High noon for Madonna and Warner Brothers

NY DAILY NEWS...RUSH AND MOLLOY

It could be high noon for Madonna and Warner Music.

We hear that Madge and her Maverick Records partners are suiting up for a legal
shootout in which they'll seek to end the label's 11-year-old partnership with
Warner Bros. Records.

"It's going to be a nuclear lawsuit," says one source, who predicts that parent
company Time Warner will be named.

Madonna's spokeswoman, Liz Rosenberg, wasn't commenting yesterday. Nor was
Maverick chief operating officer Ronnie Dashev, who is a partner with Madge and
Maverick co-founder Guy Oseary.

The looming litigation may stem from Madonna's wanting to renegotiate
Maverick's joint venture deal.

Warner Music chief Roger Ames and Warner Bros. Records chief Tom Whalley have
argued that the agreement is still in effect, says a source. "They didn't
choose to renegotiate now. There's been some tension." One source speculated
Madonna may want to buy Warner Bros.' stake in Maverick before Time Warner
chief Dick Parsons can sell the Warner Music Group.

"She may think Maverick won't be worth as much with a new owner," says the
source. "Then there's the question of who'll get Maverick's artists," who
include Michelle Branch, Alanis Morissette and Me'shell Ndegeocello.

A lawsuit could also make Madonna an unhappy prisoner of her contract as a
Warner Bros. artist.

A Warner Music rep would say only, "We love Madonna and we love Maverick."

Hopefully it's not true, Warners still release Madonna singles and promote her cds well even if she has flop album because of all her past sucess she brought the label it will be really hard if she started as a new artist on a new label, and all her fans can kiss those remastered and future box sets of her work if it did happen
What is it with big stars fullout with their labels
Does she own her masters?


.
[This message was edited Thu Oct 30 5:07:56 PST 2003 by twink69]

I don't think Madonna is gonna suffer from this !!
Knowing her she's probably gonna fuck warner up the ... in public !

I can't wait !!

Madonna has been at odds with Warners Bros. many times in recent years.In 2001,she wanted to release the song "Impressive Instant" as a single,but Warners felt that it was too edgy and non-commercial.They made plans to release the song "Amazing" instead,and she got so pissed that she eliminated that song from her tour setlist.I also heard that they had a major problem with her controversial "American Life" video,and advised her against making it.


So,understandably,I could see why Madonna may wanna take Maverick Records elsewhere.If she wants to buy WB's stake in the company,though,she may have to shell out alot of money.
[This message was edited Thu Oct 30 5:40:45 PST 2003 by DavidEye]

Deja Vu' - Madonna and WB. (What should she write on her cheek?)

I've got some suggestions. How about:

"old tart"
"sell out"
"wanna-be Brit"
"bad actress"
"can't play any instrument"
"anything for the press"

MartyMcFly said:

(What should she write on her cheek?)

How about:

'I'm a slut, cum on my face!'

abierman said:

Mmmm... I think that'll do nicely!

abierman said:

Brilliant!

abierman said:

You guys are huge Madonna fans, aren't ya?

If this is true, then I have an "I told you so" coming.


I knew a few years back, after her falling out with Freddy DeMann, when she asked Warner Bros. to buy out his share of Maverick that this was going to come back and bite her in the ass. It, effectively, gave them 2/3 ownership in Maverick.


And Maverick is a very valuable asset for Warner. A lot of the company's hit-makers (and also critical darlings) have come out of Maverick. Alanis, Michelle Branch, Me'shell, Candlebox, Deftones... hell, even the Matrix, Austen Powers, Kill Bill and Wedding Singer soundtracks.


As for her being "a new artist at a new label" I wouldn't consider that a problem. She can name her own terms at any label in the world. As for remasters and box sets, if they continued to be the same format that her first 3 remasters were, then they can keep them. Same for that rumored set-up for the box. SUCKY.

As it is, Warner Bros. needs Maverick than Maverick/Madonna needs Warner Bros.



absolutelynore-edits
[This message was edited Thu Oct 30 21:52:03 PST 2003 by AaronUniversal]

Maybe a new record company and some fresh energy would get Madonna's career on the fast track again.

"It's going to be a nuclear lawsuit" I like this sentence - hopefully Madonna will not do the same kind of mistakes/ stupidity as... go girl!

"snatched"

AaronUniversal said:

'Over rated'.

Sorry, just my opinion. Ive never really understood the hype with Madonna. I think she's quite good don't get me wrong but I dont think she's 'all that'.
[This message was edited Sun Nov 2 7:55:36 PST 2003 by JDINTERACTIVE]

laurarichardson said:

No offense,but what the hell are you talking about? Madonna still sells ALOT of records.But since you obviously don't keep track of these things,let me break it down for you.These are her worldwide record sales for her last few albums...

***'American Life'(2003) total worldwide sales= 5 million
***'Greatest Hits Volume 2 (2002) total worldwide sales= 7 million
***'Music' (2000) total worldwide sales= 14 million
***'Ray Of Light' (1998) total worldwide sales= 14 million


So much for your theory that Madonna can't "give her records away"...lol...Trust me,if Madonna were to leave Warners,EVERY other major record company would be fighting for the chance to sign her.

