laurarichardson said:

Prince had been buying Real Estate both residential and commercial for years. I believe he was really running a whole another real estate business aside from his music interest one of his properties is a 20 million dollar commercial building.

If supposedly, none of the artist have majority shares then the original owners of the company Aspiro would still hold the majority shares and I would think that they may be the ones holding on to documents. The company is based out of Sweden and they do not have to do what our Federal courts say. The admin for Prince's estate and the courts would have to work with the Swedish Govt to stop copyright infringement. Also any documents that Tidal has would be proprietary information and Tidal could be concerned about information about their business getting out to their competitors. I doubt if they turn over anything without getting a lot of info redacted. In addtion, Breamer is out so maybe they knew that and want to see what happens with the new admin.

I wonder if Prince had other business investments. Just like the fitness club that owned the private plane Prince was on from Atlanta.

You are correct, the Parent company is from Norway. If Tidal is incorporated in the US, which I do not know, then would Tidal not be under the jurisdiction of US law? According to Bloomberg, ROC Nation is a LLC and a subsidiary of Live Nation Entertainment. That makes me believe, regardless of their parent, they are responsible to US federal court jurisdiction.

Tidal Music is a subsidary of Norwegian based Aspiro. Again, I believe that Tidal is within jurisdiction. If the estate does not name Aspiro in the lawsuit, then Tidal, regardless of the parent's location, will have to respond and defend themselves in the lawsuit. I am sure Tidal and ROC can have financial documents sealed during the court proceedings.

nelcp777 said:

laurarichardson said:

nelcp777 said:

I wonder if Prince had other business investments. Just like the fitness club that owned the private plane Prince was on from Atlanta.

You are correct, the Parent company is from Norway. If Tidal is incorporated in the US, which I do not know, then would Tidal not be under the jurisdiction of US law? According to Bloomberg, ROC Nation is a LLC and a subsidiary of Live Nation Entertainment. That makes me believe, regardless of their parent, they are responsible to US federal court jurisdiction.

Tidal Music is a subsidary of Norwegian based Aspiro. Again, I believe that Tidal is within jurisdiction. If the estate does not name Aspiro in the lawsuit, then Tidal, regardless of the parent's location, will have to respond and defend themselves in the lawsuit. I am sure Tidal and ROC can have financial documents sealed during the court proceedings.

/-/I am sure he had other investments as Breamer at one point referred to the estate as a vast entertainment/ business empire. The jurisdiction of the court over the subsidiary dependent on how the parent/subsidiary relationship is structured it does not matter because U.S courts have had success working with foreign governments to stop copyright infringement. I still find it weird that most of the catalog is still up on the site you would think an injunction would have forced it all to come down since all parties agree to the 90 day exclusivity clause.

I agree with you about the injunction and material still being on the site. This is a mess. From trying to do a brief research on Tidal, it has had it share of litigation in recent years and the company is fairly new.

nelcp777 said:

laurarichardson said:

nelcp777 said: /-/I am sure he had other investments as Breamer at one point referred to the estate as a vast entertainment/ business empire. The jurisdiction of the court over the subsidiary dependent on how the parent/subsidiary relationship is structured it does not matter because U.S courts have had success working with foreign governments to stop copyright infringement. I still find it weird that most of the catalog is still up on the site you would think an injunction would have forced it all to come down since all parties agree to the 90 day exclusivity clause.

I agree with you about the injunction and material still being on the site. This is a mess. From trying to do a brief research on Tidal, it has had it share of litigation in recent years and the company is fairly new.

This is my personal opinion, I don’t have any actual knowledge of the situation and I’m simply speculating like many others do on the org.

.

As I see it, this discussion is simple; the issue is whether or not Tidal had the legal/contractual rights to post P’s entire catalog on Tidal in June. What’s to discuss? This will all come out in court; all this speculating, liking/not liking someone and character slurs won’t change the ‘legal’ decisions at the end of the day.

.

So the possibilities (that we know of):

1) There is a contractual agreement whereby Tidal will be cleared of wrongdoing. End of case.

2) No legal/contractual agreement prior to posting the files, in that Tidal did not have the specific ‘rights’ to post P’s entire catalog on Tidal -- but went ahead and did so anyway.

