Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Warner Brothers, what's the story.

5 views
Skip to first unread message

DukeSunflo

unread,
Sep 1, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/1/99
to
We all know Prince bitched about them, but what is the true story? How was he
swindled by them? Didn't he sign a new contract with them at a point in his
career when he could have gone anywhere? My opinion of Warner isn't very high
(they are one of the worst companies in terms of reissuing popular artists on
CD) but the man wasn't forced into his deal, was he???????


<A HREF="http://www.bookcloseouts.com/default.asp?rid=dukesun">Visit Book
Closeouts.com, with thousands of titles up to 90% off of the cover price. </a>


Lzdmn

unread,
Sep 1, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/1/99
to
The deal was as follows:
100 million
The formula:
6cd's and the other part in publishing (60million 6x10 plus 40 mil in projected
publishing).
Each album would have to sell 5 million for prince to keep the 10 million. If
it fell short he'd have to give it back. He received 10mil when he delivered
an album.
The symbol (first record of the new deal) flopped. He then put out the hits
knowing that it was a sure thing and then they wouldn't release The Most
Beautiful ... single so he was allowed a one off and it became a huge hit which
made warner's look stupid. Plus the people he originally signed with left so
his ties to warner were weaker.
He figured out about a year too late what was going on. Had he had Londell
after Diamond's when his comtract was up he could've gotten everything but his
timing (once again) was off.
Warner's also footed a lot of money for Paisley Park and Prince over spent on
Carmen Electra's CD (2million dollars).
He had just inked a deal had a flop and freaked. D&P is Prince's second
biggest album. Third is 1999.
Gold should've been his next Purple Rain. So to answer your question they are
both at fault but prince was smart in not suing. Let's say he lost money he
made it up by not going to court with warners. After watching George Michael
lose millions he learned from GM's mistake.
I'm pretty certain that everything will come out now because prince is truly
free from warner's.
Oh in the WB deal there was also a singles label, etc. which of course never
happened.


Bart Van Hemelen

unread,
Sep 2, 1999, 3:00:00 AM9/2/99
to
On 01 Sep 1999 01:41:17 GMT, lz...@aol.com (Lzdmn) said in
alt.music.prince about "Re: Warner Brothers, what's the story.":

>The deal was as follows:
>100 million
>The formula:
>6cd's and the other part in publishing (60million 6x10 plus 40 mil in projected
>publishing).

As I was told, a lot of those 40 mil were supposed to go to two record
labels, i.e. PPR and one that was rumored to be named "the symbol"...
Hence PPR closing down in early 1994: WB was part owner of that label,
and didn't want prince to use it to put out his "independent"
records...

>Each album would have to sell 5 million for prince to keep the 10 million. If
>it fell short he'd have to give it back. He received 10mil when he delivered
>an album.

I believe that he wouldn't see any of his publishing money until he
sold 5 million...

>The symbol (first record of the new deal) flopped. He then put out the hits
>knowing that it was a sure thing

TH were NOT part of the deal: WB paid prince several MILLIONS for it,
they did all the work on it (hence: it's actually a great set, with
extensive liner notes and filled to the rim CDs).

>and then they wouldn't release The Most
>Beautiful ... single so he was allowed a one off and it became a huge hit which
>made warner's look stupid. Plus the people he originally signed with left so
>his ties to warner were weaker.

The "usic people" left, instead lawyers became decision makers. Didn't
stop Metallica and REM from signing lucrative contracts that included
ownership of masters...

>Warner's also footed a lot of money for Paisley Park

part of the deal.

> So to answer your question they are
>both at fault but prince was smart in not suing.

the only reason prince didn't sue was because he knew the details of
his contract would be out in the open for every one to laugh at (like
the George Michael lawsuit proved).


Bart Van Hemelen
--------------------------------------
"We are here... where are you?"
http://www.geocities.com/~tenthousand/
--------------------------------------
All latest news:
http://www.prince.org/news/
(independent and uncensored!)
--------------------------------------
"If you are out to describe the truth,
leave elegance to the tailor."
- Albert Einstein, 1879-1955

0 new messages