TRON said:

Yeah,it would be kinda exciting to see her make a fresh start at a new label.But somehow,I think she will remain with Warners.I predict that they're gonna do everything to keep her.She's one of their last "big" artists and if she leaves,they are doomed.

I think Davideye should be Madonnas new Asstiant and spiritual advisor...the the ace of hearts me chillee...miss cleo get bad vibes off dat

Christopher said:

DavidEye said:

she can't quote correctly, so why would we expect her to know what she's talking about?

Material Girl fights Warner over label

By David Kirkpatrick
The New York Times
The International Herald Tribune
Monday, November 17, 2003

After 20 years and billions of dollars in music sales,
Madonna's relationship with Time Warner is showing signs
of strain over the future of her label, Maverick Records,
while negotiations over the value of her Time Warner
stock options lie just ahead.

Maverick, whose artists include Alanis Morissette and
Michelle Branch, is one of the biggest successes among
the dozens of recording joint ventures often called
"vanity labels," that major music companies have created
for their marquee stars over the past few decades.

But Madonna is locked in a dispute with Time Warner's
Warner Music division over whether it will continue to
fund Maverick after their partnership agreement expires
at the end of next year, people involved in the
discussions said last week.

It is a battle that pits an aging pop icon against a
once-dominant music business that has fallen on hard
times. Madonna is now 45. Some of her recent albums,
although still selling at levels most stars would envy,
have failed to match her biggest hits of the 1980's and
'90s. The survival and relative success of her label is a
matter of personal pride, several people who work with
her said, and it provides a base of operations to her
close friend, protégé and partner, Guy Oseary, a talent
scout who has worked for her since he was 17.

The Maverick talks also are a prelude to another set of
difficult negotiations that will test the extent of
Madonna's influence at Time Warner and its Warner Music
unit. In 1999 the pop star received options in Time
Warner stock initially valued according to a complicated
formula at $20 million to $25 million. The options might
have been worth many times as much if Time Warner's share
price had risen as much as Wall Street analysts then
predicted. But since AOL took over Time Warner in 2001,
the stock has plunged, making her options nearly
worthless.

Unlike most disappointed shareholders or Time Warner
employees, Madonna has other recourse because of her star
status. She is expected to seek payment equal to the
options' $25 million initial estimated value. To do so,
she can rely on various forms of ongoing leverage, such
as the ability to deliver or withhold her records. . . .

This is only an excerpt -- read the complete news at:

http://www.iht.com/articles/117884.html

read the whole thing here

http://www.absolutemadonn...news.shtml

Madonna Fights Warner Over Maverick Label

After 20 years and billions of dollars in music sales, Madonna's relationship with Time Warner is showing signs of strain over the future of her label, Maverick Records, while negotiations over the value of her Time Warner stock options lie just ahead.

Maverick, whose artists include Alanis Morissette and Michelle Branch, is one of the biggest successes among the dozens of recording joint ventures often called "vanity labels," that major music companies have created for their marquee stars over the past few decades.

But Madonna is locked in a dispute with Time Warner's Warner Music division over whether it will continue to fund Maverick after their partnership agreement expires at the end of next year, people involved in the discussions said last week.

It is a battle that pits an aging pop icon against a once-dominant music business that has fallen on hard times. Madonna is now 45. Some of her recent albums, although still selling at levels most stars would envy, have failed to match her biggest hits of the 1980's and '90s. The survival and relative success of her label is a matter of personal pride, several people who work with her said, and it provides a base of operations to her close friend, protégé and partner, Guy Oseary, a talent scout who has worked for her since he was 17.

The Maverick talks also are a prelude to another set of difficult negotiations that will test the extent of Madonna's influence at Time Warner and its Warner Music unit. In 1999 the pop star received options in Time Warner stock initially valued according to a complicated formula at $20 million to $25 million. The options might have been worth many times as much if Time Warner's share price had risen as much as Wall Street analysts then predicted. But since AOL took over Time Warner in 2001, the stock has plunged, making her options nearly worthless.

Unlike most disappointed shareholders or Time Warner employees, Madonna has other recourse because of her star status. She is expected to seek payment equal to the options' $25 million initial estimated value. To do so, she can rely on various forms of ongoing leverage, such as the ability to deliver or withhold her records.

Warner Music executives say that the options were just that and not a guarantee. But in arguing with Madonna they risk alienating one of the label's biggest and best-known stars at a moment when Time Warner has put the division up for sale.

About two months ago, Madonna met with Richard Parsons, chairman and chief executive of Time Warner, at his office in Rockefeller Center to discuss the matter personally, but they failed to resolve the differences.

Now her high-profile entertainment lawyers, Alan Grubman in New York and Bertram Fields in Los Angeles, are threatening suit for breach of contract.

No suit has been filed so far, and executives at Time Warner dismiss the threats as a baseless bargaining tactic. Spokeswomen for Madonna and Warner Music declined to comment on any talks.