.

Jayz isn’t a stupid man, and I’m sure Tidal has the legal recourses to advise him of the consequences of posting albums and songs without written / specific permission.

.

///So, here is where my view is different. What if Tidal did not have the rights to post? They weighted the all consequences, potential fines, and ramifications (with their legal staff) and still posted the files anyway?

.

Maybe Jayz/Tidal are courageous and should be admired. In honoring, Prince, they made sure the world had access to the entire catalog regardless of the potential personal consequences.

.

Much of P’s music had never been heard before because people simply didn’t have access to it and many were unaware. Tidal changed all that! Now fans are (re)discovering many long out of print albums that simply have never seen the light of day outside a select fan base.

.

Contract or not, Jayz may have done more for P’s legacy than anyone else by ‘freeing’ ALL of his music for everyone to enjoy.

.

As for getting paid …. I really don’t care to be a watch dog of the ‘estate’, these people (siblings) will be getting millions of dollars for doing nothing, so if they get a tiny bet less money, who cares?

.

Don't want to upset anyone, thisi is just my opinion.

[Edited 12/28/16 19:06pm]

laurarichardson said:

wavesofbliss said:

yep. just like truly independant artists do who work at domino's on the wkend to buy studio time or press up their own cds. yep, just like ani difrance and countless other independent artists who don't own 50 million in real estate purchased with money they earned from being a major label artist for 15 yrs. artists who don't go around preaching about being "free and independant" while they live like kept women on major label money. the 90s were a major transistion in the record industry. 2000s are a major transistion in distribution and IP rights. oh and fuck jz!

Prince printed up his own CDs for most of the last 15 years and according to the promoters of Musicology split the cost of producting those CDs at the concerts making 6 million off them.

<><><> i read that story too. good for him if he started putting his money where his mouth was.

Sorry but the whole idea of leaving a major lable was to make more money off the recorded music not less.

<><><><> yep. and in the long run he would have bcos he would have been sole propritor of his work. esp after he got his masters back.as well as avoiding alot of this BS that's going on now bcos he would already have a model and mechinism in place.

Prince never worked a job outside of the music business and he would not have been successful if he started delivering pizzas at 40. You move up not back.

<><><><> WTF is this about? i wasn't suggesting he do that. i was making the point that he had more capitol than those artists do but they r willing to sell pizza if need be. prince still wanted to live like a kept woman and maintain ridiculous overheads and waste cash on money pits like glam slam clubs and npg dance co. all while crying about not making money bcos of the record company. he could have invested in the tech of file sharing and more recently streaming tech that would have been of longterm benefit to his work and legacy and well and truly ahead of his time.

<><><>i'm not slagging him off, i'm just considering a few of the missed oppurtunites.

.

wavesofbliss said:

laurarichardson said:

Prince printed up his own CDs for most of the last 15 years and according to the promoters of Musicology split the cost of producting those CDs at the concerts making 6 million off them.

<><><> i read that story too. good for him if he started putting his money where his mouth was.

Sorry but the whole idea of leaving a major lable was to make more money off the recorded music not less.

<><><><> yep. and in the long run he would have bcos he would have been sole propritor of his work. esp after he got his masters back.as well as avoiding alot of this BS that's going on now bcos he would already have a model and mechinism in place.

Prince never worked a job outside of the music business and he would not have been successful if he started delivering pizzas at 40. You move up not back.

<><><><> WTF is this about? i wasn't suggesting he do that. i was making the point that he had more capitol than those artists do but they r willing to sell pizza if need be. prince still wanted to live like a kept woman and maintain ridiculous overheads and waste cash on money pits like glam slam clubs and npg dance co. all while crying about not making money bcos of the record company. he could have invested in the tech of file sharing and more recently streaming tech that would have been of longterm benefit to his work and legacy and well and truly ahead of his time.

<><><>i'm not slagging him off, i'm just considering a few of the missed oppurtunites.

.

Wavesofbliss....

Surely you cant have missed the WHOLE Point of SLaVE ?

Prince was not crying about not making money because of Record Companies...he MADE MONEY

HIS POINT WAS..Why should the record companies make MORE than the Artists ..???

