ABeautifulOne said:

One more question:

If you could be any tree, what kind of tree would you be?

CynicKill said:

lol Leave that poor child alone. People come out when they're read to!

The REASON she has a GH out now is because her CONTRACT IS UP WITH JIVE RECORDS. Britney didn't take her time releasing records, the record company prolly just wanted to milk her markebility to get all the cash they could before she burned out. But, she was signed for a 4 album deal....

CynicKill said:

why are you asking me this?

ABeautifulOne said:

I was stickin' up for you, now I'm havin' to school you lol That's a typical Barbara Walters question. He was conceding that he was gettin' in your business.

o I was lost for a sec

ABeautifulOne said:

You don't just pay off your record company. I'm sure Britney didn't get a total sucker's record deal but I'm sure she decided to give them the opition of releasing a greatest hits with minimal input (apparently, the two new songs tacked on the end were featured on Wal-Mart's edition of "In the Zone" or in some way previously released or heard and were part of that album).

BEST OF WHAT????

VinnyM27 said:

Isn't that part in every artists contract that they must have a GH set before they are released from their contract?

ABeautifulOne said:

No.

Every time I see this thread, I think of 'Meet The Fockers'.

RipHer2Shreds said:

Yeah that. I swear ABeuatifulOne is so bitchy it almost hurts my feelings.

I'm trying not to like get wild on you all so I'll hush

ABeautifulOne said:

*be nice*

I'm trying

ABeautifulOne said:

Not all but I'm sure most (especially pop artists but especially very young, amibitious pop artists.... Britney probably had to do one or the record company made the offer very appealing for her. I highly doubt this was her idea. Whatever the case is, Britney certaintly can't pay the record company off to not release the album nor would it be in her interest to do that either.

Britney must've been involved if she put alternate versions of her videos on DVD

ABeautifulOne said:

How do you figure. It's not like record comapnies don't have access to those. Once in a while, record companies actually give the fans what they want and the video set is what most fans want, since it's very complete (more complete than the actual album). That's a very rare feat.
[Edited 12/28/04 18:32pm]

ok doesn't the artist keep the original video stuff once all the editing is done they get alternate versions of the video and keep it

ABeautifulOne said:

depends on who pays for the production of the video. if it's the artist, then the artist owns it. if it's the label, the label owns it.

ABeautifulOne said:

no. but it's often used by the artist or the label as contract filler to get it all over with.

GrayKing said:

And of course I know that the artist actually pays for the damn video because they pay the label back from record sales and tours

ABeautifulOne said:

not quite that simple, but close enough for our purposes.


but that's not necessarily the case. artists like Madonna, Prince, MJ, etc. with some money (maybe even Britney at this point) usually finance videos out of their own pocket just to have control without the label meddling.

I can't beleive how britney is so popular yet an actual talent like Debbie Gibson gets ragged on or infact, does not even get a mention by your average pop fan. Pop People got to buy her stuff. Start with her greatest hits. Debbie is a zillion times better then Britney ever was. Nobody got her greatest hits. Debbie was dance pop at it's best. With an added bonus of great ballads.....


I just dug up all my Debbie Gibson again and realized how good she was. Even her later album like "body mind and soul" beats anything Britney ever did.


Anyone else even heard of Debbie Gibson?

If Britney wasn't sexy (which is zzzzz) then her stuff wouldn't do shit most of the time.

GrayKing said:

Oh My God, I love that avatar.

AsianBoi777 said:

he's my hero. he got fired yesterday