Deaky.
Its no sin to be living with your parents these days millions do.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
The Real Wizard
[QUOTE] [b]The Fairy King wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]millionaire_waltz wrote:[/b]
Well John deserves the money as he was a Queen member too.
He has got more dignity than May & Taylor put together for he knew the show really was over without Fred.[/QUOTE]
If it weren't for Roger and Brian, no-one would be talking about Queen after 1993. You wouldn't have gotten anything past the Living On My Own remix. Stop speaking about John as if he's some kind of saint. It's ridiculous. [/QUOTE]
Bang on. Deacon is enjoying his retirement largely *because* of the hard work of Brian and Roger, not despite it.
Without a doubt Deacon has tens of millions more in the bank due to album remasters, greatest hits packages, box sets, the biopic (not the film itself but from album sales it generated), and yes, touring with Adam Lambert (he gets performance royalties) - all of which he has had nothing to do with.
Never mind the songwriting and mechanical royalties, let's not forget that unlike most artists, Queen have their own publishing too (they have John Reid to thank for that). Even just three big songs are a massive revenue generator for Deacon, all of which he sees after the record company takes their cut.
He put in his 20 years, so he earned it. But only a fool would discount the hard work done by May, Taylor, and their manager for the 20+ years since then.
[QUOTE] [b]millionaire_waltz wrote:[/b]
Well John deserves the money as he was a Queen member too.
He has got more dignity than May & Taylor put together for he knew the show really was over without Fred.[/QUOTE]
If it weren't for Roger and Brian, no-one would be talking about Queen after 1993. You wouldn't have gotten anything past the Living On My Own remix. Stop speaking about John as if he's some kind of saint. It's ridiculous. [/QUOTE]
Bang on. Deacon is enjoying his retirement largely *because* of the hard work of Brian and Roger, not despite it.
Without a doubt Deacon has tens of millions more in the bank due to album remasters, greatest hits packages, box sets, the biopic (not the film itself but from album sales it generated), and yes, touring with Adam Lambert (he gets performance royalties) - all of which he has had nothing to do with.
Never mind the songwriting and mechanical royalties, let's not forget that unlike most artists, Queen have their own publishing too (they have John Reid to thank for that). Even just three big songs are a massive revenue generator for Deacon, all of which he sees after the record company takes their cut.
He put in his 20 years, so he earned it. But only a fool would discount the hard work done by May, Taylor, and their manager for the 20+ years since then.
Deaky.
Record sales after Queen in 1991 is surely down to the record label as they are always releasing box set and greatest hits compilations.
brENsKi
[QUOTE] [b]Enigma wrote:[/b]
Record sales after Queen in 1991 is surely down to the record label as they are always releasing box set and greatest hits compilations.[/QUOTE]
Recorded music sales - for the last 20 years have been a small part of music earnings. Remember how (in the 80s) the slogan was "home taping is killing music"?, and then in the 90s - things got worse, when home computer owners had CD-writers.
Then, faster internet speeds and the era of music file-sharing; Napster, Morpheus, Audiogalaxy, PirateBay, Bittorrent etc there's been little money made by artists from of recorded music.
the vast majority of the money made since the year 2000 will be down to three elements:
>> tours
>> licensing for live performance (by other artists/cover bands etc) and radio airplay
>> promotional stuff like movie soundtracks and advertising products.
Deacy has made most of his money (like the rest of the band) - for the last 20 years, in those three ways.
Record sales after Queen in 1991 is surely down to the record label as they are always releasing box set and greatest hits compilations.[/QUOTE]
Recorded music sales - for the last 20 years have been a small part of music earnings. Remember how (in the 80s) the slogan was "home taping is killing music"?, and then in the 90s - things got worse, when home computer owners had CD-writers.
Then, faster internet speeds and the era of music file-sharing; Napster, Morpheus, Audiogalaxy, PirateBay, Bittorrent etc there's been little money made by artists from of recorded music.
the vast majority of the money made since the year 2000 will be down to three elements:
>> tours
>> licensing for live performance (by other artists/cover bands etc) and radio airplay
>> promotional stuff like movie soundtracks and advertising products.
Deacy has made most of his money (like the rest of the band) - for the last 20 years, in those three ways.
AlbaNo1
I always remember thinking that Freddie’s estate value at the time of his death wasn’t that vast for a rock star of his status ...around 8m or something.
For sure their estates have grown since then by multiples , a fair bit due to sources mentioned above.
What do they get for adverts I wonder. Because they are jingle tastic on UK tv ads.
For sure their estates have grown since then by multiples , a fair bit due to sources mentioned above.
What do they get for adverts I wonder. Because they are jingle tastic on UK tv ads.
HelloDelilah
[QUOTE] [b]AlbaNo1 wrote:[/b]
I always remember thinking that Freddie’s estate value at the time of his death wasn’t that vast for a rock star of his status ...around 8m or something.
For sure their estates have grown since then by multiples , a fair bit due to sources mentioned above.
What do they get for adverts I wonder. Because they are jingle tastic on UK tv ads.[/QUOTE]
I agree. I thought Freddie's estate wasn't that much for that time too, but he did like to spend money and was extremely generous to those around him and had very fine taste.
I always remember thinking that Freddie’s estate value at the time of his death wasn’t that vast for a rock star of his status ...around 8m or something.
For sure their estates have grown since then by multiples , a fair bit due to sources mentioned above.
What do they get for adverts I wonder. Because they are jingle tastic on UK tv ads.[/QUOTE]
I agree. I thought Freddie's estate wasn't that much for that time too, but he did like to spend money and was extremely generous to those around him and had very fine taste.