Thats what it is all about....

Thats WHY TIDAL....

Lovejunky said:

wavesofbliss said:

Wavesofbliss....

Surely you cant have missed the WHOLE Point of SLaVE ?

no i didn't miss the point. and i stand by my comments.

Lovejunky said:

wavesofbliss said:

Wavesofbliss....

Surely you cant have missed the WHOLE Point of SLaVE ?

Prince was not crying about not making money because of Record Companies...he MADE MONEY

HIS POINT WAS..Why should the record companies make MORE than the Artists ..???

Thats what it is all about....

Thats WHY TIDAL....

--Thank you.

wavesofbliss said:

laurarichardson said:

Prince printed up his own CDs for most of the last 15 years and according to the promoters of Musicology split the cost of producting those CDs at the concerts making 6 million off them.

<><><> i read that story too. good for him if he started putting his money where his mouth was.

Sorry but the whole idea of leaving a major lable was to make more money off the recorded music not less.

<><><><> yep. and in the long run he would have bcos he would have been sole propritor of his work. esp after he got his masters back.as well as avoiding alot of this BS that's going on now bcos he would already have a model and mechinism in place.

Prince never worked a job outside of the music business and he would not have been successful if he started delivering pizzas at 40. You move up not back.

<><><><> WTF is this about? i wasn't suggesting he do that. i was making the point that he had more capitol than those artists do but they r willing to sell pizza if need be. prince still wanted to live like a kept woman and maintain ridiculous overheads and waste cash on money pits like glam slam clubs and npg dance co. all while crying about not making money bcos of the record company. he could have invested in the tech of file sharing and more recently streaming tech that would have been of longterm benefit to his work and legacy and well and truly ahead of his time.

<><><>i'm not slagging him off, i'm just considering a few of the missed oppurtunites.

.

prince still wanted to live like a kept woman and maintain ridiculous overheads and waste cash on money pits like glam slam clubs and npg dance co. all while crying about not making money bcos of the record company”

I believe those business ventures were in place before things went sour with WB and those ventures and came to an end when he was fighting with the label. Having a place to showcase you music and letting fans hang out is not a waste. In the end he just did the same thing at Paisley Park by having dance parties and events. It is all a part of being an entrepreneur and no entrepreneur all of their money into one venture.

. “he could have invested in the tech of file sharing and more recently streaming tech that would have been of longterm benefit to his work and legacy and well and truly ahead of his time.”

Did you miss that NPG music club he was the first artist to have a music service were fans could purchase files to listen to. He did this 15 years before streaming came along now we have no idea how much money he made off of the club but I can remember people bitching and laughing about what he was doing. I am not sure why you do not recall any of this.

I think he did a great job when he went independent and I want you to name me another artist at Prince level that left a major label and was able to find a means to distribute their music on the scale that he did for as long as he did.If he missed a few opps so be it as he was doing about 90 other things.

DD55 said:

nelcp777 said:

I agree with you about the injunction and material still being on the site. This is a mess. From trying to do a brief research on Tidal, it has had it share of litigation in recent years and the company is fairly new.

This is my personal opinion, I don’t have any actual knowledge of the situation and I’m simply speculating like many others do on the org.

.

As I see it, this discussion is simple; the issue is whether or not Tidal had the legal/contractual rights to post P’s entire catalog on Tidal in June. What’s to discuss? This will all come out in court; all this speculating, liking/not liking someone and character slurs won’t change the ‘legal’ decisions at the end of the day.

.

So the possibilities (that we know of):

1) There is a contractual agreement whereby Tidal will be cleared of wrongdoing. End of case.

2) No legal/contractual agreement prior to posting the files, in that Tidal did not have the specific ‘rights’ to post P’s entire catalog on Tidal -- but went ahead and did so anyway.

.

Jayz isn’t a stupid man, and I’m sure Tidal has the legal recourses to advise him of the consequences of posting albums and songs without written / specific permission.

.

///So, here is where my view is different. What if Tidal did not have the rights to post? They weighted the all consequences, potential fines, and ramifications (with their legal staff) and still posted the files anyway?

.

