independent and unofficial
Prince fan community
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Prince: Music and More > On this date in 1992
« Previous topic  Next topic »
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Author

Tweet     Share

Message
Thread started 09/03/12 1:52am

LIBRA

On this date in 1992

On this date in 1992, a spokesman for Prince said Warner Brothers Records had re-signed the performer to a contract worth a record $100 million. The figure surpassed the $60 million deal Madonna had signed earlier in the year. But industry sources later speculated the Prince contract might have been worth a lot less. Warner also made Prince a vice president for A&R for the label and agreed to put substantial money into two joint venture record labels.

Everybody's lookin 4 the ladder, it's in the garage
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 09/03/12 3:16am

NouveauDance

avatar

And thus began the shit slide.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 09/03/12 3:44am

KingSausage

avatar

20 Years of Released Shit: Vol. 1
"Drop that stereo before I blow your Goddamn nuts off, asshole!"
-Eugene Tackleberry
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 09/03/12 10:56am

motherfunka

avatar

Anyone remember the details of the contract? I kind of remember them saying he would get a flat fee for an album, then if it sold so many (not sure how many???) he would get more money. Obviously the Symbol album didn't meet those extra numbers and he was pissed he wasn't going to get anymore money for it. The way the press touted it though, was that he was getting a 100 mil up front, which wasn't the case.

At the time when he was doing all the gigs at Paisley Park 94-95, he always made speeches how music should be free, and a couple of times he did give us some free music (Slave/New World single and The Good Life remixes). It just seems kind of weird that he is so against the internet and free downloads now...well not actually so weird since he always contradicts himself. I guess if I were an artist I would want to get paid for my work also, but like I said he was the one saying it should be free.

TRUE BLUE
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 09/03/12 11:15am

SoulAlive

Prince was promised an advance of $10 million per album...but only if the previous album sold at least 5 million copies.Considering that most of his albums were barely reaching platinum status in those days (D&P being the rare exception) there was no way that Prince was gonna receive that type of money from Warners.

motherfunka said:

Anyone remember the details of the contract? I kind of remember them saying he would get a flat fee for an album, then if it sold so many (not sure how many???) he would get more money. Obviously the Symbol album didn't meet those extra numbers and he was pissed he wasn't going to get anymore money for it. The way the press touted it though, was that he was getting a 100 mil up front, which wasn't the case.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #5 posted 09/03/12 11:17am

rdhull

avatar

I remember Russell Simmons stating "I wouldn't pay more than 1 million for his contract resign" due to his lackluster sales and waning popularity.

"Climb in my fur."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #6 posted 09/03/12 11:19am

SoulAlive

Just How Princely Is Prince's Deal? : Pop music: The star's new Warner Bros. pact is one of the industry's biggest ever, but insiders question its purported $100-million value.

September 05, 1992|CHUCK PHILIPS | SPECIAL TO THE L.A. TIMES

Hold that champagne.

Prince and his advisers may be toasting their new multimillion-dollar contract with Warner Bros. Records, but some executives at the record label are not exactly ecstatic.

Not only were key officers at Warner Bros. surprised when Prince's publicists issued a press release Thursday announcing the pact, but they were "dismayed"--in the words of one Warner official--by the claim that it was the biggest deal in record industry history.

Without denying the Prince deal is one of the "four or five biggest" in the record industry, insiders claim the total figure is based largely on projected revenue--not guaranteed income.

"Can you believe what Madonna, who just finished negotiating a $60-million contract with Warners, is going to say when she hears about the Prince deal?" asked one industry observer.

While company executives declined to discuss the new pact, other industry insiders were quick to challenge the accuracy of the deal's reported $100-million figure.

To earn $100 million, each of Prince's next six albums will have to sell at least 5 million copies, a level that he has rarely matched despite his high international visibility. The music publishing and other joint ventures also depend on projected sales performance.

If Prince's sales fall short in any of these areas, the amount due him under the contract could be greatly reduced.

So how much cash did the 34-year-old Minneapolis recording artist, whose real name is Prince Roger Nelson, get for signing his name on the dotted line?

Approximately $30 million.

