mjscarousal said:

cloveringold85 said:

.

MJS: Okay, I'm getting confused now. You said you believe that Prince got the money up-front, correct?

Nope I did not say that. I don't think Prince was ever paid.

Okay

mjscarousal said:

cloveringold85 said:

.

It's possible, but risky to not have a contract/paper trail when doing business transactions. I mean, I would not buy a car or a house without proper documentation. Maybe Prince did get the cash up-front? This whole things is about as bizarre as can be, that's for sure!!

It is very bizarre! And common sense would suggest there would have been a contract but the Prince of 2016 seemed to be a mellow, kind hearted, and geneous middle age man that really wanted to help, guide and support young generation. I think its very possible there was never a contract and probably a verbal agreement and Jay Z took advantage of that.

.

^^ ^^

.

mjscarousal said:

cloveringold85 said:

Bitch betta have my money. Pay me whatcha owe me, LMAO!!

TIDAL and Joe Camel betta PAY UP!

.

Lovejunky said:

its my understanding that a lot of the meeting between jay and prince were filmed for a possoible doc release

Noodled24 said:

mjscarousal said:

Because Prince commited career suicide in order to get his money.

You really think Jay Z gave him $750, 000 in a brief case?????

Wouldn't be the first time Prince demanded cash in a bag.

walked outside of paisley and found a bag of purple money ,.,,wasnt that a lyric recently

lwr001 said:

its my understanding that a lot of the meeting between jay and prince were filmed for a possoible doc release

I read that somewhere some time back too..

I have since tried to find the Article where this is mentioned.

Its just Like Prince to film stuff. so when I read that Article if noted it...

This would explain a lot of whats going on behind the scens that we arent privvy to..

oliviacamron said:

Lovejunky said:

Theres an interview somewhere with Prince and Larry Graham, Larry says they never work with a Contract....Prince says something about preferring to work with People who Hold to their Words...

So Prince holds himself to the same standard then. He must have not knew he was going to die because he had so many plans and projects coming up like the charity event

No one knows WHEN they are going to die ..only that inevitably they/we will..

Even if he did have an inkling that his departure was near, that doesnt mean he would stop making plans.

He LIVED for his Music, so its normal for him, as far as I can see, to be implimenting projects and setting wheels in motion every day...

mjscarousal said:

cloveringold85 said:

.

It's possible, but risky to not have a contract/paper trail when doing business transactions. I mean, I would not buy a car or a house without proper documentation. Maybe Prince did get the cash up-front? This whole things is about as bizarre as can be, that's for sure!!

It is very bizarre! And common sense would suggest there would have been a contract but the Prince of 2016 seemed to be a mellow, kind hearted, and geneous middle age man that really wanted to help, guide and support young generation. I think its very possible there was never a contract and probably a verbal agreement and Jay Z took advantage of that.

--- There is nothing to take a advantage of. You can do a contract verbally/handshake as long as their is a mutual exchange you have a contract. ( I believe that Prince had equity in Tidal) Something is going on because most of the content is still up on Tidal. I even question the 90 day clause since 90 days has long passed and all of the remaining content can be removed per that agreement which both Bremer and Roc Nation due agreement exsisted. Why is most of the catalogue still on Tidal as of today.

[Edited 12/15/16 4:29am]

LIBRA said:

A couple of things.

1.) Prince died. Any "DEAL" is null and void unless it is written in the will. No will no "Deal."

2.) Since there is no will it would have to be a written contract. No contract and we all know why.

3.) Now that prince is dead and there is no will nor contract it will have to be a NEW contract with his estate.

4.) Tital is in $$ trouble. They have not paid some artist per reports. Yes It is aslo said that Tital uploaded 19 Albums AFTER he died. They do not have a right to do so.

It is also said that they never paid Prince $750,000 for his last CD.

I see this as their way to get some cash and pay off some debt.