Maybe Jayz/Tidal are courageous and should be admired. In honoring, Prince, they made sure the world had access to the entire catalog regardless of the potential personal consequences.

.

Much of P’s music had never been heard before because people simply didn’t have access to it and many were unaware. Tidal changed all that! Now fans are (re)discovering many long out of print albums that simply have never seen the light of day outside a select fan base.

.

Contract or not, Jayz may have done more for P’s legacy than anyone else by ‘freeing’ ALL of his music for everyone to enjoy.

.

As for getting paid …. I really don’t care to be a watch dog of the ‘estate’, these people (siblings) will be getting millions of dollars for doing nothing, so if they get a tiny bet less money, who cares?

.

Don't want to upset anyone, thisi is just my opinion.

[Edited 12/28/16 19:06pm]

"As I see it, this discussion is simple; the issue is whether or not Tidal had the legal/contractual rights to post P’s entire catalog on Tidal in June. What’s to discuss? This will all come out in court; all this speculating, liking/not liking someone and character slurs won’t change the ‘legal’ decisions at the end of the day."

Exactly, the court will sort it out and if money is owed it will be payed. I also don't see how anyone can beat an injuction so Tidal must have some documentation and that will have to be given to a Federal court.

laurarichardson said:

Did you miss that NPG music club he was the first artist to have a music service were fans could purchase files to listen to. He did this 15 years before streaming came along now we have no idea how much money he made off of the club but I can remember people bitching and laughing about what he was doing. I am not sure why you do not recall any of this.

I think he did a great job when he went independent and I want you to name me another artist at Prince level that left a major label and was able to find a means to distribute their music on the scale that he did for as long as he did.If he missed a few opps so be it as he was doing about 90 other things.

sorta. there were so many complaints and weirdness i decided against it. i never paid much attention to his online presence after that. i'd just click around whatever site he had up at the time- if i could get in. i don't feel that missed much, he ended up releasing most of that music anyway. i enjoyed flipping thru that online museum they had up right after his death.

laurarichardson said:

laurarichardson said:

mjscarousal said:

WHY do you keep saying TIDAL is majority Black owned when it is not?????? I have already given you receipts that show it is not BUT you keep saying that it is??? I even posted a picture that shows that none of the workers at TIDAL are Black, not one Black person in that photo! Shareholder is NOT the same as CEO and a CEO is the highest rank and position in a company. Your dedication to TIDAL and Jay Z is mind blowing at this point.

[Edited 12/27/16 18:28pm]

Do you know anything about business? All you did was show a picture of a bunch of people that are supposed to be employees of Tidal. The picture of a bunch of people tells us nothing and is not a receipt ( you say proof ) about who the shareholders are. Even if these people in the picture are employees that does not mean that are shareholders in the company also known as owners. The people in the picture could be shareholders if part of their compensation is stock but I have no way of knowing if this is the case. Do you know if he people in the picture are shareholders? In a nutshell the employees could have nothing to do with the majority ownership of the company.

You are correct a shareholder is not the same as a CEO. A shareholder actually has ownership in the company and depending on how many shares they own they along with other shareholders can have much more power than a CEO.

Please see some definitions

Chief executive officer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Redirected from CEO)

"Chief Executive", "CEO", and "CEOs" redirect here. For other uses, see Chief executive (disambiguation) and CEO (disambiguation).

A chief executive officer (CEO)[1] describes the position of the most senior corporate officer, executive, leader or administrator in charge of managing an organization. CEOs lead a range of organizations, including public and private corporations, non-profit organizations and even some government organizations (e.g., Crown corporations). The CEO of a corporation or company typically reports to the board of directors and is charged with maximizing the value of the entity,[2] which may include maximizing the share price, market share, revenues, or another element. In the non-profit and government sector, CEOs typically aim at achieving outcomes related to the organization's mission, such as reducing poverty, increasing literacy, etc. Titles also often given to the holder of CEO position include president and chief executive (CE).[3]

Responsibilities

The responsibilities of an organization's CEO are set by the organization's board of directors or other authority, depending on the organization's legal structure. They can be far-reaching or quite limited and are typically enshrined in a formal delegation of authority. Typically, responsibilities include decision maker on strategy and other key policy issues, leader, manager, and executor. The communicator role can involve speaking to the press and the rest of the outside world, as well as to the organization's management and employees; the decision-making role involves high-level decisions about policy and strategy. As a leader of the company, the CEO/MD advises the board of directors, motivates employees, and drives change within the organization. As a manager, the CEO/MD presides over the organization's day-to-day operations.[4][5][6] The term refers to the person who makes all the key decisions regarding the company, which includes all sectors and fields of the business, including operations, marketing, business development, finance, human resources, etc. The CEO of a company is not necessarily the owner of the company.