"This $100-million figure is so ridiculous," said one industry insider. "No company could afford to pay Prince that. Based on what he has sold recently, they'd go broke."

"His representatives are just playing the big numbers up for the media," said another prominent record company executive. "These huge numbers get leaked to the press to puff up artists' egos and to promote the people who negotiate the deals. It's free advertising so that his representatives can lure other artists into their camp."

Gary Stiffelman, an entertainment attorney at the Los Angeles firm Ziffren, Brittenham and Branca, declined to discuss details of the contract, but dismissed allegations of self-promotion. Stiffelman negotiated the contract for Prince along with Gilbert Davison, president of Paisley Park Enterprises, Prince's Minneapolis record company.

"We don't comment on the value of the deals we make," said Stiffelman, whose firm has also negotiated deals for the Rolling Stones, Aerosmith and ZZ Top.

"We leave that speculation to the press and the music community."

Prince's contract is the latest in a string of mega-bucks superstar signings triggered by Janet Jackson's estimated $40-million, three-album deal with Virgin Records last year.

Just where does the deal place Prince in this high-visibility, high-ego sweepstakes?

Most industry observers contacted Friday put it in the top 5. Some believe that Janet Jackson's pact is still the most valuable because she becomes a "free agent" after three albums--thus enabling her to sign an even bigger contract if she remains a hot artist.

Others pointed to the Michael Jackson/Sony and Madonna/Warner Bros. arrangements, both of which were estimated at $60 million each. These contracts, however, bind the artists to the labels for between six and seven albums. They also include lucrative film/TV/video/merchandisng provisions.

Sources close to the Prince/Warner Bros. talks said the entertainer is guaranteed up to an estimated $10-million advance per album--three times his previous fee and twice as much as Jackson or Madonna receives. The six-album deal reportedly also includes a blue-chip 25% royalty rate on every record he sells.

Under the agreement, Warner Bros., which is owned by Time Warner, will eventually pay about $20 million to restructure Prince's existing record label, Paisley Park Records, and establish an additional joint venture record label. Prince will also reportedly be paid an additional $20-million advance by Warner/Chappel music publishers to establish two other co-venture companies.

If Prince's next album--due Oct. 20--does not sell enough units to turn a profit for the company, sources say, his advance for successive albums will be reduced significantly to compensate for their losses.

In the pop world, a "guaranteed" cash advance is like a separate interest-free loan that the company deducts from the entertainer's share of the profits every time one of his or her albums sells.

The advance for each album is deducted from an artist's royalties on the album until he or she sells enough records to pay back the $10 million, which means about 5 million copies in Prince's case--given his estimated 25% royalty rate.

If the album doesn't sell the 5 million copies, Time Warner reportedly has the right to deduct the difference from royalties generated by all of his previous albums.


  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #7 posted 09/03/12 11:35am

SoulAlive

Under the agreement, Warner Bros., which is owned by Time Warner, will eventually pay about $20 million to restructure Prince's existing record label, Paisley Park Records

confused and we all see how this turned out.Over $2 million was spent on promoting the Carmen Elektra album,which flopped big time.Three other albums were released on Paisley Park in 1993,but they bombed as well.In early 94,Warners shut the label down and that's about the time that Prince began his "war" with them.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #8 posted 09/03/12 11:44am

SchlomoThaHomo

avatar

SoulAlive said:

Under the agreement, Warner Bros., which is owned by Time Warner, will eventually pay about $20 million to restructure Prince's existing record label, Paisley Park Records

confused and we all see how this turned out.Over $2 million was spent on promoting the Carmen Elektra album,which flopped big time.Three other albums were released on Paisley Park in 1993,but they bombed as well.In early 94,Warners shut the label down and that's about the time that Prince began his "war" with them.

well he kinda disproved his business sense in the span of a year, tho i'm sure he blamed it all on them. nobody was checking for a Staples and Clinton record in 93, just like they werent checking for Chaka and GCS 2000 in 98.

and 2 milli on Carmen!? i mean WOW. i don't remember seeing any promotion for her other than on the Sexy MF video tape and the Ryde Divine special. where the hell did that money go?

