don't be silly, "hard worker" ... of course they shall earn their money - but not without valuable return!
*bangmyheadindisbelief*
Thread
Posts in chronological order
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Holly2003 wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Record Companies need to make a profit. is that unreasonable?[/QUOTE]
And QP most of all. ;)
A 2 cd set for £10 is reasonable.
A box set of 13 cardboard sleeved singles for £20 is reasonable.
What this box set does is that it MAXIMISES the profit.
QP (not the record company!) has done the math and come up with a figure of 10,000 Queen fans willing to pay for the singles.
Instead of releasing them as one boxset of £100, they can spread out half of the material on four box sets of £40 each.
That's a pretty good mark-up, and everybody else except the fans are winners.
To you that might be reasonable, but to me that's cold-blooded exploitation.
And QP most of all. ;)
A 2 cd set for £10 is reasonable.
A box set of 13 cardboard sleeved singles for £20 is reasonable.
What this box set does is that it MAXIMISES the profit.
QP (not the record company!) has done the math and come up with a figure of 10,000 Queen fans willing to pay for the singles.
Instead of releasing them as one boxset of £100, they can spread out half of the material on four box sets of £40 each.
That's a pretty good mark-up, and everybody else except the fans are winners.
To you that might be reasonable, but to me that's cold-blooded exploitation.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Negative Creep wrote:
EMI release what QP delivers to them. EMI have little control over what they can release - otherwise the anthologies would have been out years ago I'd imagine. I'm sure EMI would love to release previously unreleased Queen material - QP do not. This is a good lesson for record companies though - never let the artist own the copyright to sound recordings! And if EMI had owned all the recordings and had them in their own vaults, far less masters would have gone missing.[/QUOTE]
I disagree.
EMI decide how big a boxset should be, NOT Queen.
Queen put forward the idea, EMI decide how much money they want to spend on it and what format it should take.
The original boxset was to have been 12 CDs. EMI said 10. Now we get this....
I truly believe EMI have decided upon this current format, not Queen.
EMI release what QP delivers to them. EMI have little control over what they can release - otherwise the anthologies would have been out years ago I'd imagine. I'm sure EMI would love to release previously unreleased Queen material - QP do not. This is a good lesson for record companies though - never let the artist own the copyright to sound recordings! And if EMI had owned all the recordings and had them in their own vaults, far less masters would have gone missing.[/QUOTE]
I disagree.
EMI decide how big a boxset should be, NOT Queen.
Queen put forward the idea, EMI decide how much money they want to spend on it and what format it should take.
The original boxset was to have been 12 CDs. EMI said 10. Now we get this....
I truly believe EMI have decided upon this current format, not Queen.
how did that bold text happen?
I think Tero said it all "I guess all this just goes to show that one can never set their expectations on QP low enough... They can always pass under the bar like a world-class limbo artist".
Why is it so hard for Queen to release something new ( perhaps fresh) and exciting. I just dont get it. Im disappointed, and i save £££ ofcourse, but i would gladly spend £££ on Queen if it was quality.
The worst part is that the limited press of 10k higly likely will be sould out......
Why is it so hard for Queen to release something new ( perhaps fresh) and exciting. I just dont get it. Im disappointed, and i save £££ ofcourse, but i would gladly spend £££ on Queen if it was quality.
The worst part is that the limited press of 10k higly likely will be sould out......
Disagree all you like - QP have no interest in Queen fans. I think it's highly unlikely EMI declined what was apparently originally proposed and requested a replica singles boxset spread over several boxes. I imagine EMI have an extremely hard time getting anything out of QP. As far as I'm aware, QP are free to release material via whatever means they wish - they aren't under contract to EMI.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Negative Creep wrote: [/QUOTENAME]As far as I'm aware, QP are free to release material via whatever means they wish - they aren't under contract to EMI.[/QUOTE]
I don't think it's QUITE that simple (and would imagine they have some sort of an "exclusive deal" with EMI), but I do think QP is much more than an innocent pawn struggling against the evil recording company.
EMI isn't in a position to dictate its more successful artists what to release, and especially not to those who own the rights to their own material.