----------

[Edited 12/28/16 6:13am]

Well given the fact that you insisted that a shareholder is higher than a CEO you clearly don't know much about business and I showed the photo to prove the point that TIDAL is not a Black owned business that is operated by Black workers despite the LIE Jay Z promoted, that was the point. Its hilarious you keep going through loop holes just to defend Jay Z. Point BLANK period, Jay Z does not own TIDAL and TIDAL is not a Black owned business. This is not rocket science.

laurarichardson said:

mjscarousal said:

WHY do you keep saying TIDAL is majority Black owned when it is not?????? I have already given you receipts that show it is not BUT you keep saying that it is??? I even posted a picture that shows that none of the workers at TIDAL are Black, not one Black person in that photo! Shareholder is NOT the same as CEO and a CEO is the highest rank and position in a company. Your dedication to TIDAL and Jay Z is mind blowing at this point.

[Edited 12/27/16 18:28pm]

I really want you to read this below and think about it.

I have no dedication to Jay-Z or Tidal. I simply look at the facts which have been discussed in the above conversations if you would take the time to read something instead of going off of emotion you would see the big picture.

You do not like Jay-Z we get it so what. It has nothing to do with anything at all and if you took the time to read anything you would now that Jay-Z and other artist have an equity stake in Tidal we have no idea how much they have because it is a private company but it is possible that combined the group as a whole may have a majority share. He raised and spent 54 million to buy into the company I doubt he raised that money so he could be or remain a minority shareholder.

If you took two minutes to think you might wonder why so much hatred has been going on since Jay-Z and other artist brought into this business. Did you ever think the music industry might not like the idea of artist actually owning a stake in a streaming service considering the amount of profit streaming services and record labels are making and not including the artist in on?

Did you ever think that if artist own the streaming service they could eventually just put their music on the service without a record label at all?

Do you not realize that this is exactly what Prince was talking about 20 years ago?

Why do you think there is negativity against this company and this business model?

No one gives a rat’s ass about Jay-Z past as a drug dealer or that he was a rap artist there are people in the music industry who simply do not want artist to own a streaming services.

You do have dedication to Jay Z and TIDAL. For crying out loud you just argued that a shareholder was higher than a CEO just to big up Jay Z! It is clear that you have some bias towards them and feel the need to defend them even when your argument does not factually or rationally make sense. My dislike for Jay Z has nothing to do with my feelings about this matter. However, the shady and unethical things that Jay Z and TIDAL have done does support the reasons why I dislike him. However, Jay Z has showed his own ass and does not need any help from me in pointing his flaws out on this matter.

I already pointed out to you why the general public is not feeling TIDAL. The whole marketing roll out of TIDAL was wrong form the get go. There marketing strategy was to use their "star power" to get people to purchase the streaming service. "Come support us because I am Jay Z, Kanye, Beyonce and because it will give us more money" there was no catching points that was geared toward how it would benefit the consumer. Consumers have a right to question any product and how it is being marketed to them. The way TIDAL was marketed was obnoxious and geared toward shareholders as the center which was wrong, CONSUMERS should always be the focal point any time a product is being marketed, that is the whole point! In business you want consumers to buy your product!

mjscarousal said:

You do have dedication to Jay Z and TIDAL. For crying out loud you just argued that a shareholder was higher than a CEO just to big up Jay Z! It is clear that you have some bias towards them and feel the need to defend them even when your argument does not factually or rationally make sense. My dislike for Jay Z has nothing to do with my feelings about this matter. However, the shady and unethical things that Jay Z and TIDAL have done does support the reasons why I dislike him. However, Jay Z has showed his own ass and does not need any help from me in pointing his flaws out on this matter.