But realistically they do NOT have a shot at this.

link:

https://www.digitalmusicn...-catalog/

[Edited 11/15/16 12:30pm]

I'm a bit late responding to the posts about this subject, but I do agree with you. But even on a handshake, Roc Nation should have date(s)/times when reps met with Prince. If they paid Prince cash, they should have recorded in a journal (a simple daytimer/planner), that they gave him cash. $750K cash, such a large withdrawal should show on a bank statement. Or, if the money was taken out of someone's vault, I go back to my original statement of writing down the transaction & meeting in a day timer/planner both of which are submissable in court. I'm not for or against Tidal, but if they didn't pay Prince, they need to pay the estate now and move forward. If they can't prove anything, they need to move on. Streaming Prince's music through ALL services would be better for his legacy whether Tidal remains in business or not. I'm not big on streaming, but for those who are, I'd like them to have access to Prince's music; Tidal lags in subscribers. He deserves to continously be heard.

PRNelson said:

I wonder if Londell is representing the Prince estate in this case? I'm guessing it may have some repercussions considering he owns source magazine and has affiliations with other artists. I asked him on twitter but received no response.

You've probably seen his response by now, but today Londell posted the following on Twitter: "During my tenure with #Prince, we shut down infringement. It's unacceptable. While some has been done, more remains to be done. "I am only an advisor to the #Prince Estate. "If" I were in control, some things would be different & lawsuits for infringements like b4!

laurarichardson said:

mjscarousal said:

It is very bizarre! And common sense would suggest there would have been a contract but the Prince of 2016 seemed to be a mellow, kind hearted, and geneous middle age man that really wanted to help, guide and support young generation. I think its very possible there was never a contract and probably a verbal agreement and Jay Z took advantage of that.

--- There is nothing to take a advantage of. You can do a contract verbally/handshake as long as their is a mutual exchange you have a contract. ( I believe that Prince had equity in Tidal) Something is going on because most of the content is still up on Tidal. I even question the 90 day clause since 90 days has long passed and all of the remaining content can be removed per that agreement which both Bremer and Roc Nation due agreement exsisted. Why is most of the catalogue still on Tidal as of today.

[Edited 12/15/16 4:29am]

A contract is a written agreement in business. You really think a judge is going to honor a handshake? We have no way of knowing if Prince wanted TIDAL to control all his music!?!?! It turns into he said, she said type of thing without a signature. TIDAL is TOAST.

mjscarousal said:

laurarichardson said:

--- There is nothing to take a advantage of. You can do a contract verbally/handshake as long as their is a mutual exchange you have a contract. ( I believe that Prince had equity in Tidal) Something is going on because most of the content is still up on Tidal. I even question the 90 day clause since 90 days has long passed and all of the remaining content can be removed per that agreement which both Bremer and Roc Nation due agreement exsisted. Why is most of the catalogue still on Tidal as of today.

[Edited 12/15/16 4:29am]

A contract is a written agreement in business. You really think a judge is going to honor a handshake? We have no way of knowing if Prince wanted TIDAL to control all his music!?!?! It turns into he said, she said type of thing without a signature. TIDAL is TOAST.

A contract can be a verbal agreement if an exchange occured. TIDAL claims they have an equity term agreement. I believe Prince was going to get equity in TIDAL or was given equity. It is all going to depend on how the agreement was put together. It can be a slippy slope but it is an exchange or at least Tidal sees it that way. This is the reason I think the bulk of the music is still on Tidal even after the Dec 8th date concerning their claim.

See below.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Term_sheet

A term sheet is a bullet-point document outlining the material terms and conditions of a business agreement. After a term sheet has been "executed", it guides legal counsel in the preparation of a proposed "final agreement". It then guides, but is not necessarily binding, as the signatories negotiate, usually with legal counsel, the final terms of their agreement.

A term sheet implies the conditions of a business transaction, as proposed by a party. It may be either binding or non-binding.

