised with my experience – I thought it would be dynamic and exciting (maybe like in Jerry McGuire) but literally used to sit and wait for a phone to ring. It was boring. Look at their list – currently so many artists – look at their future engagements. Not much happening.

  • Simon says:

    Wait, I thought they sold out years ago…?

  • David Rowe says:

    Wow. And just one week ago we saw a S.D. headline suggesting the large agency model was on the ascent. Seems to this (happy) boutique proprietor that exactly the opposite is true. Opus3, and now A-H, bailed out by the deep pockets of an individual investor – same as IMG around a dozen years ago. The company line may be “selling was not required”, but I somehow doubt any of these three transactions was was executed from a position of fiscal strength by the acquired party.

  • Ludwig's Van says:

    It used to be that if an agency signed an artist, it was solely due to artistic merit and commercial viability. But now we can only assume that these artists got signed to these agencies because they were students of the San Francisco Conservatory – and that those students chose that school not for educational reasons, but for career possibilities. So integrity be damned – the music business has become a farce.

  • GCMP says:

    Wait for some enlightened bureaucrat to allege restraint of trade and illegal vertical integration . . . and perhaps rightly. Imagine if Harvard bought IBM so their students could get jobs.

  • MMcGrath says:

    Brilliant moves by all concerned. Classical music is showing business acumen and a sense of future.

  • Principled says:

    Lies Askonas and Harold Holt would roll in their graves at these inadequates – selling the family silver (which was inherited and is not theirs to sell). Artists finding out via this article and not via Askonas Holt because of a NL exclusive is disgraceful and telling of the new direction of this company.

  • Rob B. says:

    I was surprised that you didn’t voice an opinion on this Mr Lebrecht, especially as the concept of big agencies is something you have spoken out about so vociferously in the past. Was there maybe a deal done for the SD exclusive?

    Either way, I think some of the comments bring up valid questions that demand analyzing and investigating further.

    (Fun fact: SFCM Corp used to exist to train musicians)

  • Monty Earleman says:

    It’s a brilliant move to get top students. Curtis does it too.

  • Phoebe says:

    Music colleges have real issues with lack of employment nowadays

  • IgnotumCantor says:

    The major donor would be Getty, I’m nearly 100% certain.

  • MacroV says:

    Interesting, from a business strategy standpoint. I’m sure SFCM is a fine institution but it’s never really had the reputation of Curtis or Juilliard. But the first thing I thought of was how Dorothy Delay would have a pipeline for her students (mostly Juilliard but others, too) to ICM. So in practice this seems sort of similar.

  • MOST READ TODAY: