Not to get too technical, MG, but you're confusing profit with revenue. Lots of nonprofits (e.g., arts organizations like theatres, museums, and symphony orchestras, and educational institutions like universities) don't, by definition, make any "profit" per se (i.e., no income for any owners or investors), but they bring in enough revenue to pay others (officers/employees, guest and resident artists, vendors such as you described, etc.) quite handsomely. Of course, as nonprofits, they also benefit from being able to accept tax-deductible donations (at least in the US).
True - those types of companies don't have huge R&D bills, however. Also they're all government-supported, which puts them rather into the same category as Melodiya and Syliphone.
Big R&D bills (in this industry, lots of failures) require investment capital and that can only be generated by profits or subsidies.
MG
They're not government-supported in the way I think you're meaning, at least here in the US. They may get SOME government funding in the form of grants, but those tend to account for a very small portion of these organizations' revenues. And in terms of R&D bills (I assume you mean research and development?), I'm not quite sure what you mean in the context of a record company--maybe marketing costs (not really R&D)? In any event, there are many nationally and internationally known nonprofits that spend quite large amounts on marketing and bring in substantial revenues, without the need for investors who demand payment of profits.