Cerebus said:

mjwifey4l said:

google it please.... end of discussion.

YOU don't get to decide when a discussion is over. If you're going to state "facts", provide a source. Why should I look something up when you're the one posting it? And I will say AGAIN, since you keep speaking of him in the first person, MICHAEL JACKSON IS DEAD! "mjs net worth..." He has NO NET WORTH. HE'S DEAD!

Now, first of all, show me ANYTHING that claims Michael Jackson's net worth was EVER a couple billion dollars. Before or after his death. Second, quoted from that linked MTV article, "his estate has generated nearly $1 billion in the past year". OK, so where does it say that they've EARNED $1 billion? Where does it say that $1 billion is net? It doesn't. There are costs involved in production, promotion and distribution of ALL those products. And there are MANY hands in the profit pot. His estate GENERATING nearly $1 billion does not mean dead MJ or anybody else actually EARNED $1 billion. Are you getting this yet?

FYI, SamiDion, you're wrong on both counts. His estate isn't worth over a billion just because you want it to be, and the STICKY clearly states, "Discuss Everything and Anything MJ"

Cerebus

100% correct. I'm a huge MJ fan, would have loved for him to be a billionaire and thought he could have actually been one if his finances/deals were handled properly but the fact remains he wasn't. Never hovered in that arena. Not in the 70s, not at his peak in the 80s, not in the 90s, and certaintly not into the new millenium. And to mjwifey, I have googled it. And it doesn't support your claim. Generating $1 billion isn't the same as pocketing the same amount. I don't know if these loons understand that.

Cerebus said:

YOU don't get to decide when a discussion is over. If you're going to state "facts", provide a source. Why should I look something up when you're the one posting it? And I will say AGAIN, since you keep speaking of him in the first person, MICHAEL JACKSON IS DEAD! "mjs net worth..." He has NO NET WORTH. HE'S DEAD!

Now, first of all, show me ANYTHING that claims Michael Jackson's net worth was EVER a couple billion dollars. Before or after his death. Second, quoted from that linked MTV article, "his estate has generated nearly $1 billion in the past year". OK, so where does it say that they've EARNED $1 billion? Where does it say that $1 billion is net? It doesn't. There are costs involved in production, promotion and distribution of ALL those products. And there are MANY hands in the profit pot. His estate GENERATING nearly $1 billion does not mean dead MJ or anybody else actually EARNED $1 billion. Are you getting this yet?

FYI, SamiDion, you're wrong on both counts. His estate isn't worth over a billion just because you want it to be, and the STICKY clearly states, "Discuss Everything and Anything MJ"

The bold confuses me. I thought that dead rich people/celebrities still have net worth, especially if their estates still continue to generate money. It's a business, some examples being the estates of Rodgers & Hammerstein and Elvis Presely.

Also, even though he may have had a cashflow problem, I thought that most of MJ's money was in his assets, which was all added up to a billion dollars or more. If he had sold them, then...we wouldn't be having this discussion right now.

This ones goes into a little more depth:

http://www.myjourneytobil...naire.html

Though, I would be hard pressed to find some human being out there walking around with one billion dollars in cold hard cash.

Cerebus said:

mjwifey4l said:

google it please.... end of discussion.

YOU don't get to decide when a discussion is over. If you're going to state "facts", provide a source. Why should I look something up when you're the one posting it? And I will say AGAIN, since you keep speaking of him in the first person, MICHAEL JACKSON IS DEAD! "mjs net worth..." He has NO NET WORTH. HE'S DEAD!

Now, first of all, show me ANYTHING that claims Michael Jackson's net worth was EVER a couple billion dollars. Before or after his death. Second, quoted from that linked MTV article, "his estate has generated nearly $1 billion in the past year". OK, so where does it say that they've EARNED $1 billion? Where does it say that $1 billion is net? It doesn't. There are costs involved in production, promotion and distribution of ALL those products. And there are MANY hands in the profit pot. His estate GENERATING nearly $1 billion does not mean dead MJ or anybody else actually EARNED $1 billion. Are you getting this yet?

FYI, SamiDion, you're wrong on both counts. His estate isn't worth over a billion just because you want it to be, and the STICKY clearly states, "Discuss Everything and Anything MJ"

actually it IS over wen i say itz over and i speak in first person wen reffering to mj cuz i can and a dare u 2 stop me, BITCH stfu.... if ur gonna be that ignorant and keep saying "show me the facts, show me the facts" and im tellin u wher 2 find facts then stop begging me and get them ur self cuz i kno wat im talkin about... and dnt reply back kuz i sure wont,

mjwifey4l said:

Cerebus said:

YOU don't get to decide when a discussion is over. If you're going to state "facts", provide a source. Why should I look something up when you're the one posting it? And I will say AGAIN, since you keep speaking of him in the first person, MICHAEL JACKSON IS DEAD! "mjs net worth..." He has NO NET WORTH. HE'S DEAD!

Now, first of all, show me ANYTHING that claims Michael Jackson's net worth was EVER a couple billion dollars. Before or after his death. Second, quoted from that linked MTV article, "his estate has generated nearly $1 billion in the past year". OK, so where does it say that they've EARNED $1 billion? Where does it say that $1 billion is net? It doesn't. There are costs involved in production, promotion and distribution of ALL those products. And there are MANY hands in the profit pot. His estate GENERATING nearly $1 billion does not mean dead MJ or anybody else actually EARNED $1 billion. Are you getting this yet?

