independent and unofficial
Prince fan community
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Prince: Music and More > Wasn't the internet supposed to stop all this kind of nonsense?
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 2 of 2 <12
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #30 posted 06/02/07 8:53pm

paisley16

avatar

Flowerz said:

nod yep .. Forbes said he was the highest paid act of the year (54 Million) out beating Madonna, Rolling Stones, etc ..(any band) .. not to mention.. he also took home the best concert award of the year (outbeating Usher).. so brother must be doing something right..


umm, I'm all for putting Prince on top but he did not beat out the Stones, unfortunately. At least not in 2006.
see here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16385870/

Rolling Stones: $138.5
Barbra Streisand: $92.5
Tim McGraw/Faith Hill: $88.8
Madonna: $85.9
Cirque Du Soleil - “Delirium”: $82.1
Celine Dion: $78.1
Kenny Chesney: $66.0
Bon Jovi: $59.7
Dave Matthews Band: $51.3
Elton John: $48.9

Source: Pollstar. All figures in millions of dollars.
Ask where they're going, they'll tell U – "Nowhere"
They've taken a lifetime lease on Paisley Park ...music
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #31 posted 06/02/07 8:58pm

paisley16

avatar

Forbes said this in 2004...

"Musicology marked the end of his six-year hiatus from touring, and fans jumped at the chance to see him perform. Prince sold a whopping 1.4 million tickets—more than any other touring act in 2004. The simultaneous release of his Musicology album made it an even more lucrative year for the artist whose name continues to confuse".

They listed his earnings that year at $49.7 million, ranking 12.
http://www.forbes.com/lis.../4L20.html

To be clear, that means he sold the most tickets that year, but was not the highest earner.
[Edited 6/2/07 21:00pm]
Ask where they're going, they'll tell U – "Nowhere"
They've taken a lifetime lease on Paisley Park ...music
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #32 posted 06/03/07 6:50am

Doozer

avatar

paisley16 said:

Flowerz said:

nod yep .. Forbes said he was the highest paid act of the year (54 Million) out beating Madonna, Rolling Stones, etc ..(any band) .. not to mention.. he also took home the best concert award of the year (outbeating Usher).. so brother must be doing something right..


umm, I'm all for putting Prince on top but he did not beat out the Stones, unfortunately. At least not in 2006.
see here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16385870/

Rolling Stones: $138.5
Barbra Streisand: $92.5
Tim McGraw/Faith Hill: $88.8
Madonna: $85.9
Cirque Du Soleil - “Delirium”: $82.1
Celine Dion: $78.1
Kenny Chesney: $66.0
Bon Jovi: $59.7
Dave Matthews Band: $51.3
Elton John: $48.9

Source: Pollstar. All figures in millions of dollars.


Prince didn't have an official tour in 2006.
Check out The Mountains and the Sea, a Prince podcast by yours truly and my wife. More info at https://www.facebook.com/TMATSPodcast/
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #33 posted 06/03/07 6:56am

Doozer

avatar

http://www.rollingstone.c...ney_makers

Prince took in the second-highest gross earnings in 2004, behind Madonna, but his lower overhead per concert gave him the highest net profit of the year. He took home 85% of the profit on each night, averaging a take-home profit of about $910,000 per show.
Check out The Mountains and the Sea, a Prince podcast by yours truly and my wife. More info at https://www.facebook.com/TMATSPodcast/
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #34 posted 06/03/07 11:03pm

BoySimon

My bad. I didn't pick up on the differing versions of Guitar. Sorry.

That said, the point still remains. Yes, buying singles etc were part and parcel of music purchasing, but a single had a b-side, remember them?, and there was a time when Prince used to put non-album tracks on his b-sides... which was cool. He also used to do these 12" remixes of the a-sides too, which were also cool. I seem to recall his intention rehards the internet as being a quick means of release for the plethora of tures WB didn't want him to release. That has not manifest and I find myself buying songs that then reappear on albums... and not in a promotional kind of way, remember that singles also used to have 'from the forthcoming album' on them, so we knew the deal. Now we shell out and then shell out again for a product we already have. Like all Prince's intentions, it seems the delivery fails... by and large - huge generalisation there I know. I'm merely frustrated by this, and expressing my frustration.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #35 posted 06/04/07 7:55pm

Doozer

avatar

BoySimon said:

My bad. I didn't pick up on the differing versions of Guitar. Sorry.

