Just caught this article:



JACKSON TO SELL OFF REMAINING BEATLES CATALOGUE

Pop superstar MICHAEL JACKSON is being forced to sell the remaining rights to the BEATLES songs he owns in a bid to pay off outstanding debts.
The THRILLER star purchased the British group's back catalogue in 1985, but sold part ownership of the songs to record company Sony in 1995, using the rest as security for loans in a deal rumoured to have made the star GBP750 million ($1.5 billion).

However, under the deal, Jackson must sell the rest of the rights to Sony by 31 May next year (08) after they helped him repay a GBP140 million loan.

According to US celebrity writer ROGER FRIEDMAN, "(The deal) is not a lot for a celebrity who likes to travel, stay in expensive hotels and shut down toy stores for private shopping."

Source: WENN



[Where'sthe link to back this story up??? So, locked until you can give it to me... otherwise it's just hearsay. - June7 ]

too bad the families of George, and John, as well as Paul and Ringo can't buy these back.

Prince's arguement sorta, innit?

Michael has proven to be an awful businessman If he seriously needed cash,he would stop being so lazy and get out there and TOUR! Madonna's last tour grossed nearly $200 million.If MJ went out there for 4 months or so,he could also make alot of cash.His popularity in the US has slipped,but I know damn well he could sellout arenas in places like Japan and England.I can't believe how dumb he has turned out to be.

SoulAlive said:

The touring thing though can be a bit overrated. It all depends on what you are paying for in the long run, one of the reasons Princes Musicology tour ended up making Prince alot of $$$ musnt so much that the shows were sell outs, it was because he didnt have a ton of sponsors paying him that he would have to pay back, he pretty much did his own advertising, also he kept the tour in the USA which allowed him to "cheapen" travel costs for him and his employees and instruments. Traveling overseas is when alot of tours start to lose money despite how many tickets they sell, between Travel and Insurance,Passports for everyone its a big amount to pay off. So i dont doubt that Michael can/will sell out shows, i dont think he is good at the marketing thing, i think he is more the type of person that will have tons of emnployees and sponsors, which means alot of people to pay at the end of the day.

lastdecember said:

still,I think he should at least give it a shot! It would be tragic if he had to sell off his shares of the Beatles catalog.That's one of the few ways he still makes money these days.He should do a 4-month,scaled-back tour.Forget the expensive props and a bunch of dancers.Just get out there and SING! Tour in Europe,Japan,Australia and select US dates.He could make alot of money this way.

.
[Edited 3/12/07 6:34am]

it would had been something else if he would have sold the catalogue to Prince. I know Sir Paul McCartney is just flaming up right now.

A question: why did MJ sell half of the Beatles catalog to Sony in 1995? Why did he need all those loans? That was his biggest mistake.

Ha-ha!

SoulAlive said:

It was actually a great move! He merged the catalogues, so know he owns a lot more music than he use to.

And the story is BS btw. It's a RF article. Take no notice.

DarlingDiana said:

We all know Friedman has it out for MJ...But this news has been reported by various media outlets...There's a lot of things that are said about MJ that border under the realm of absurdity...But if you don't think the man doesn't have some money issues (that much was made clear during the trial...), I don't know what else to tell you....

lastdecember said:

I love MICHAEL.. but its sooo funny that he likes so shut down toy stores... and all that other stuff... its JUST too funny

lastdecember said:

if you have a sponsor that means you have someone willing to give you money for the right to advertise their product during the tour. you don't have to pay the money back. i think you have sponsorship confused with the record company advances for albums.

DarlingDiana said:

LOL! Another spin on the "MJ is going broke" story.I feel sorry for RF. His obsession with Michael has reached psychotic levels. As DarlingDiana said, Michael MERGED the ATV catalogue with Sony. Instead of owning JUST the Beatles' 250 song catalogue, MJ is now 50% owner of songs by people like Dylan, Destiny's Child, Bruce and hundreds of other artists. The Sony/ATV catalogue owns tens of thousands of songs. Don't forget that Sony/ATV recently purchase the Acuff/Rose catalogue which is home to thousands of country songs. It's interesting that Friedman always fails to mention that Michael is HALF owner of thousands of songs and not just the Beatles. I guess he figures that no one will question him because that are not aware of the real facts. When Michael merged the ATV catalogue with Sony in 1995, Sony had to pay him more than $100 CASH upfront because his ownership of the Beatles' catalogue was worth more than Sony's entire share. Remember, this $100 million had nothing to do with the money that he was going to make yearly on the merger. Friedman also doesn't want people to know that Michael owns a LOT of stock in Sony and that he has 100% ownership of the Mijac catalogue. Roger's purpose is to make people think that Michael is broke. If he is broke, don't you think that he would have filed bankruptcy by now? RF has been saying that he was going to file bankruptcy since 2001.

TotalAlisa said:

He did that sh!t when I saw him in NYC over ten years ago. There was a huge crowd in front of a comic book store I go to - I look in the window, and that freak was inside, browsing around.

It's a damn shame that Paul, Ringo, and the family of John and George don't have no ownership or say of The Beatles catalog. They should own that together. Michael stopped that back in 1985 and now look at him. I think that was not cool for Mike to do that but, like he once told Paul after that happened "It was just business".

