The word is that AOL-Time Warner is trying to sell off Warner Brother Records. The word on the street is that EMI will be purchasing it.

RIAA

'nuff said.

Couldnt this be a good thing..a shake up in the internal makings of WB etc. new blood? Maybe new negotiations of his catalogue remastering etc and if theres a shake up ( i.e. revamping of WB execs) maybe Prince will be more likely to deal with these new folks.

rdhull said:

You would want Prince in with the execs? Why?
[This message was edited Sat Feb 15 21:01:51 PST 2003 by Anji]

Anji said:

Just to negotiate a remastering contract etc..nothing for a new release etc..just back catalogue restructuring.

Is EMI still around? I thought they folded shortly after the Emancipation fiasco?

NuPwrSoul said:

Yeah Associated with Capitol Records.you know for a while when Prince Signed with the different Places after He Left Warners the Companys would either Go out of Business or something would go down.

mistermaxxx said:

That's what I thought, but I saw this on CNN.

RIAA

'nuff said.

rdhull said:

Especially if the new company has fresh out of school
18 year old execs, they probably don't know who the
hell Prince is anyway.

"Some dude called "Prince" phoned today, said he wanted
to buy back his masters for a million dollars. Man, I've
only been here two days and allready I sold 26 masters
for a whopping million dollars! I'm on to big things".

**Secretary hits the Mo Oustin-Batphone-Alarm Button**

This won't happen. It's anti-competetive. EMI is one of the majors and will *never* be allowed to buy the entire WB music group.

WB were as artistically friendly to Prince as any record company could be.

He's a frickin' cry-baby that's all.

Y'all finally realize that AOL owns everything and not WB..

I don't think Prince and his back-catalogue would be high on the list of priorities in a reconstructed WB anyway.

IstenSzek said:[quote]

rdhull said:

Do you think just because I wasn't ridiculously comprehensive that I dont already know that there may be people who are not knowledgeable about Prince who would be in important positions (though I doubt they'd be 18 year old)? Nevertheless it would stil be a fresh start to negotiate rather than with old controversies and people that will not see either ones side just out of spite and familiarity.

.
[This message was edited Sun Feb 16 9:51:16 PST 2003 by rdhull]

Marrk said:

Doesn't have to be high priority to get done.

rdhull said:

[Snip. Flame removed. LaV]

moonangel said:

Oceana stop stalking me.

rdhull said:[quote]

IstenSzek said:

Nah, I see your point rdhull, but I was just having a bit
of fun, thinking what *could* perhaps happen.

The Batphone was a give-away

If anything, change of the old regime would probably be a
good thing since it couldn't be worse than it is now,
where neither parties seem willing to do anything with all
of Prince's back catalogue.

The most obscure artists ever are releasing remastered cds
by the tons and yet, Prince's vast array of music remains
untouched.

It would be so great to get remasters of something like
sign o the times, parade, 1999. etc.

IstenSzek said:

Yeah I agree, that was what I was trying to say.

Whoa buyout by EMI? Were'nt they up for sale for years with now buyers? This seems weird though, I thought AOL is trying to revive itself by using content from Warners

MiaBocca said:

this is true... they let him produce & play all of the intruments on his shit... how many companies did he pass over because they wouldn't allow him to do that..?

they put out a double album ("1999") at a time when it was did not seem like a commercially sound thing to do (he hadn't had a hit since "i wanna be your lover")...

they signed any act that he asked them to...

they never made him chase or follow trends... he was pretty much free to do his own thing...

warner was good to prince...

EllisDee said:

also Him getting that Amount of Freedom as a Black Artist was Truly Unheard of.still is in alot of cases when you think about it?

ellisdee,what in the hell can you say such a thing.WB toke all the royalties from the back catalog.

"if you dont own the masters,then the master owns you." The
back catalog is Prince's legacy.

oneken said:

yes, but that's standard practice... which means, that as far as record companies go, warner was good to him... most record companies wouldn't have allowed him nearly as much freedom and still would've taken the royalties... i'd say that prince made out pretty decent compared to a lot of other artists...

EllisDee said:

I still say he was stupid to thumb his nose to a $100Mil deal.Could he really make more than that if he had his 'masters'? It's debatable.

Marrk said:

he did take the $100,000,000, right?

that poor Slave!

Rudy said:

I don't think he ever got that much. Plus it was a deal
on some pretty strict terms.

He'd get like a $10,000,000 advance on each album and
then another $10,000,000 if it sold more than a few
million copies or something, didn't he?

They never gave him a cheque for $ 100,000,000.

Plus, with him wanting out of the contract and making
other deals with Warners from 1993-1995 I don't think
he left with a lot of extra cash.

squish said:

They said. the record company has lost money for several years. and last year lost millions!

RIAA

'nuff said.

chookalana said:

You have to wonder what impact the rift with Prince had on this. If instead of battleing Prince, they worked with him, how many millions could that have generated. The Rainbow Children was pretty much universally critically aclaimed and has several potential hits on it. ONA Live was the same way. 5 million copies of the Rainbow Children + 2 million copies of ONA Live could have brought in $50 million or so for WB (not to mention the impact on sales of the back catalog).

Instead WB is losing money and nobody hears Prince's work.

Earlier in the thread, people talked about the freedom and support WB gave to Prince. Don't forget the restrictions they placed on him as well. Always trying to limit his output. Time after time he would record stuff and want to release stuff only to be told no. The story I heard was WB said no to releasind Diamonds and Pearls. It was only after Prince sent an unlabled copy of Gett Off to radio, who turned it into a major hit, that WB would release the album.

I believe the final straw that caused the rift was Prince wanted to release an EP with I believe Peach, Pink Cashmere, Pope and Nothing Compares 2 U because Peach was so popular during the Act II tour. Instead WB only let him release them as part of a greatest hits CD, which pushed their release back nearly a year, the result was Peach bombed, other music he was recording couldn't be released, etc.

I also think if WB had simply released any music Prince wanted to any time he wanted to and gave him ownership of his masters that he would still be releasing music with them and would still be getting substantial radio play. Plus we'd have the entire back music catalog remasterd on CD and the entire back video catalog on DVD.

Prince isn't the only artist who figured out the importance of owning their masters. The Bee Gees for one fought a successful battle to regain ownership of their masters. The artists who create the music should own the master recordings.

Amen