Term sheets are very similar to "letters of intent" (LOI) in that they are both preliminary, mostly non-binding documents meant to record two or more parties' intentions to enter into a future agreement based on specified (but incomplete or preliminary) terms. The difference between the two is slight and mostly a matter of style: an LOI is typically written in letter form and focuses on the parties' intentions; a term sheet skips most of the formalities and lists deal terms in bullet-point or similar format. There is an implication that an LOI only refers to the final form. A term sheet may be a proposal, not an agreed-to document.

Within the context of venture capital financing, a term sheet typically includes conditions for financing a startup company. The key offering terms in such a term sheet include (a) amount raised, (b) price per share, (c) pre-money valuation, (d) liquidation preference, (e) voting rights, (f) anti-dilution provisions, and (g) registration rights.[1]

It is customary to begin the negotiation of a venture investment with the circulation of a term sheet, which is a summary of the terms the proposer (the issuer, the investor, or an intermediary) is prepared to accept. The term sheet is analogous to a letter of intent, a nonbinding outline of the principal points which the stock purchase agreement and related agreements will cover in detail.

The advantage of the abbreviated term sheet format is, first, that it expedites the process. Experienced counsel immediately know generally what is meant when the term sheet specifies "one demand registration at the issuer's expense, unlimited piggybacks at the issuer's expense, weighted average antidilution"; it saves time not to have to spell out the long-form edition of those references. Second, since the term sheet does not propose to be an agreement of any sort, it is less likely that a court will find unexpected promissory content; a "letter of intent" can be a dangerous document unless it specifies very clearly, as it should, which portions are meant to be binding and which merely guide the discussion and drafting. Some portions of a term sheet can have binding effect, of course, if and to the extent an interlocutory memorialization is needed of some binding promises, that is, confidentiality of the disclosures made in the negotiation. The summary format of a term sheet, however, makes it less likely that any party will be misled into thinking that some form of enforceable agreement has been memorialized when it has not.[2]

Maybe this type of arrangement.

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/simple-agreement-for-future-equity.html

[Edited 12/15/16 13:01pm]

JettaP said:

LIBRA said:

A couple of things.

1.) Prince died. Any "DEAL" is null and void unless it is written in the will. No will no "Deal."

2.) Since there is no will it would have to be a written contract. No contract and we all know why.

3.) Now that prince is dead and there is no will nor contract it will have to be a NEW contract with his estate.

4.) Tital is in $$ trouble. They have not paid some artist per reports. Yes It is aslo said that Tital uploaded 19 Albums AFTER he died. They do not have a right to do so.

It is also said that they never paid Prince $750,000 for his last CD.

I see this as their way to get some cash and pay off some debt.

But realistically they do NOT have a shot at this.

link:

https://www.digitalmusicn...-catalog/

[Edited 11/15/16 12:30pm]

I'm a bit late responding to the posts about this subject, but I do agree with you. But even on a handshake, Roc Nation should have date(s)/times when reps met with Prince. If they paid Prince cash, they should have recorded in a journal (a simple daytimer/planner), that they gave him cash. $750K cash, such a large withdrawal should show on a bank statement. Or, if the money was taken out of someone's vault, I go back to my original statement of writing down the transaction & meeting in a day timer/planner both of which are submissable in court. I'm not for or against Tidal, but if they didn't pay Prince, they need to pay the estate now and move forward. If they can't prove anything, they need to move on. Streaming Prince's music through ALL services would be better for his legacy whether Tidal remains in business or not. I'm not big on streaming, but for those who are, I'd like them to have access to Prince's music; Tidal lags in subscribers. He deserves to continously be heard.

Well you are agreeing with someone who does not know what they are speaking on.

Prince died. Any "DEAL" is null and void unless it is written in the will. No will no "Deal."

Deals don't die when people die. The deal is now with the estate.

laurarichardson said:

mjscarousal said:

A contract is a written agreement in business. You really think a judge is going to honor a handshake? We have no way of knowing if Prince wanted TIDAL to control all his music!?!?! It turns into he said, she said type of thing without a signature. TIDAL is TOAST.

