he Financial Times publishes today an article about Warner Music in which Madonna is also mentioned.


Shares in Warner Music fell to a record low on Monday – more than 60 per cent below their peak for the year – as the last quoted recorded music company became the focus for investors' bearishness about the industry's prospects.

Last month's decision by Warner, which is due to report third-quarter earnings today, to drop its seven-year pursuit of EMI has raised questions about its prospects in the absence of a merger, which could have provided cost-saving opportunities and built a stronger rival to the larger Universal Music and Sony BMG.

Its shares, which peaked at $27.24 late last year, were trading at $10.67, down 3 per cent, on Monday, after analysts at Citigroup lowered their price target from $19 to $10 per share.

Warner is expected to report today that its US market share is at its highest level for a decade, at 20.4 per cent, and its share of revenues coming from digital distribution continues to rise. However, such strengths have been overshadowed by continued bad news about CD sales, still the most important part of the recorded music market, and by concerns that Warner may have to pay up to keep some of its most valuable artists.

Sales of physical formats are down 19 per cent so far this year in the US, Warner's largest market. Announcements in recent weeks showing that Universal and Sony BMG have increased recorded music sales in the face of these conditions have raised concerns that smaller groups may be suffering disproportionately.

Warner is also understood to be fighting to retain one of its best known artists. Madonna, who is signed to the group for one more studio album and a greatest hits album, is understood to have held talks with Live Nation that could see her record future albums with the concert promoter.

"We'd love to keep her and we'll make an aggressive bid," said one person close to Warner. Should Madonna leave Warner, the company would retain her recorded music catalogue and publishing rights but her defection would be a symbolic blow.

The same person denied industry rumours that Warner's falling share price could trigger a shake-up in its executive ranks. The position of Lyor Cohen, head of its US recorded music business, has been strengthened by chart successes from Linkin Park, Nickelback and Michael Bublé.

Edgar Bronfman Jr, chairman and chief executive, is one of its largest shareholders, having invested in the private equity-backed buy-out from Time Warner in November 2003.

Less than a week after Terra Firma secured control of EMI, Warner executives are still thought to be interested in a combination with EMI Music, should the private equity group decide to sell on the recorded music division, as expected.

However, the downturn in the CD market could make Warner's investors more wary of investing more in recorded music.

On Monday, the group announced its latest deal to bulk up Warner Chappell, its music publishing business, with the acquisition of Non-Stop Music for an undisclosed sum. Non-Stop has licensed music to films such as Pirates of the Caribbean, Harry Potter and Shrek 3.

Mr Bronfman is expected to tell investors today that healthier areas of the music business, such as publishing, strategic marketing and brand management, are likely to become a growing focus.

Source: The Financial Times via www.msnbc.msn.com

MikeMatronik said:

I heard that the LiveNation deal she's considering could be worth $160 million.Still,I hope she stays with Warners.When artists jump from label to label,their catalog can get mistreated,resulting in weak compilations created without the involvement of the artist.

SoulAlive said:

Madonna would never allow that to happen. She owns those master...she's not as dumb as a certain midget.

according to a recent article in the Daily Mail,Madonna has big things planned:

After a short break with her film-director husband Guy Richie and their children,Madonna will then be working non-stop until mid-2008.The finishing touches still have to be added to her new album.After the new record is released in November,she is getting ready for a world tour that kicks off next June,then she is launching a 25th anniversary box set and a set of 12 children's books.

MikeMatronik said:

Does she really own her masters?

SoulAlive said:

She's Madonna...I think this answers it

MikeMatronik said:

bullshit madonna will not own her masters what artist does these days well a certain smart ass midget does

cream72 said:

Madonna OWNS them
U2 OWNS them
Pet Shop Boys OWNS them
David Bowie OWNS then

Can I go on?

MikeMatronik said:

If she owns them,let's send her a note asking her to remaster 'Like A Prayer'

MikeMatronik said:

okay what i dont understand if warners let madonna own them but prince wanted to and they wouldnt let him i like to know what the fuck did she do to gain that right (on second thought i dont wanna know )

i don't think she owns her masters. where did you guys get that info?

maybe she owns the masters from her albums since she set up that joint
record company within warners. what's it called maverick?

but i don't think she owns masters for anything up to like a prayer.

cream72 said:

Because was a complete dickhead about it..simple as that he went in crying like a bitch when HE was the one that signed that contract without looking at the fine print..HE was the one that allowed it... HE didnt know it until someone put the bug in his ear about it... so to put it PRINCE DONT KNOW SHIT!!!

cream72 said:

Madonna was signed to Sire...not to Warner. WB was the distributor of the early Madonna albums.

MikeMatronik said:

warner owned Sire and still does

I think if Madonna would own her masters then GHV2 probably wouldn't have been released...

cream72 said:

owning ones own masters is not a far fetched thing...U2 were able to negotiate a contract that allowed them to claim the masters to a large percentage of their early work...prince was just horrible at negotiating.

cha know, if madge doesnt own her masters now then wb has an excellent bargaining chip.

MikeMatronik said:

I question this.

SoulAlive said:

I question this too. I had heard about the books, though not 12 of them...and of course the new album. But a tour as well? I know she has been the touring bunny for a while and can certainly sell tix, but I would think that she'd take a break a little from touring.

Though the 25th anniversary box set is interesting (and needed).

SoulAlive said:

I think she might need a certain midgets permission for that one. Didn't Prince write Like a Prayer, Love SOng and played the music on Act of contrition?

IstenSzek said:

One does have to wonder why much of her catalog has not been updated with remasters...just the first 3.

IAintTheOne said:

He wasn't a dickhead about it. He simply didn't realize it until after he signed. And it wasn't any real realization either. That was the standard contract at the time.

sosgemini said:

Now I think this is probably a clearer picture of what really happened. I'm willing to bet he tried negotiating with SLAVE written on his face.

superspaceboy said:

She toured after LAV after TB after LAP and before Breathless was released and after Erotica.

She would have toured after BS but got the role for Evita and was in discussions for a tour after ROL but opted for the Next Best Thing.

Even though during "Truth or Dare" she said she never wanted to tour again after the Girlie Show she stated something like if you ever hear me say I don't want to tour I'm lying.

superspaceboy said:

He co-wrote Love Song.

Patrick Leonnard has confirmed Madge came to him with the lyrics and melody of Like A Prayer.

And why would he have say over an album that isn't his, it's a guest appereance?

superspaceboy said:

same reason WBR hasn't remastered Prince's for some reason they need the artist permission and if she doesn't want to give it they can't.

How did this rumour about Prince writing Like A Prayer start? It seems to never go away. Prince did not write all the great songs from the 80s people

MikeMatronik said:

Heres a few more that own them

Bon Jovi
Elton John
Paul McCartney (not beatle stuff)
Mr. Springsteen too!

I do think Madonna should leave Warners though, as i feel that Dylan and Springsteen need to leave Sony. Labels just cant get it done anymore unless your 20 years old with some stupid mundane song, then they can get you played and on magazines 24/7. But Madonna should leave.
[Edited 8/7/07 13:24pm]

LightOfArt said:

because there is a rumored cover in the vault.

but you don't see people claiming he wrote One of Us.