"That's when stars collide. When there's space for what u want, and ur heart is open wide."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #9 posted 09/03/12 12:35pm

ludwig

SchlomoThaHomo said:

SoulAlive said:

Under the agreement, Warner Bros., which is owned by Time Warner, will eventually pay about $20 million to restructure Prince's existing record label, Paisley Park Records

confused and we all see how this turned out.Over $2 million was spent on promoting the Carmen Elektra album,which flopped big time.Three other albums were released on Paisley Park in 1993,but they bombed as well.In early 94,Warners shut the label down and that's about the time that Prince began his "war" with them.

well he kinda disproved his business sense in the span of a year, tho i'm sure he blamed it all on them. nobody was checking for a Staples and Clinton record in 93, just like they werent checking for Chaka and GCS 2000 in 98.

and 2 milli on Carmen!? i mean WOW. i don't remember seeing any promotion for her other than on the Sexy MF video tape and the Ryde Divine special. where the hell did that money go?

Music videos, promo-material for radio stations.

Get on up was a minor radio hit here in germany, I heard it quite often on very popular stations. And you know, they wouldn't spin it without getting "served" by the record company.

The promo video for Get on up was also on rotation on MTV, and was even featured on the then very popular Beavis & Butthead show.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #10 posted 09/03/12 12:48pm

Bohemian67

avatar

I wonder if its right that our society pays popstars and sports stars so much money?

"Free URself, B the best that U can B, 3rd Apartment from the Sun, nothing left to fear" Prince Rogers Nelson - Forever in my Life -
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #11 posted 09/03/12 1:55pm

NouveauDance

avatar

Bohemian67 said:

I wonder if its right that our society pays popstars and sports stars so much money?

I can think of other sectors of society who earn tons but don't deserve it, I'd start with them before I took the likes of Prince and David Beckham to the guillotine.

[Edited 9/3/12 13:55pm]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #12 posted 09/03/12 3:01pm

smoothcriminal
12

Bohemian67 said:

I wonder if its right that our society pays popstars and sports stars so much money?

Why not?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #13 posted 09/03/12 4:25pm

EyeJester7

NouveauDance said:

Bohemian67 said:

I wonder if its right that our society pays popstars and sports stars so much money?

I can think of other sectors of society who earn tons but don't deserve it, I'd start with them before I took the likes of Prince and David Beckham to the guillotine.

[Edited 9/3/12 13:55pm]

I would have to agree, I mean they're far more other sectors that earn more, and have other intentions than pop stars..

But..I mean..it's all a factor of how much you really give; I think anyways?

It's Button Therapy, Baby!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #14 posted 09/03/12 11:25pm

Bohemian67

avatar

NouveauDance said:

Bohemian67 said:

I wonder if its right that our society pays popstars and sports stars so much money?

I can think of other sectors of society who earn tons but don't deserve it, I'd start with them before I took the likes of Prince and David Beckham to the guillotine.

[Edited 9/3/12 13:55pm]

They were not the title of the thread. I threw in sport because they're also entertainment.

"Free URself, B the best that U can B, 3rd Apartment from the Sun, nothing left to fear" Prince Rogers Nelson - Forever in my Life -
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #15 posted 09/04/12 2:41am

NouveauDance

avatar

Bohemian67 said:

NouveauDance said:

I can think of other sectors of society who earn tons but don't deserve it, I'd start with them before I took the likes of Prince and David Beckham to the guillotine.

[Edited 9/3/12 13:55pm]

They were not the title of the thread. I threw in sport because they're also entertainment.

I wasn't having a dig, just following your train of thought smile

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #16 posted 09/04/12 3:51am

SoulAlive

SchlomoThaHomo said:

SoulAlive said:

Under the agreement, Warner Bros., which is owned by Time Warner, will eventually pay about $20 million to restructure Prince's existing record label, Paisley Park Records

confused and we all see how this turned out.Over $2 million was spent on promoting the Carmen Elektra album,which flopped big time.Three other albums were released on Paisley Park in 1993,but they bombed as well.In early 94,Warners shut the label down and that's about the time that Prince began his "war" with them.

well he kinda disproved his business sense in the span of a year, tho i'm sure he blamed it all on them. nobody was checking for a Staples and Clinton record in 93, just like they werent checking for Chaka and GCS 2000 in 98.

and 2 milli on Carmen!? i mean WOW. i don't remember seeing any promotion for her other than on the Sexy MF video tape and the Ryde Divine special. where the hell did that money go?