A contract can be a verbal agreement if an exchange occured. TIDAL claims they have an equity term agreement. I believe Prince was going to get equity in TIDAL or was given equity. It is all going to depend on how the agreement was put together. It can be a slippy slope but it is an exchange or at least Tidal sees it that way. This is the reason I think the bulk of the music is still on Tidal even after the Dec 8th date concerning their claim.

See below.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Term_sheet

A term sheet is a bullet-point document outlining the material terms and conditions of a business agreement. After a term sheet has been "executed", it guides legal counsel in the preparation of a proposed "final agreement". It then guides, but is not necessarily binding, as the signatories negotiate, usually with legal counsel, the final terms of their agreement.

A term sheet implies the conditions of a business transaction, as proposed by a party. It may be either binding or non-binding.

Term sheets are very similar to "letters of intent" (LOI) in that they are both preliminary, mostly non-binding documents meant to record two or more parties' intentions to enter into a future agreement based on specified (but incomplete or preliminary) terms. The difference between the two is slight and mostly a matter of style: an LOI is typically written in letter form and focuses on the parties' intentions; a term sheet skips most of the formalities and lists deal terms in bullet-point or similar format. There is an implication that an LOI only refers to the final form. A term sheet may be a proposal, not an agreed-to document.

Within the context of venture capital financing, a term sheet typically includes conditions for financing a startup company. The key offering terms in such a term sheet include (a) amount raised, (b) price per share, (c) pre-money valuation, (d) liquidation preference, (e) voting rights, (f) anti-dilution provisions, and (g) registration rights.[1]

It is customary to begin the negotiation of a venture investment with the circulation of a term sheet, which is a summary of the terms the proposer (the issuer, the investor, or an intermediary) is prepared to accept. The term sheet is analogous to a letter of intent, a nonbinding outline of the principal points which the stock purchase agreement and related agreements will cover in detail.

The advantage of the abbreviated term sheet format is, first, that it expedites the process. Experienced counsel immediately know generally what is meant when the term sheet specifies "one demand registration at the issuer's expense, unlimited piggybacks at the issuer's expense, weighted average antidilution"; it saves time not to have to spell out the long-form edition of those references. Second, since the term sheet does not propose to be an agreement of any sort, it is less likely that a court will find unexpected promissory content; a "letter of intent" can be a dangerous document unless it specifies very clearly, as it should, which portions are meant to be binding and which merely guide the discussion and drafting. Some portions of a term sheet can have binding effect, of course, if and to the extent an interlocutory memorialization is needed of some binding promises, that is, confidentiality of the disclosures made in the negotiation. The summary format of a term sheet, however, makes it less likely that any party will be misled into thinking that some form of enforceable agreement has been memorialized when it has not.[2]

Maybe this type of arrangement.

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/simple-agreement-for-future-equity.html

Commonly referred to as a SAFE, a simple agreement for future equity is a simple contract between an investor and a startup company where the investor provides capital to the startup company, and the startup provides a warrant to issue stock to the investor at a later time.

SAFEs are one common instrument used in angel investing as a method to reduce legal costs and overhead in investing in startups. Angel investors use these low-cost instruments in ultra-high risk startup investing because they expect most of their startup investments to fail. As a practical matter, most startups that do fail have little or no assets of value to take advantage of after their failure.

Read more: http://www.businessdictio...quity.html

simple agreement for future equity
Definition
Popular Terms
Commonly referred to as a SAFE, a simple agreement for future equity is a simple contract between an investor and a startup company where the investor provides capital to the startup company, and the startup provides a warrant to issue stock to the investor at a later time.

SAFEs are one common instrument used in angel investing as a method to reduce legal costs and overhead in investing in startups. Angel investors use these low-cost instruments in ultra-high risk startup investing because they expect most of their startup investments to fail. As a practical matter, most startups that do fail have little or no assets of value to take advantage of after their failure.