That said, the point still remains. Yes, buying singles etc were part and parcel of music purchasing, but a single had a b-side, remember them?, and there was a time when Prince used to put non-album tracks on his b-sides... which was cool. He also used to do these 12" remixes of the a-sides too, which were also cool. I seem to recall his intention rehards the internet as being a quick means of release for the plethora of tures WB didn't want him to release. That has not manifest and I find myself buying songs that then reappear on albums... and not in a promotional kind of way, remember that singles also used to have 'from the forthcoming album' on them, so we knew the deal. Now we shell out and then shell out again for a product we already have. Like all Prince's intentions, it seems the delivery fails... by and large - huge generalisation there I know. I'm merely frustrated by this, and expressing my frustration.


I think you're a victim of old marketing vs. new marketing and you're just not seeing it.

Many of the "12-inch" mixes of singles in the 80s and early 90s were simply unedited versions of songs, with an edit of the track appearing as the album version. (Take "Gett Off" for example.) You might end up with an edit-of-an-edit for the "radio edit," an edit for the album version, and the full studio track as the 12" mix. What you think is an extended version of a song is likely just the full studio version, just labeled "extended" on a CD maxi or what have you.

The traditional "single" and b-side is a thing of the past (for Prince, anyway). If this were 1989, you might have found a CD single for "Guitar" featuring:

A Side:
Guitar (from the 4th coming album "Planet Earth")
[this would be the version available to Verizon customers]

B-side:
Guitar (less string remix)
[the version sold for $1.99 on 3121.com]

You're just living through a change in the way Prince is releasing music. Simple as that.
Check out The Mountains and the Sea, a Prince podcast by yours truly and my wife. More info at https://www.facebook.com/TMATSPodcast/
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #36 posted 06/05/07 1:09am

BoySimon

Also, many of the releases in the 80s and early 90s were not unedited versions with an edited version appearing on the album; take America, for example, or Pop Life, or Hot Thing, etc.

You may be right about the manner in which music is being marketed and supplied, but that does not alter the fact that what appeared the implied intent, as far as Prince and the internet was concerned, is at odds with what we have now. Personally, I find this a shame, that's all.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #37 posted 06/05/07 8:12am

Doozer

avatar

BoySimon said:

Also, many of the releases in the 80s and early 90s were not unedited versions with an edited version appearing on the album; take America, for example, or Pop Life, or Hot Thing, etc.

You may be right about the manner in which music is being marketed and supplied, but that does not alter the fact that what appeared the implied intent, as far as Prince and the internet was concerned, is at odds with what we have now. Personally, I find this a shame, that's all.


I'll agree with you there -- most of your original post was dedicated to paying for Guitar twice, which wasn't the case, so that's where I was coming from.

As to the subject at hand, the proliferation of the internet not resulting in a larger quantity of released music from Prince isn't exactly the first idea Prince has had that hasn't panned out...

• Emancipation will be a multi-year project with many, many singles (oops)
• I won't be playing any "Prince" material live any more (uh huh)
...I won't go on.

But he's a free-spirited artist with grand plans and a relatively short attention span, so what can we really expect?

The "internet age" certainly hasn't slowed releases from Prince, anyway.
Check out The Mountains and the Sea, a Prince podcast by yours truly and my wife. More info at https://www.facebook.com/TMATSPodcast/
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #38 posted 06/05/07 8:24am

SMARTYSOFT

avatar

GiGi319 said:

Flowerz said:



nod yep .. Forbes said he was the highest paid act of the year (54 Million) out beating Madonna, Rolling Stones, etc ..(any band) .. not to mention.. he also took home the best concert award of the year (outbeating Usher).. so brother must be doing something right..


All I'm saying, Prince has seen better days. Nobody's is debating that he's doing remarkably well after being in this business for over 30 years now. And I still think he is the best live-performer ever but there are artists out there that suck on stage and do better on the charts.


Prince always hated "the charts" information. He doesn't NEED that to grade him or his music, much less NEED it. We love him and always will. The charts are pretty crappy lately!
If I could be muse 2 the Pharoah......
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #39 posted 06/05/07 9:28am

ElCapitan

avatar

BoySimon said:

Also, many of the releases in the 80s and early 90s were not unedited versions with an edited version appearing on the album; take America, for example, or Pop Life, or Hot Thing, etc.

You may be right about the manner in which music is being marketed and supplied, but that does not alter the fact that what appeared the implied intent, as far as Prince and the internet was concerned, is at odds with what we have now. Personally, I find this a shame, that's all.



Things don't always work out like we think they will. Especially with Prince. I doubt anyone here could withstand the scrutiny of someone fact-checking their goals and ideas from 10 years ago. He's used the internet quite a bit to the benefit of his fans. Hopefully he'll continue.
"What kind of fuck ending is that?"
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 2 of 2 <12
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Prince: Music and More > Wasn't the internet supposed to stop all this kind of nonsense?