I already pointed out to you why the general public is not feeling TIDAL. The whole marketing roll out of TIDAL was wrong form the get go. There marketing strategy was to use their "star power" to get people to purchase the streaming service. "Come support us because I am Jay Z, Kanye, Beyonce and because it will give us more money" there was no catching points that was geared toward how it would benefit the consumer. Consumers have a right to question any product and how it is being marketed to them. The way TIDAL was marketed was obnoxious and geared toward shareholders as the center which was wrong, CONSUMERS should always be the focal point any time a product is being marketed, that is the whole point! In business you want consumers to buy your product!

i completely agree. it is entirely possible that prince was sold a bill of goods regarding his deal with TIDAL and that TIDAL make some quick grab after his death. it wouldn't b the first time prince made a questionable business decision and it wouldn't b the first time that jz didn't some shady business. i still can't shake the feeling that they hadto have something in place or prince wouldn't have been dealing with them before his death. it could have just gone bad for prince. didn't he pull out of a concert tIDAL was sponsoring or whatever. but then again prince was known for doing things like that,too

wavesofbliss said:

mjscarousal said:

You do have dedication to Jay Z and TIDAL. For crying out loud you just argued that a shareholder was higher than a CEO just to big up Jay Z! It is clear that you have some bias towards them and feel the need to defend them even when your argument does not factually or rationally make sense. My dislike for Jay Z has nothing to do with my feelings about this matter. However, the shady and unethical things that Jay Z and TIDAL have done does support the reasons why I dislike him. However, Jay Z has showed his own ass and does not need any help from me in pointing his flaws out on this matter.

I already pointed out to you why the general public is not feeling TIDAL. The whole marketing roll out of TIDAL was wrong form the get go. There marketing strategy was to use their "star power" to get people to purchase the streaming service. "Come support us because I am Jay Z, Kanye, Beyonce and because it will give us more money" there was no catching points that was geared toward how it would benefit the consumer. Consumers have a right to question any product and how it is being marketed to them. The way TIDAL was marketed was obnoxious and geared toward shareholders as the center which was wrong, CONSUMERS should always be the focal point any time a product is being marketed, that is the whole point! In business you want consumers to buy your product!

i completely agree. it is entirely possible that prince was sold a bill of goods regarding his deal with TIDAL and that TIDAL make some quick grab after his death. it wouldn't b the first time prince made a questionable business decision and it wouldn't b the first time that jz didn't some shady business. i still can't shake the feeling that they hadto have something in place or prince wouldn't have been dealing with them before his death. it could have just gone bad for prince. didn't he pull out of a concert tIDAL was sponsoring or whatever. but then again prince was known for doing things like that,too

Prince made a poor business move by collaborating with JayZ/TIDAL and got taken advantage of, it happens. There is no reason for some here to defend Jay Z and to come up with excuses for him or TIDAL when its evident that they are shady.

laurarichardson said:

mjscarousal said:

mnfriend said:

Look, I'm just a non attached friend of purple, no sides, I like what Laura adds here, I think she's level headed. I found this, Prince 2015, Ebony, I copy/ paste below: EBONY: I like this album better than Hit N Run: Phase One. No disrespect. Prince: Hit N Run sounds like today. Tidal is sinking money into it, and they need it. And my heart is always on because I want them to do well. [Beyoncé and Jay Z] have taken a lot of abuse, their family has. A historic amount of abuse between the two of ’em. And when we win on this, none of us’ll gloat. He’s not the gloating type anyway. He’s slick with his. He says to brush the dirt off your shoulder. “Y’all just need to stop. Just calm down! Everybody calm down! There ya go.”