Maverick was born 11 years ago as the brain-child of Madonna and her longtime manager Freddy DeMann. The new label was announced with grand plans to expand beyond music into movies and books, although that never happened. Madonna said at the time she envisioned an "artistic think tank" that would be a cross between the 1920's German art institute Bauhaus and Andy Warhol's legendary Factory studio.

Maverick was notable for both its early success and internal discord. In the early 1990's, Madonna herself was actively involved in running the label, going to clubs, listening to tapes, and giving opinions as well as receiving updates on business matters. But principle responsibility belonged to DeMann, who brought in Oseary to help spot new talent.

Oseary was an outgoing Israeli-born immigrant who even as a teenager made no secret of his ambition to become a well-connected Hollywood power broker. He had befriended DeMann's daughter at Beverly Hills High School, and DeMann gave him an early break by bringing him into his artist management business.

Oseary demonstrated a keen ear in Maverick, signing the techno band Prodigy. But his greatest achievement came in 1994, at age 22, when he found a little-known 20-year-old Canadian singer, Morissette. Her first U.S. album, "Jagged Little Pill," became one of the most successful debut records of all time, selling more than 28 million copies after it initial release.

Its success brought both windfall profits and turmoil. Madonna grew closer to Oseary and more distant from DeMann, people who worked with them said. She gave Oseary a stake in the Maverick partnership over DeMann's objections, and in 1996 she dropped DeMann as business manager. DeMann reportedly favored selling the business to Warner while it was at a peak, but Oseary argued it could continue to grow.

The label has since had few major hits from its artists, with the exception of Michelle Branch. But Maverick is still saddled with the heavy financial burden of paying out DeMann for his highly valued stake, Time Warner executives said.

After his mentor's ouster, Oseary took over principle responsibility for the label. Madonna has grown less directly involved over the years, although people who work with her say she speaks often to Oseary and receives updates on Maverick's business. People who work with Madonna say that Maverick has lost money for only a couple of years, but Warner Music executives say it has not made money since the mid-1990's. Since 1999, the label has sold its music publishing division to Warner Music for an undisclosed sum and has cut its staff by roughly half in a series of layoffs.

Ronnie Dashev, chief operating officer of Maverick Records, said, "Despite the fact that we do have substantial differences with Time Warner right now, we are hoping to be able to resolve them."

If Madonna and Warner cannot come to terms, she and her partners in Maverick can demand that Warner buy out their stake when the contract expires, but the two sides disagree sharply about what the label is worth. People involved in the discussions say that Madonna's business associates put the value of their 60 percent stake at $60 million; executives of Warner Music say it may be worth less than half that amount given the current state of the music business and Maverick's poor financial performance in recent years.

Maverick, of course, has been a source of leverage in its talks with Time Warner because of Madonna. "She started this company with Freddy DeMann 11 years ago and she continues to be involved," Caresse Henry, Madonna's business manager, said. "She is committed to the success of her record label."

In the pop world, though, even Madonna may be mortal. Her album released this year, "American Life," has sold 3.5 million CD's - less than half the sales of her 2000 hit "Music" and less than a third the sales of "Ray of Light" in 1998. At her current pace, she will fulfill her contract for two more albums of new material in three years, when she is 48. And few female pop stars, with the exception of Cher, have been able to continue recording platinum albums much beyond that.

Yet very few singers of any age sell three million copies of an album. People who work with Madonna note that her most recent album came out in the difficult climate of the war in Iraq, and that her 2001 concert tour sold more than $100 million in tickets, four times as much as the previous tour.

A spokeswoman for Madonna, Liz Rosenberg, warned not to judge her career by one album. "She went on T.R.L. this week," she said, referring to MTV's popular request show, Total Request Live. "So what? She is 45. They still love her. Has she sold the number of records she used to sell? No. But I still believe she is an unbelievable force in the music business, and her influence is tremendous. Madonna has been said to be over so many times, and each time she comes back bigger and better."

source: New York Times

Interesting article.I wonder how this will play out.If Madonna leaves Warners and takes Maverick with her,Warners will be in big trouble.They will lose one of their biggest artists.

I love this part...


"Yet very few singers of any age sell three million copies of an album.People who work with Madonna note that her 2001 concert tour sold more than $100 Million in ticket sales."


Very good point.People love to look at the 'American Life' CD and insist that's she's over.But I'm sure there are many forgotten artists who would love to be "over" the way Madonna is...lol

DavidEye said:

good point.



if you're "over" it's assumed, and no one talks about it. they don't write articles this long about people who are "over"

Thanks to Aaron for posting the entire article.

It will be interesting to see how this shapes up.

P has stayed independent although I don't know what is going on with the talks with Universal. So has TTD. Courtney is back with a Major. Lenny is with a Major.

Artist's like Producer/Songwriter Linda Perry believe that it is too difficult to go independent because you need the distribution and radio. I'll post her interview with this quote what I can find it.

Ani has stayed independent. I'm not sure if MJ is re-signing with Sony or heading over to Dreamworks.

So there are a lot of different sides of the coin as far as Independent VS. Going with a Major Label.

Thanks for adding good info to this thread.