http://www.drudgereport.c...ash3lp.htm

LINKIN PARK OPPOSES FLEECING OF WARNER MUSIC,DEMANDS IMMEDIATE RELEASE

New York, NY (May 2, 2005) The new owners of the Warner Music Group will be reaping a windfall of $1.4 billion from their $2.6 billion purchase a mere 18 months ago if their planned IPO moves forward. Linkin Park, their biggest act, will get nothing.

Meanwhile, of the planned $750 million raised by an IPO, only about $7 million will be put toward the company's own operations, with no money going to WMG artists. Additionally, WMG has already seen a widespread reduction of its work force and substantial cuts in marketing and promotion expenditures. Linkin Park has become increasingly concerned that WMG’s diminished resources will leave it unable to compete in today's global music marketplace, resulting in a failure to live up to WMG's fiduciary responsibility to market and promote Linkin Park.

Linkin Park has been responsible for approximately 10% of the entire Warner Music Group's record sales, selling over 35 million records worldwide in just 5 years. After reading numerous and daily articles about how WMG executives and corporate raiders have ridden the coattails of the creative community to extract massive rewards, Linkin Park has become increasingly offended and discouraged.

"We couldn't be more grateful for the support we receive from all our fans around the world," said Linkin Park. "We feel a responsibility to get great music to our fans. Unfortunately, we believe that we can't accomplish that effectively with the current Warner Music."

The Grammy Award winning group had been planning to start work on their next record, which was slated for a Spring 2006 release. The record was scheduled to follow up Linkin Park's last full-length release, Meteora, which has sold over 10 million copies worldwide. The band now wants off WMG and is weighing all of their options on how to best get new music to their fans. Possible avenues include relying more on touring, merchandising and endorsements, rather than leaving their future in the hands of a weakened WMG. Recently, new Fiona Apple music was released on the Internet for free and for years, bands like the Grateful Dead and Phish have performed new material live and let fans tape for free.

Music industry attorney Peter Paterno, who represents artists like Dr. Dre, Pearl Jam and Warner Music's Metallica, recently told The New York Times: "The [WMG] guys who are running this thing are looking at it pretty cynically. It's becoming more and more apparent that this is nothing more than a financial play for the investors. It's not about the music or the employees; it's about a return for private equity investors. It's kind of astounding when you sit back and look at the audacity."

The loss of future Linkin Park recordings will be disastrous for WMG. While there are hundreds of bands signed to the WMG roster, the music business is still a hit-driven industry. For example, the delay of just two new releases from EMI acts Coldplay and Gorillaz recently forced EMI to announce to the marketplace that it would be unable to meet its earlier projections.

Developing...

I demand that they never release anything again!

I'm so glad Prince left the mess known as WB. Smart man. Hopefully, Linkin Park can do their exodus from WB too.
[Edited 5/2/05 11:25am]

BIG WHITE MANSION!!!!!

and people called prince nutz
yall wan't a Golden Parachute?

Linkin Park sucks.

BlaqueKnight said:

-----
First all none of us are around when these record deals are signed. So we don't know all the details.

In Prince's case you could blame some of his issues on Steve Fargoli. He was the manager and it was is reponsiblity to work on getting the masters back.

As long as Steve was getting his 10% I am sure he was not thinking about any master tapes.

I read an interview a few years ago about Tom Petty who sued MCA to get out of his deal because MCA never paid him the royalty rate they were contractualy obligated to pay.

There is a whole story about Motown having a second set of books. What happens if you have a great deal and the record company just does not hold up their end?

Companies can afford to drag a court case on for years and keep an artist from recording until they finally have to give up or accept a settlement.

Right now the best thing for artist to do is to stay independent or do some sort of one off deal like Prince.

LinkinPark said:

Then start creating some great music instead of the whiny angst-driven drivel that you pass off as "great music".
[Edited 5/2/05 14:06pm]

laurarichardson said:

Yeah right. What your saying is easier said than done especially if you are a new artist in the industry. For those who are in the really in the biz, they know that, it is more feasible to sign with a major lable then an indie because of exposure.

As for you mentioning the deal Prince got, that's a total different set of circumstances altogether. Basically, in Princes cases, he's an established artist with an high powered attorney and enough longevity in the business that he can call his shot. So, you technically can't you use him as a good example.

Moonbeam said:

they suck, at least korns first album was good.

Likin Park Rocks!!

Warners = evil

Quite ironic, bearing in mind that Linkin Park were a band recruited by Warners placing ads for musicians/singers in magazines/papers. They're as manufactured as O-Town...if anyone remembers them...

jjam said:

Linkin Park=Stinkin Park

I like Linkin Park but what makes them think they are supposed to get a piece of the IPO?

why is this sticky?

SleezyG said:

Good question. I mean- it's Linkin Park for God's sake!

