It's quite a long read - but fascinating.

http://entertainment.time...015124.ece

Sample:

Her co-writers, meanwhile, have often been talented unknowns, like Pat Leonard, with whom she composed and performed her most successful album, the 24m-seller from 1986, True Blue. As soon as their names have benefited from the connection with her hits - and their asking price has consequently risen - she drops them and hires somebody new, and usually cheaper.

Nor are these fleeting but crucial collaborators allowed near the limelight. In 1993 Pat Leonard, whose credits include Live to Tell, La Isla Bonita and Like a Prayer, told me how angry he used to get "when Madonna would say in an interview ‘music isn’t a concern of mine’. Because I would think, ‘Well it’s a concern of somebody’s, bitch, otherwise you wouldn’t be sitting there.’ Most of the time she’s just playing a game".

yeah,that is an interesting article.

i thought this part was very interesting:

"Her finest hour as a dealmaker came in 2007 when she signed a $120m, 10-year contract with Live Nation, the world’s largest concert-promotion company. This so-called “360- degree” deal placed the exploitation of all of her music-related activities, from touring to recording, under one roof. Her decision to sign with a concert promoter showed her, again, to be ahead of the game. Her experience with Maverick had taught her that, in the 21st century, albums are best seen as a tool to sell concert tickets rather than money-earners in their own right. “The business paradigm has shifted,” she said upon signing. “As a creative artist and a businesswoman I have to acknowledge that.”

Madonna has, as usual, got the better of the deal. Aside from some generous stock options she cashed in last year, she will have pocketed the premium Live Nation paid for a “360-degree” monopoly that, two years on, they no longer want. Dismayed at the near-impossibility of turning a profit from record sales, Live Nation have been talking in private about licensing Madonna’s next studio album back to her old record company, Warners."

errant said:

GirlBrother said:

N that's Madonna right there, to her its all bout the fame and the money, as a business person is brilliant, but she isn't and never will be an artist.
[Edited 4/8/09 21:53pm]

thank you very much!

She owns no boats, private jets or other rock-star toys, apparently subscribing to the old showbiz saying: ‘If it flies, floats or f***s, rent don’t buy’

what does the bolt one stand for?

‘If it flies, floats or f***s, rent don’t buy’

CandaceS said:

I've heard rumors that they may use Warners or another major company for distribution.Shakria's CD will be the first LiveNation release,so it'll be interesting to see what they do with her album,in terms of promotion and distribution.

SoulAlive said:

hmmm. I don't know. Shakira is big, but I doubt her album costs as much to make or promote as a Madonna album. they were probably euphoric when the deal was signed, but as they gained experience or did research into exactly everything that's involved with making/selling music, they're probably having a panic attack and looking for every escape route possible

P.S.: I just read that Shakira still owes Sony 2 albums and a GH before the music part of her deal with Live Nation kicks in.

JackieBlue said:

what does the last one mean?