Read more: http://www.businessdictio...quity.html

simple agreement for future equity
Definition
Popular Terms
Commonly referred to as a SAFE, a simple agreement for future equity is a simple contract between an investor and a startup company where the investor provides capital to the startup company, and the startup provides a warrant to issue stock to the investor at a later time.

SAFEs are one common instrument used in angel investing as a method to reduce legal costs and overhead in investing in startups. Angel investors use these low-cost instruments in ultra-high risk startup investing because they expect most of their startup investments to fail. As a practical matter, most startups that do fail have little or no assets of value to take advantage of after their failure.

Read more: http://www.businessdictio...quity.html

[Edited 12/15/16 13:01pm]

TIDAL claims that Prince had discussions with Jay Z about the music industry, (and their claiming this is their proof that an agreement was exchanged) however, that is not verbalizing an agreement. That is not concrete proof that an agreement was exchanged. Like I said, TIDAL is TOAST and full of bullshit.

[Edited 12/15/16 13:15pm]

JettaP said:

LIBRA said:

A couple of things.

1.) Prince died. Any "DEAL" is null and void unless it is written in the will. No will no "Deal."

2.) Since there is no will it would have to be a written contract. No contract and we all know why.

3.) Now that prince is dead and there is no will nor contract it will have to be a NEW contract with his estate.

4.) Tital is in $$ trouble. They have not paid some artist per reports. Yes It is aslo said that Tital uploaded 19 Albums AFTER he died. They do not have a right to do so.

It is also said that they never paid Prince $750,000 for his last CD.

I see this as their way to get some cash and pay off some debt.

But realistically they do NOT have a shot at this.

link:

https://www.digitalmusicn...-catalog/

[Edited 11/15/16 12:30pm]

I'm a bit late responding to the posts about this subject, but I do agree with you. But even on a handshake, Roc Nation should have date(s)/times when reps met with Prince. If they paid Prince cash, they should have recorded in a journal (a simple daytimer/planner), that they gave him cash. $750K cash, such a large withdrawal should show on a bank statement. Or, if the money was taken out of someone's vault, I go back to my original statement of writing down the transaction & meeting in a day timer/planner both of which are submissable in court. I'm not for or against Tidal, but if they didn't pay Prince, they need to pay the estate now and move forward. If they can't prove anything, they need to move on. Streaming Prince's music through ALL services would be better for his legacy whether Tidal remains in business or not. I'm not big on streaming, but for those who are, I'd like them to have access to Prince's music; Tidal lags in subscribers. He deserves to continously be heard.

.

Very good points made!! Like you said, there has to be some type of paper trail from Tidal. Bremer said they asked for accounting records and Tidal has yet to respond. It doesn't matter if they had a handshake deal or not, because without proper documentation or some kind of paper trail, they don't have a leg to stand on. Now, given the fact that P's music is still up on Tidal must mean they have rights to do so and/or the Judge is allowing them to bide their time?

.

I agree with you; I think Prince's music should be easily accessible, not just though Tidal. I think Prince and JayZ both wanted to help each other out by doing this deal, but it basically back-fired on JayZ now.

.

We will have to wait and see.

mjscarousal said:

laurarichardson said:

--- There is nothing to take a advantage of. You can do a contract verbally/handshake as long as their is a mutual exchange you have a contract. ( I believe that Prince had equity in Tidal) Something is going on because most of the content is still up on Tidal. I even question the 90 day clause since 90 days has long passed and all of the remaining content can be removed per that agreement which both Bremer and Roc Nation due agreement exsisted. Why is most of the catalogue still on Tidal as of today.

[Edited 12/15/16 4:29am]

A contract is a written agreement in business. You really think a judge is going to honor a handshake? We have no way of knowing if Prince wanted TIDAL to control all his music!?!?! It turns into he said, she said type of thing without a signature. TIDAL is TOAST.