Well Prince obviously was misinformed about Jay Z because Jay Zgloats about all his money, ventures, business deals in his songs. He even gloated about owning Prince music so this statement from Prince is showing poor judgement of character.

mnfriend said:

Look, I'm just a non attached friend of purple, no sides, I like what Laura adds here, I think she's level headed. I found this, Prince 2015, Ebony, I copy/ paste below: EBONY: I like this album better than Hit N Run: Phase One. No disrespect. Prince: Hit N Run sounds like today. Tidal is sinking money into it, and they need it. And my heart is always on because I want them to do well. [Beyoncé and Jay Z] have taken a lot of abuse, their family has. A historic amount of abuse between the two of ’em. And when we win on this, none of us’ll gloat. He’s not the gloating type anyway. He’s slick with his. He says to brush the dirt off your shoulder. “Y’all just need to stop. Just calm down! Everybody calm down! There ya go.”

yes she is....

and patient too...

Laura is dope and I agree with her opinions on other issues. She is very passionate and I respect that she never backs down but she is being very biased on this topic. There are receipts that have been presented that shows that Jay Z and TIDAL are shady and have not been forthright in all their dealings with Prince.

Have y'all heard of Entertainment Lawyer? A gossip blogger. He does blind items and a few times a years will give answers to some of the blind items that have been posted on his website.

Since this thread is about JayZ, I thought it was timely to re-post this particular solved blind item here. I make no claims of my own...but this is interesting, yes?

http://crazydaysandnights.net/2017/01/blind-items-revealed-32-8.html

October 5, 2016

This A+ list singer lives large. How often do we see photos of her all over the world. Traveling in a private jet on seemingly a perfect vacation. She never wears the same clothes twice and her husband must make as much money as her too right? She is beyond wealthy. That is the image, but not the reality. Our A+ lister recently decided to invest in a company. She made a big deal about it. The problem for her is that it required an actual cash outlay and was not something that could be charged. She had the money, but it was a close call. How did it get like this? back in the day when she was first hitting it big, she had good management. They kept her expenses low and the income high. Times were really good. Then, her management changed. What was just her money now became the money of her and her manager for all of his ideas to rule the world. The problem is most of his ideas have not turned out so great. It probably wouldn’t be that big of a deal if he had not put their money into the deals and used more money from outside investors. High risk and high reward. He didn’t want to share. Meanwhile, our A+ lister started stepping up her spending game at the same time her record and tour sales started declining. What to do? Basically the couple run a tab and charge everything to the record company. They have sold off a lot of their future royalties because they didn’t have enough cash to cover the bill when the record company comes calling. They also have sold off the future royalties of some of the artists they control. They had to sell property to pay off some investors and to keep his latest business afloat. They went from owning a really expensive property to leasing something not all that great compared to it. They made a bs offer on a house to make it look like they were moving up, but they could never provide proof of funds which is why they lost out. They didn’t have enough money. Over the past six months, the monthly allowance our A+ lister has been forced to live on has been reduced. the clothes have been downgraded a couple of levels and the household expenses have been cut in half. The big investment he made he needs to get out of but can’t because the entire house of cards would come tumbling down and bankruptcy, both professionally and personally would have to occur. It would destroy their whole brand and image so they keep trying to make it work, but short of winning some type of lottery either of the real variety or some singer breaking out like Adele, it just isn’t going to happen.

Beyonce/Jay-Z

Mumio said:

Mumio said:

How long has Crystal Ball been gone from tidal? It's on the verge of being a bit shit.

RicoN said:

Mumio said:

Have y'all heard of Entertainment Lawyer? A gossip blogger. He does blind items and a few times a years will give answers to some of the blind items that have been posted on his website.

Since this thread is about JayZ, I thought it was timely to re-post this particular solved blind item here. I make no claims of my own...but this is interesting, yes?