Moonbeam said:

I'm sorry but could someone please explain this whole thing to me?

anon anon

Universal Accused Of Racketeering
Posted: Thu., Apr. 28, 2005 09:12:33 AM MST

LOS ANGELES (CelebrityAccess MediaWire) -- Two independent music promoters have sued Universal Music Group, claiming that the record company forced them to submit false invoices so Universal could recoup promotional costs from artists such as Rapper Nelly.

National Music Marketing of Los Angeles and Majestic Promotions of Atlanta are asking for $100 million from the company in the suit, according to Reuters.

The suit raises issues similar to the “pay-for-play” concepts being probed by New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer in a wide-ranging investigation. Spitzer is looking into the legality of record companies paying radio stations to play their songs.

“What (Universal) was doing was defrauding their artists -- some of their biggest artists,” plaintiffs’ lawyer David J. Cohen told Reuters. “I’m sure (rapper) Nelly is not going to be happy that they were taking money out of his promotion budget to pay for promotions for other artists -- money that he had to pay back form his royalties.”

The lawsuit said that when National and Majestic refused to submit fraudulent promotions invoices, Universal fired them and radio stations to avoid doing business with them. Cohen said that Universal drove National out of business and Majestic is “hanging by a thread.”

The suit accuses UMG of racketeering, fraud, trade libel and breach of contract. --by CelebrityAccess Staff Writers.

BlaqueKnight said:

I couldn't agree with you more.

I don't even get what they are opposed to? Isn't it important to keeps shareholders happy too?

Madonna isn't too happy with the new Warner Bros. either.Her next album could be the last for Warners.

MsLegs said:

-----
I know it is hard for artist to do what Prince did. You have to wait until you have the money, power and fanbase. Linkin Park may have to wait a few years before they can do it but, if they can hang around I think they could pull it off.

DavidEye said:

Let's hope

It's most likely their fault her tour dvd hasn't see the light of day, apparently they feel it won't sell.

Leave now Madonna, LEAVE!!!

OK I've narrowed it down to this.

Is this really any of Linkin Park's business, other than the last bolded sentence?

CinisterCee said:

If a label makes a business move that is going to inevitably hurt the artist, the artist has reason for concern. Since they are WB's golden boys at the moment, they are of course worried that WB is going to cut more money from their promotion budget, since its probably the biggest. They're probably right, too. Poor promotion is very damaging to an artist's career. I'm sure this is their biggest concern.

BlaqueKnight said:

Co-Sing, It does not matter who you are. You must have promotion. Any artist or group can be runied without it.

BlaqueKnight said:

Love your posts on this thread BK and I agree with you but as far as promotion, are artists restricted from promoting themselves? Plus, how hard is it really to go underground or have your own website to distribute your own music? I know artists personally who don't have a huge budget but are still getting the music out to fans.

TheOrgerFormerlyKnownAs said:

The answer to your first question is IT DEPENDS ON THE CONTRACT. Most companies have restrictions on their artists doing too much self-promotion. The way they see it is that artists will be busy enough just being artists. Can an artist say, go to their friend's club and do a free show? Probably not. Can an artist go and perform at their friend's house party? Probably so, if they keep it a secret. Labels are like the mafia in that they don't want anything going on with their people that they don't get a piece of.
The answer to your second question depends on the artist. Someone like Bilal could do this fairly easily whereas someone like SWV or Christina Milian might have a tougher time. Some artists need labels, other artists need the money and promotion and access. Trust me ALL the majors are scared as hell of a breakout artist coming from the web, so its not hard to do, its just hard to make it happen on a widescale. They KNOW its gonna happen eventually and when it does, it with be the death of them. Labels pay for access. They pay for promotion. They are "connected". The internet is the world's playing field right now. Its fair game. Its actually the only real way an independant can have the potential to blow up on a large scale without the help of a label without doing a million gigs a year. I predict that the next "Napster" type format will spawn the first internet star. Then the government will shut it down. There are a few organizations working towards just such a thing, like http://www.omn.org/. Right now, all these media organizations work in conjunction with labels, but that's because there's money flowing. If one of these internet organizations blows up, then t.v. stations will have no choice but to play ball with them. The potential for profit will not be ignored. This would take the control out of the hands of the major labels. I'm gonna say this; its a generalization but its an unspoken truth. If you can sell 40K units as an independant, you can get signed to a major. You may not need them, but you can have them. They will fight over you because you have proven to be guarenteed money. At that point, you can choose to option your independent label out as a subsidiary company (smart: see LaFace Records) or sell yourself to the major as an artist (dumb). Optioning out your independant label lets you keep control of the music and the money while allowing you access to areas of the biz that you don't get as an indie. Selling your artist is just plain f**king stupid if you've already sold 40,000 copies. You're already doing what the majors do on a smaller scale. You're already in the game and just don't know it. The whole trick to the industry is getting attention. Staying on peoples' minds so that when it comes time to sell them your products, they view you favorably and part with the cash. Its all about marketing. One of the biggest mistakes I see small artists making is not keeping fanlists. With the internet being what it is today, there is no reason a performing artist of any genre shouldn't have an email list a mile long. "If you build it, they will come."
[Edited 5/4/05 22:29pm]