.

Exactly! And, Prince is not here to speak for himself. Now, does he have someone who is aware of the deal with Tidal and can speak on his behalf? We just don't know. Does Tyka know? The reality is, Prince did a lot of things on his own and without legal advice, so they all have one hell of a mess on their hands now! I hope we hear about some news, pretty soon!

.

[Edited 12/15/16 13:47pm]

mjscarousal said:

laurarichardson said:

mjscarousal said:

TIDAL claims that Prince had discussions with Jay Z about the music industry, (and their claiming this is their proof that an agreement was exchanged) however, that is not verbalizing an agreement. That is not concrete proof that an agreement was exchanged. Like I said, TIDAL is TOAST and full of bullshit.

[Edited 12/15/16 13:15pm]

No, Roc Nation filed a claim in probate court stating they do have a written agreement however, Breamer is trying to throw out the claim because when you make claim you should listed the dollar figure and provide backup docs. Roc nation did it provide the docs and they have not listed a dollar figure on their claim. You need to read the court docs.

Can I ask you a question?

Prince has made it known in many publications and interviews his affinity for Jay and Tidal...I have no insight into what deals may or may have not been signed and or monies exchanged nor does anyone on here.. The fact that they didn't respond to Bremer means absolutely nothing; tBremer isn''t the courts so why expose your hand.

mjscarousal said:

laurarichardson said:

mjscarousal said: No, Roc Nation filed a claim in probate court stating they do have a written agreement however, Breamer is trying to throw out the claim because when you make claim you should listed the dollar figure and provide backup docs. Roc nation did it provide the docs and they have not listed a dollar figure on their claim. You need to read the court docs.

Can I ask you a question?

Sure you can

lwr001 said:

Prince has made it known in many publications and interviews his affinity for Jay and Tidal...I have no insight into what deals may or may have not been signed and or monies exchanged nor does anyone on here.. The fact that they didn't respond to Bremer means absolutely nothing; tBremer isn''t the courts so why expose your hand.

Any agreement they had with him is propritory information and they may have been tipped off by the family that Breamer was not going to be around beyond January so why give the info to them.

They will have to give the info to a court if the next admins want to pursue the federal case. I think it would be better if all parties set down and worked something out rather then waste more money and time in court battles. Also stop the barrage of e-mails and actually talk maybe even bring in a arbitrator.

laurarichardson said:

JettaP said:

I'm a bit late responding to the posts about this subject, but I do agree with you. But even on a handshake, Roc Nation should have date(s)/times when reps met with Prince. If they paid Prince cash, they should have recorded in a journal (a simple daytimer/planner), that they gave him cash. $750K cash, such a large withdrawal should show on a bank statement. Or, if the money was taken out of someone's vault, I go back to my original statement of writing down the transaction & meeting in a day timer/planner both of which are submissable in court. I'm not for or against Tidal, but if they didn't pay Prince, they need to pay the estate now and move forward. If they can't prove anything, they need to move on. Streaming Prince's music through ALL services would be better for his legacy whether Tidal remains in business or not. I'm not big on streaming, but for those who are, I'd like them to have access to Prince's music; Tidal lags in subscribers. He deserves to continously be heard.

Well you are agreeing with someone who does not know what they are speaking on.

Prince died. Any "DEAL" is null and void unless it is written in the will. No will no "Deal."

Deals don't die when people die. The deal is now with the estate.

Thanks. In actuality, none of us really know what the heck is happening. Just speculating. The deal may not have died with Prince, but the fact remains that Roc Nation hasn't proven their case yet. I'd be more inclined to side with Roc Nation if they could/would produce payment info.

laurarichardson said:

laurarichardson said:

mjscarousal said:

Can I ask you a question?

Sure you can

Do you work for TIDAL?

mjscarousal said:

laurarichardson said:

Sure you can

Do you work for TIDAL?

i cant breathe