Red Hot Chili Peppers seeking $350M for masters catalog as WMG leads the bid — report
The Red Hot Chili Peppers are reportedly shopping their recorded-music masters and are seeking roughly $350 million for the collection, according to multiple industry reports. The move would mark one of the biggest single-artist masters sales in recent years and comes after the band previously monetized parts of their songwriting income.
Sources say Warner Music Group — which has a long commercial relationship with the band in the U.S. — is leading the bidding, potentially leveraging the new JV it has formed with private equity partners to underwrite major catalog purchases. Insider reporting and trade outlets describe Warner (and affiliates) as the front-runner, although no agreement has been announced and talks remain confidential.
The package on offer is said to include the band’s recorded masters spanning their career, reportedly encompassing the group’s 13 studio albums and other releases originally issued via Warner in the U.S. That catalog contains signature hits such as “Under the Bridge,” “Californication,” “Dani California” and “Give It Away,” making it an attractive long-term streaming and licensing asset.
Industry estimates cited in press reports value the catalog’s annual cash flow at the low-to-mid tens of millions of dollars — a profile that supports the $350 million asking price when buyers apply customary multiples for evergreen, high-profile catalogs. One report pegs annual revenue from the masters at about $26 million a year, a figure that helps explain the valuation band being discussed.
If a deal proceeds at or near the reported figure, it would deepen a trend of legacy acts monetizing recorded or publishing rights through outright sales to record companies, funds and catalog specialists. The Red Hot Chili Peppers have previously sold publishing rights: in 2021 the band received about $140 million from Hipgnosis for their publishing catalog, a separate transaction that underscores how artists have been monetizing different slices of their intellectual property.
For Warner, acquiring the Chili Peppers masters would be strategically consistent with the company’s recent push into catalog investment. The label and its financial partners have been assembling capital to bid on marquee assets, using combined music-operational expertise and private capital to compete with other deep-pocketed buyers. That wider market dynamic — where record companies, PE firms and specialist funds all chase durable streaming income — has kept valuations elevated for blue-chip catalogs even as multiples have softened from the 2021 peak.
Neither Warner Music Group nor representatives for Red Hot Chili Peppers had publicly confirmed terms at the time of reporting. Negotiations for catalogs of this magnitude typically involve extended due diligence on rights clearances, revenue histories and contractual carve-outs (for example, territories where rights are held by third parties), any of which could alter deal economics or the final purchaser.
For fans and the business community alike, the potential sale raises familiar questions about legacy control and future licensing. Buyers prize masters for sync potential in film, TV and ads as well as steady streaming yields, while artists weigh the tradeoff between upfront capital and retaining long-term ownership. For the Red Hot Chili Peppers — one of rock’s most commercially enduring acts — a masters sale would represent a significant capitalization of the band’s recorded legacy.
As with other headline catalog stories, the next steps to watch are whether an exclusive agreement is struck, which parties — if any — publicly confirm terms, and the precise structure of any sale (outright transfer vs. long-term licensing or joint ownership). Until then, interested buyers and industry observers will be parsing filings, revenue disclosures and music-rights precedents to judge whether $350 million — or some other sum — becomes the final price tag.
*Reporting compiled from Billboard, Music Business Worldwide, Reuters, the Financial Times and Consequence.*