SoulAlive said:

Michael Jackson/Janet Jackson -- Scream

At the time, THIS was the most expensive music video ever. Michael was always a kind of person that was (atill is) willing to spend money to get the best results in anything.....even if it fail expectation.[b]

I'm curious, how much did Ghosts run him?

ehuffnsd said:

True. The touring $$ do come out of the artists pocket though, i dont know of any artist that the labels pay for their tour costs, so if you have huge entourages and such and stage shows, you really better pray for sponsors. The reason Prince got a big payday for Musicology, was the simplicity of the set, scale pay for the band, and a very small entourage and sound light crew. I dont think Michael could do a stripped down tour like that.

BlackAdder7 said:

lmao!!! when Paul stops buying the rights of music from other artists!!!


I mean really, everyone goes poor Paul (and company)... How can you really feel bad for Paul when he's doing the same exact thing to other people! I call it karma!
[Edited 3/12/07 11:05am]

SoulAlive said:

he can sing.....at least not the last time i saw him live.that was 2001

MJ did the 1995 deal because he needed the cash back then too!! I mean they added the sony catalog but that thing isnt worth much at all!! if he didnt do the 100mil deal back then he would be worth alot more!!
He isnt broke yet but he has taken loans on everything he owns: neverland, mijac, his parents house!! he makes $7mil/yr in royalties but that only last his couple of weeks!!

There is no debating that his finances r pretty messed up its not only RF saying that its a well known fact!!

Right now he has a liquidity problem !! that means all his money is tied up in assets!! but if he sells his holding in ATV neverland and other assets he will have the money to repay all the loans and have some money for couple of yrs b4 he can finally file for bankcrupcy!! couple of yrs down the road u see him doin really bad

If he sells ATV most ppl forget he has to pay a huge tax bill on that!! it went up $500mil in worth so that is taxable income!! federal tax on that $500m is like $150mill and then state tax is up $25mil so that $175 tax bill

so the math on atv sale
sale price $500mil
minus taxes $175mil ( just my guess but i cant be too far off)
minus loans $300mil

net money after $25mil

What will a tour do!! well he will sellout thats for sure!! but MJ is over the top and i am sure he will spend alot of money on effects and it wont be that profitable!!

P2daP said:

I agree. MJ didn't steal the rights he bought them, fair and square, ok he was a little sneaky, but he never stole anything. I guess if Paul McCarthy owe the whole of Motown or something like that, it would be ok? MJ has mess up his finances with his extravagant spending, but the only reason why he still hasn't filed for bankruptcy was because back in the day, when he was still down to earth, he actually made good business decisions like buying the Beatles Catalogue.
[Edited 3/12/07 12:43pm]

RF has been saying this for like 4 years now

I have to do all my private toy shopping online.
[Edited 3/12/07 13:36pm]

bboy87 said:

yeah...its silly...and all the other media outlets pick it up and nothing ever comes of it...kinda like mj was in forclosure...and mj was filing bankrupty...each act would result in a public notice being issued by the courts...which all them media outlets would publish.


but it never happens...cause its all bs.

DiminutiveRocker said:

It's amazing the downright ignorance and hypocrisy when it comes to Michael. Michael is HALF owner of the Sony/ATV catalogue. How can he be blamed for "exploiting" the catalogue when Sony owns the other half? If you are going to claim that MJ is exploiting, then why not be fair(as if that is possible when it comes to Michael) and say that SONY is exploiting the catalogue. In fact, there are Beatles songs that Michael REFUSES to allow for commercialization. I really get pissed when people have this "holier than thou" attitude toward Beatles songs, when Paul McCartney is "whoring" Buddy Holly's songs for every commercial that he can find. Are you trying to tell me that it is alright for Paul to do what he and others are whining about. Another thing that is so hypocritical is would the whiners still be whining if it was someone else who owned the Beatles catalogue and not Michael? You can guarantee that if CBS had gotten the rights( they bid around $42 million, Michael bid $46 million) for this catalogue, they would have been using songs for commercials even more. No one buys a catalogue just to sit and look at them and people need allowing their hate to cloud their judgement. Paul is exploiting Buddy Holly's songs and thousands of others and I haven't heard one complaint from the media, music industry or detractors.
[Edited 3/12/07 21:42pm]
[Edited 3/12/07 21:46pm]

but he just made 1,500,000 in japan.

maybe he doesnt tour cause he can't sing anymore
[Edited 3/13/07 9:15am]

skyecute said:

Oh, relax with your hypocritical accusations. I never said I HATED anyone and I'm sure I'd be just as angry if CBS or whoever was was liscensing all these Beatle songs. And by the way - Michael outbid McCartney as well, even after McCarteny appealed to him as an artist to let him own his own material. But surely if the Beatles - the songwriters themselves - did OWN their own catalog (and I won't even go into why they don't), we would NOT be hearing "Hello Goodbye" on a Target commercial. And by the way - I hope Michael's stuff never gets bought and sold either!

At least he gave Little Richard back his publishing rights