http://crazydaysandnights.net/2017/01/blind-items-revealed-32-8.html

October 5, 2016

This A+ list singer lives large. How often do we see photos of her all over the world. Traveling in a private jet on seemingly a perfect vacation. She never wears the same clothes twice and her husband must make as much money as her too right? She is beyond wealthy. That is the image, but not the reality. Our A+ lister recently decided to invest in a company. She made a big deal about it. The problem for her is that it required an actual cash outlay and was not something that could be charged. She had the money, but it was a close call. How did it get like this? back in the day when she was first hitting it big, she had good management. They kept her expenses low and the income high. Times were really good. Then, her management changed. What was just her money now became the money of her and her manager for all of his ideas to rule the world. The problem is most of his ideas have not turned out so great. It probably wouldn’t be that big of a deal if he had not put their money into the deals and used more money from outside investors. High risk and high reward. He didn’t want to share. Meanwhile, our A+ lister started stepping up her spending game at the same time her record and tour sales started declining. What to do? Basically the couple run a tab and charge everything to the record company. They have sold off a lot of their future royalties because they didn’t have enough cash to cover the bill when the record company comes calling. They also have sold off the future royalties of some of the artists they control. They had to sell property to pay off some investors and to keep his latest business afloat. They went from owning a really expensive property to leasing something not all that great compared to it. They made a bs offer on a house to make it look like they were moving up, but they could never provide proof of funds which is why they lost out. They didn’t have enough money. Over the past six months, the monthly allowance our A+ lister has been forced to live on has been reduced. the clothes have been downgraded a couple of levels and the household expenses have been cut in half. The big investment he made he needs to get out of but can’t because the entire house of cards would come tumbling down and bankruptcy, both professionally and personally would have to occur. It would destroy their whole brand and image so they keep trying to make it work, but short of winning some type of lottery either of the real variety or some singer breaking out like Adele, it just isn’t going to happen.

Beyonce/Jay-Z

I think there might be some truth to this. Beyonce and Jay Z have been touring non stop for over the last 3 years back to back and I have found this strange. There not struggling and they don't have any debts as far as we know so why are they doing all this touring back to back?? I think there is some truth to the blind item and they owe a lot of people money. Tea was already spilled that artists that do Super Bowl half times have to now pay up front OR give half of their tour gross back to NFL.

[Edited 1/5/17 10:38am]

Supposedly, Beyonce gets $5.5 million per show. There are times when that amount does change. I remember Prince stating in a complaint about a venue during the show that he was getting $3 million for that show and he was going to perform despite the sound issues. All I can think is that her money was joined with her DH's money and much of it walked out the door ...

[Edited 1/5/17 12:27pm]

Mumio said:

Have y'all heard of Entertainment Lawyer? A gossip blogger. He does blind items and a few times a years will give answers to some of the blind items that have been posted on his website.

Since this thread is about JayZ, I thought it was timely to re-post this particular solved blind item here. I make no claims of my own...but this is interesting, yes?

http://crazydaysandnights.net/2017/01/blind-items-revealed-32-8.html

October 5, 2016

This A+ list singer lives large. How often do we see photos of her all over the world. Traveling in a private jet on seemingly a perfect vacation. She never wears the same clothes twice and her husband must make as much money as her too right? She is beyond wealthy. That is the image, but not the reality. Our A+ lister recently decided to invest in a company. She made a big deal about it. The problem for her is that it required an actual cash outlay and was not something that could be charged. She had the money, but it was a close call. How did it get like this? back in the day when she was first hitting it big, she had good management. They kept her expenses low and the income high. Times were really good. Then, her management changed. What was just her money now became the money of her and her manager for all of his ideas to rule the world. The problem is most of his ideas have not turned out so great. It probably wouldn’t be that big of a deal if he had not put their money into the deals and used more money from outside investors. High risk and high reward. He didn’t want to share. Meanwhile, our A+ lister started stepping up her spending game at the same time her record and tour sales started declining. What to do? Basically the couple run a tab and charge everything to the record company. They have sold off a lot of their future royalties because they didn’t have enough cash to cover the bill when the record company comes calling. They also have sold off the future royalties of some of the artists they control. They had to sell property to pay off some investors and to keep his latest business afloat. They went from owning a really expensive property to leasing something not all that great compared to it. They made a bs offer on a house to make it look like they were moving up, but they could never provide proof of funds which is why they lost out. They didn’t have enough money. Over the past six months, the monthly allowance our A+ lister has been forced to live on has been reduced. the clothes have been downgraded a couple of levels and the household expenses have been cut in half. The big investment he made he needs to get out of but can’t because the entire house of cards would come tumbling down and bankruptcy, both professionally and personally would have to occur. It would destroy their whole brand and image so they keep trying to make it work, but short of winning some type of lottery either of the real variety or some singer breaking out like Adele, it just isn’t going to happen.

Beyonce/Jay-Z

Thanks sis.....this connects some dots for me.