FYI, SamiDion, you're wrong on both counts. His estate isn't worth over a billion just because you want it to be, and the STICKY clearly states, "Discuss Everything and Anything MJ"

actually it IS over wen i say itz over and i speak in first person wen reffering to mj cuz i can and a dare u 2 stop me, BITCH stfu.... if ur gonna be that ignorant and keep saying "show me the facts, show me the facts" and im tellin u wher 2 find facts then stop begging me and get them ur self cuz i kno wat im talkin about... and dnt reply back kuz i sure wont,

Fool.

Cerebus said:

jcurley said:

What I've always wondered is about Purple Rain. It is Purple productions or something like that-what was Prince's take of thatmovie. I mean it gossed over $80m in the US alone (and this is 1984)-then factor in video sales and the rights to TV. No artist in history has produced that volume of cash in a 12 mt period

Purple Rain-the album

PR-the film

PR-the tour

PR-the video

PR-the live video-(15 weeeks at no 1 in the US)

Did Prince have a decent slice of each of these or would the live video etc be treated on the same level as the album % wise.

Prince (and the Revolution, one would assume) were only getting pieces of those pies. I'd be willing to bet a good number of these tours brought in more money than everything associated with PR combined. Highest grossing concert ...n history.

Ha-i've looked at the website. It is just that I remember the PR tour being huge and major venues. However looking at these tours it appears they did more dates. Why do you say they get a "Piece of the pie"? This is why I am asking about PR productuions-surely Prince was part of the production company-therefore a major rather a recipient receiver of revenue. Also in terms of the tour isn't he just "I am the artist, yo are the backing band"-would it not be the case that Prince would earn a far greater proportion than those listed

jcurley said:

Cerebus said:

Prince (and the Revolution, one would assume) were only getting pieces of those pies. I'd be willing to bet a good number of these tours brought in more money than everything associated with PR combined. Highest grossing concert ...n history.

Ha-i've looked at the website. It is just that I remember the PR tour being huge and major venues. However looking at these tours it appears they did more dates. Why do you say they get a "Piece of the pie"? This is why I am asking about PR productuions-surely Prince was part of the production company-therefore a major rather a recipient receiver of revenue. Also in terms of the tour isn't he just "I am the artist, yo are the backing band"-would it not be the case that Prince would earn a far greater proportion than those listed

Warner Bros. footed the funds for Purple Rain and while Purple Films is listed as a producer, I bet the bulk of the money went back to Warner.

sosgemini said:

jcurley said:

Ha-i've looked at the website. It is just that I remember the PR tour being huge and major venues. However looking at these tours it appears they did more dates. Why do you say they get a "Piece of the pie"? This is why I am asking about PR productuions-surely Prince was part of the production company-therefore a major rather a recipient receiver of revenue. Also in terms of the tour isn't he just "I am the artist, yo are the backing band"-would it not be the case that Prince would earn a far greater proportion than those listed

Warner Bros. footed the funds for Purple Rain and while Purple Films is listed as a producer, I bet the bulk of the money went back to Warner.

You'll be correct. Warner's still counting their money from Purple Rain.

Paul McCartney's wealth was due more to his publishing company. He owns 25,000 songs, none of these have anything to do with The Beatles, except early songs that had been under another publisher. Jackson never owned the entire Beatle catalog.. but McCartney owns the licensing to "Annie" which means he got a peace of Jay-Z's "Hard Knock Life" and "Grease", which is one of the best selling soundtracks of all time as well as the Broadway revival put money in his pocket. Add to that the Buddy Holly catalog, and the Frankie Valli catalog (ever hear of the "Jersey Boys" musical?, he gets that.). "Unchained Melody"?

And then there's The Beatles. The Cirque musical, all recordings, 1/4 publishing (the Beatles publishing is broken down into 1/3). Basically, Sony has the majority ownership of the publishing, so they can license the songs to "Glee", but using the songs themselves would have to have general consent.. McCartney wasn't allowed to release a Pepper era song because Harrison objected to it, and his widow has also objected to it. But something like Cirque or Rock Band, was approved across the board.

The Beatles' current representative used to work for Sony. I think this is makes any future projects, remixes, etc a lot easier to get approval. But they're dragging feet on the download versions of their music. McCartney had mentioned a possibility of the catalog being released on Blu Ray.

But when Michael and McCartney went head to head for the publishing, I've always had a theory that Yoko and Michael Jackson had a secret deal worked out, and she put some of her money into Jackson's effort in buying the catalog.

U2 is wealthy because of the constant touring, their ownership of Dublin hotels, bars, and clubs, ownership of their master tapes and publishing.

Bon Jovi makes a lot of money in touring, and Jon's never been divorced. Neither has Bono.

When you're talking about Sean Combs, Jennifer Lopez, Mariah Carey, Britney Spears, also keep in mind they have cologne and perfume lines that line their pockets with a ton of dough, as well as clothing lines. This is where pop musicians make the bulk of their money outside of music.

Also throw in properties, stocks, various investments, wineries, liquor, energy drinks, race cars, art (their own and others) etc.

.