It seems like Paisley Park Records was never a "real" record label.It was always Prince's vanity label.He often didn't even sign real artists,he signed people who were simply friends (or girlfriends) of his.That was his way of rewarding these people.Warners had no problem with this in the 80s,but after they pumped $20 million into the label,they wanted a return on their investment.Unfortunately,the Carmen Elektra project didn't deliver.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #17 posted 09/04/12 3:59am

Tittypants

avatar

KingSausage said:

20 Years of Released Shit: Vol. 1

spit True indeed!

الحيوان النادلة ((((|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|̲̅̅=̲̅̅|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|)))) ...AND THAT'S THE WAY THE "TITTY" MILKS IT!
My Albums: https://zillzmp.bandcamp.com/music
My Soundcloud: https://soundcloud.com/zillz82
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #18 posted 09/04/12 4:46am

Chas

avatar

I never understood why he signed the contract in the first place. By 1992, he'd been in the business at least 15 years, and had seen the highest highs and the lowest lows. Did he not see the limitations and stipulations to which he'd have to adhere? I don't think by that point he was blinded by all those zeroes in $100 million bucks, he was already rich. If he didn't want to be stifled, why did he allow those rules to be put in the contract? With all that money on the line, and being the control freak Prince is, why didn't he comb over every single line with a high-priced team of entertainment lawyers and a "Record contracts for dummies" book? It seems to me, Warners knew he had the capability to make them money, which is why they agreed to pay him so much, so you'd think he had some kind of leverage. To me, that takes away some of the credence of the "slave" argument he made. He could've easily let his contract with Warners end, and call up Arista, Sony or Universal and get the deals he eventually made years later.

That being said... this is Prince we're talking about. Black is white, up is down, and being forced into getting paid millions of dollars by making music is slavery.

That's just my opinion. He released all the music he wanted eventually, anyway.

Chas

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #19 posted 09/04/12 1:32pm

Bohemian67

avatar

NouveauDance said:

Bohemian67 said:

They were not the title of the thread. I threw in sport because they're also entertainment.

I wasn't having a dig, just following your train of thought smile

Cool. I wasn't sure.

To Smooth Criminal:

Wouldn't such kind of money set a precedent for society for things being 'never enough'? i.e. a kind of predecessor for the bonus culture.

"Free URself, B the best that U can B, 3rd Apartment from the Sun, nothing left to fear" Prince Rogers Nelson - Forever in my Life -
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #20 posted 09/06/12 5:09am

SoulAlive

Chas said:

I never understood why he signed the contract in the first place. By 1992, he'd been in the business at least 15 years, and had seen the highest highs and the lowest lows. Did he not see the limitations and stipulations to which he'd have to adhere? I don't think by that point he was blinded by all those zeroes in $100 million bucks, he was already rich. If he didn't want to be stifled, why did he allow those rules to be put in the contract? With all that money on the line, and being the control freak Prince is, why didn't he comb over every single line with a high-priced team of entertainment lawyers and a "Record contracts for dummies" book? It seems to me, Warners knew he had the capability to make them money, which is why they agreed to pay him so much, so you'd think he had some kind of leverage. To me, that takes away some of the credence of the "slave" argument he made. He could've easily let his contract with Warners end, and call up Arista, Sony or Universal and get the deals he eventually made years later.

That being said... this is Prince we're talking about. Black is white, up is down, and being forced into getting paid millions of dollars by making music is slavery.

I think alot of it had to do with ego.He saw that Janet Jackson,Michael Jackson and labelmate Madonna were signing these massive,lucrative deals and he didn't want to be left behind.It was important for him to have a deal that surpassed theirs.Of course,it didn't really work out the way he planned.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #21 posted 09/06/12 6:13am

udo

avatar

NouveauDance said:

And thus began the shit slide.

yeahthat

Because he couldn't keep up his side ofthe contract...

Pills and thrills and daffodils will kill... If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Prince: Music and More > On this date in 1992