They might request a series of 50 singles, but Queen have no obligation to give their songs into such a release. (And vice versa, Queen can ask to release a 10 disc archive set and be turned down by EMI.)
The bottom line is that EMI needs QP's co-operation to make a profit from the Queen material, and QP is more than willing to give it.
I don't think it's QUITE that simple (and would imagine they have some sort of an "exclusive deal" with EMI), but I do think QP is much more than an innocent pawn struggling against the evil recording company.
EMI isn't in a position to dictate its more successful artists what to release, and especially not to those who own the rights to their own material.
They might request a series of 50 singles, but Queen have no obligation to give their songs into such a release. (And vice versa, Queen can ask to release a 10 disc archive set and be turned down by EMI.)
The bottom line is that EMI needs QP's co-operation to make a profit from the Queen material, and QP is more than willing to give it.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Tero wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Holly2003 wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Record Companies need to make a profit. is that unreasonable?[/QUOTE]
And QP most of all. ;)
A 2 cd set for £10 is reasonable.
A box set of 13 cardboard sleeved singles for £20 is reasonable.
What this box set does is that it MAXIMISES the profit.
QP (not the record company!) has done the math and come up with a figure of 10,000 Queen fans willing to pay for the singles.
Instead of releasing them as one boxset of £100, they can spread out half of the material on four box sets of £40 each.
That's a pretty good mark-up, and everybody else except the fans are winners.
To you that might be reasonable, but to me that's cold-blooded exploitation.[/QUOTE]
Obviously I wasn't clear enough but I really can't be bothered repeating myself.
And QP most of all. ;)
A 2 cd set for £10 is reasonable.
A box set of 13 cardboard sleeved singles for £20 is reasonable.
What this box set does is that it MAXIMISES the profit.
QP (not the record company!) has done the math and come up with a figure of 10,000 Queen fans willing to pay for the singles.
Instead of releasing them as one boxset of £100, they can spread out half of the material on four box sets of £40 each.
That's a pretty good mark-up, and everybody else except the fans are winners.
To you that might be reasonable, but to me that's cold-blooded exploitation.[/QUOTE]
Obviously I wasn't clear enough but I really can't be bothered repeating myself.
I think we should all take into consideration that they probabaly can do something different in the future. Something more along the lines of what was originally intended with perhaps a new music format...
This will hold some of the public over for a little while longer in the meantime.
This will hold some of the public over for a little while longer in the meantime.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Holly2003 wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Tero wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
To you that might be reasonable, but to me that's cold-blooded exploitation.[/QUOTE]
Obviously I wasn't clear enough but I really can't be bothered repeating myself.[/QUOTE]
I DID get, and there's that "clue" about it for you to read again.
"To YOU". "To ME".
To you that might be reasonable, but to me that's cold-blooded exploitation.[/QUOTE]
Obviously I wasn't clear enough but I really can't be bothered repeating myself.[/QUOTE]
I DID get, and there's that "clue" about it for you to read again.
"To YOU". "To ME".
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Tero wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Holly2003 wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Tero wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
To you that might be reasonable, but to me that's cold-blooded exploitation.[/QUOTE]
Obviously I wasn't clear enough but I really can't be bothered repeating myself.[/QUOTE]
I DID get, and there's that "clue" about it for you to read again.
"To YOU". "To ME".[/QUOTE]
Whatever.
To you that might be reasonable, but to me that's cold-blooded exploitation.[/QUOTE]
Obviously I wasn't clear enough but I really can't be bothered repeating myself.[/QUOTE]
I DID get, and there's that "clue" about it for you to read again.
"To YOU". "To ME".[/QUOTE]
Whatever.
All the songs in on 2 cds of 74 minutes.
13 cds?.....BIG TIME MONEY MONEY!!!
13 cds?.....BIG TIME MONEY MONEY!!!
Did you all read my previous post? If anything this is a big time limited release anyway. It's only 10,000 copies WORLDWIDE...right? It's almost a non-issue. It's just a didley for the meantime. As they say...a "one off".
All the songs in on 2 cds of 74 minutes.
13 cds?.....BIG TIME MONEY MONEY!!
13 cds?.....BIG TIME MONEY MONEY!!