Apparently Queen's contract is finishing up 2010. Is this a good thing for us?
God knows, EMI has played it very safe the last few years. Looking at the Montreal disc is proof of that - another company had to clean up the video and release it on dvd/blu-ray while EMI just released the cd.
So, what might another company provide? At the moment there are the unreleased anthologies, which could be a nice money spinning carrot, or the possibility of a new album of unreleased tracks with Fred on them.
In my wildest dreams, they'll be picked up by Universal, and each album will be released as a double disc set. The love and attention that The Who or Elton John releases are getting is phenomenal.
What do other people think?
Simon
Togg · Member since
That depends on what Queen themselves want to do in the future, Rogers was not happy about the promotion of Cosmos, but it doesn't mean they will not sign a new contract with EMI again.
Lots of artists have moved from EMI recently so I would not be surprised if they did, but unless they are going to do much more in the future there is little to make another label rush to grab them. EMI will still hold the rights to the older stuff to some degree I would imagine.
Benn · Member since
Absolutely a good thing. It's entirely likely that QPL may have been keeping us all hanging on for all these years and just waiting for the opportunity to be able to release the archive material with a label such as Universal, who are more "in tune" with the re-issue market.
If they have been, then more power to their elbows.
You can just imagine the bidding war waiting in the wings for the band's material. Could be an ugly business!
onevsion · Member since
Very good thing indeed. In the video message on the convention Roger Taylor openly spoke about how he felt about the shitty promotion EMI did for the Cosmos Rocks album (at 4:34 minutes) [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1RiZjNPagk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1RiZjNPagk[/url]
Maybe things change in the future and hopefully Queen (or what's left of it) sees that they don't really need a record company anymore these days... Would be great if they will release nice footage from the archives!
cmsdrums · Member since
I suppose that they (QPL) own the music (apart from a few early tracks?), and so once their licensing agreement runs out with EMI I'm sure they would be free to licence it to another company. They did it in 1990 with the back catalogue going to Hollywood Records, so it wouldn't be such a rash move.
Indeed it would be good to see a new company try to make their mark with anthology and archive sets, but if a new record company did take the back catalogue, it would doubtless mean quite a few new Greatest Hits sets in order for them to make their investment worthwhile.
Queenrockyou · Member since
I don't know a lot in that field, but is it forced that "Queen" and "Queen + Paul Rodgers" are parts of the same contract ? I would find it logical if it was a separate project and contract, moreover because Paul Rodgers isn't part of Queen. Therefore, If it's the QPR contract that ends, then no harm. If it Queen's contract, then I suppose that means EMI will stay (try to) master of the material up to 1986 (at least), and all the unreleased thing. And as next year will be Queen's 40th birthday and a bunch of releases could appear, I think EMI will do the task and won't give someone else's the opportunity to cash on it. And to be honest, who will spend so many money to buy the (expensive I suppose) rights of an artist who was successful in the past but will probably never release anything new ? Indeed, only the back catalogue could be of any interest, or as said a good lot of Greatest Hits...
But it's true indeed that Universal should be a good partner. They can make good products and promotion... At least when they want to !!
Regards,
Olivier,
Belgium.
Ps : how do you know the EMI contract ends in 2010 ?
MercuryArts · Member since
If Roger was unhappy w/ how EMI promoted TCR then he must have been incensed over how Hollywood Records has "promoted" TCR and anything else they released in the last 18 years.
Vali · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]ruth.olivier wrote:
[/b]
Ps : how do you know the EMI contract ends in 2010 ?
[/QUOTE]
Hi Olivier !
this subject has been discussed lately at the QOL Forum, where "Kes", who seems to be in good knowledge of what's cooking inside Queen's kitchen, reported this contract ending with EMI in 2010.
The reason why the Queen front has been so "steady" (in terms of [b]really interesting[/b] releases) in recent years could be found in the proximity of this contract ending.
It is suposed that new negotiations will be started and from that moment we'll see wich path will take the brand "Queen".
It's been said the band is not happy with their actual relation with EMI. Roger, in fact, gave us some hints during his convention message.
I really hope all the good stuff we've been waiting for (anthologies, BBC, 70's shows, etc etc) has been locked in the archives waiting for a new contract signature, wether it is with EMI, Universal or whoever will be.
So, my point of view and reply to this thread's title is: YES
Micrówave · Member since
Please.... Rhino Records, pick up the tab.
Brian & Roger: Don't be greedy.
Oberon · Member since
[QUOTE]
[b]Micrówave wrote: [/b]
Please.... Rhino Records, pick up the tab.
Brian & Roger: Don't be greedy.[/QUOTE]
They are only half of the decision making team. Remember John? And Jim Beach (I think) represents Freddie's rights on behalf of whoever they were passed to (Mary?)
pma · Member since
Yes, the EMI deal ending will mean that
in the future all Queen releases will be reissued through
Mobile Fidelity Soundlabs.
They treated the Yes and Chicago catalogs like gold.
Benn · Member since
Absolutely - Rhino have a cracking track record with archival releases. However, I just think that the Queen name is too big for them to win. Universal will get the gig here and they will put their 'oomph' behind the archive a-la The Who.