Nathan H
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
Deacon is enjoying his retirement largely *because* of the hard work of Brian and Roger, not despite it.
Without a doubt Deacon has tens of millions more in the bank due to album remasters, greatest hits packages, box sets, the biopic (not the film itself but from album sales it generated), and yes, touring with Adam Lambert (he gets performance royalties) - all of which he has had nothing to do with.
Never mind the songwriting and mechanical royalties, let's not forget that unlike most artists, Queen have their own publishing too (they have John Reid to thank for that). Even just three big songs are a massive revenue generator for Deacon, all of which he sees after the record company takes their cut.
He put in his 20 years, so he earned it. But only a fool would discount the hard work done by May, Taylor, and their manager for the 20+ years since then.
[/QUOTE]
Well written. I just don't understand how it's that difficult for some people to digest and take it in.
Deacon is enjoying his retirement largely *because* of the hard work of Brian and Roger, not despite it.
Without a doubt Deacon has tens of millions more in the bank due to album remasters, greatest hits packages, box sets, the biopic (not the film itself but from album sales it generated), and yes, touring with Adam Lambert (he gets performance royalties) - all of which he has had nothing to do with.
Never mind the songwriting and mechanical royalties, let's not forget that unlike most artists, Queen have their own publishing too (they have John Reid to thank for that). Even just three big songs are a massive revenue generator for Deacon, all of which he sees after the record company takes their cut.
He put in his 20 years, so he earned it. But only a fool would discount the hard work done by May, Taylor, and their manager for the 20+ years since then.
[/QUOTE]
Well written. I just don't understand how it's that difficult for some people to digest and take it in.
brENsKi
[QUOTE] [b]AlbaNo1 wrote:[/b]What do they get for adverts I wonder. Because they are jingle tastic on UK tv ads.[/QUOTE]
depends really. the adverts can be done in two ways - one being usually much cheaper than the other.
>> recording as made by original artist = royalties to writers and performers
>> recording as remade by hired performers = royalties to writer and small fee to new performer
some figures:
https://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/music-licensing4.htm
depends really. the adverts can be done in two ways - one being usually much cheaper than the other.
>> recording as made by original artist = royalties to writers and performers
>> recording as remade by hired performers = royalties to writer and small fee to new performer
some figures:
https://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/music-licensing4.htm
The Real Wizard
[QUOTE] [b]Young Music Fan wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
Deacon is enjoying his retirement largely *because* of the hard work of Brian and Roger, not despite it.
Without a doubt Deacon has tens of millions more in the bank due to album remasters, greatest hits packages, box sets, the biopic (not the film itself but from album sales it generated), and yes, touring with Adam Lambert (he gets performance royalties) - all of which he has had nothing to do with.
Never mind the songwriting and mechanical royalties, let's not forget that unlike most artists, Queen have their own publishing too (they have John Reid to thank for that). Even just three big songs are a massive revenue generator for Deacon, all of which he sees after the record company takes their cut.
He put in his 20 years, so he earned it. But only a fool would discount the hard work done by May, Taylor, and their manager for the 20+ years since then.
[/QUOTE]
Well written. I just don't understand how it's that difficult for some people to digest and take it in.[/QUOTE]
They don't have to, really. The ins and outs of the music business don't have to be understood by the man on the street. It's just that when people are so blissfully ignorant of the music business combined with holding strong opinions about people and things they know nothing about, that's when they just end up looking like morons in front of people who do know - most of whom won't even bother to let them know how moronic they look. They just quietly let them dig their own graves.
It's so hard for most people to simply say "I don't know." Showing a slight bit of humility and desire to learn is much more difficult than shutting up - especially if it conflicts with existing opinions (whether or not they're informed by facts and genuine understanding). But of course when you sufficiently inform your worldview with facts, you then have far less opinions. Those are the folks that almost always conduct themselves with grace.
Most people just aren't there, and never will be. We're overwhelmingly emotional beings, after all - not rational ones.
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
Deacon is enjoying his retirement largely *because* of the hard work of Brian and Roger, not despite it.
Without a doubt Deacon has tens of millions more in the bank due to album remasters, greatest hits packages, box sets, the biopic (not the film itself but from album sales it generated), and yes, touring with Adam Lambert (he gets performance royalties) - all of which he has had nothing to do with.
Never mind the songwriting and mechanical royalties, let's not forget that unlike most artists, Queen have their own publishing too (they have John Reid to thank for that). Even just three big songs are a massive revenue generator for Deacon, all of which he sees after the record company takes their cut.
He put in his 20 years, so he earned it. But only a fool would discount the hard work done by May, Taylor, and their manager for the 20+ years since then.
[/QUOTE]
Well written. I just don't understand how it's that difficult for some people to digest and take it in.[/QUOTE]
They don't have to, really. The ins and outs of the music business don't have to be understood by the man on the street. It's just that when people are so blissfully ignorant of the music business combined with holding strong opinions about people and things they know nothing about, that's when they just end up looking like morons in front of people who do know - most of whom won't even bother to let them know how moronic they look. They just quietly let them dig their own graves.
It's so hard for most people to simply say "I don't know." Showing a slight bit of humility and desire to learn is much more difficult than shutting up - especially if it conflicts with existing opinions (whether or not they're informed by facts and genuine understanding). But of course when you sufficiently inform your worldview with facts, you then have far less opinions. Those are the folks that almost always conduct themselves with grace.
Most people just aren't there, and never will be. We're overwhelmingly emotional beings, after all - not rational ones.
miraclesteinway
The impression that I get from Cameron is that John doesn't hate Queen, hate the memories, or even hate what the band is doing now. The impression I get is that John just enjoys not being in the public eye, and that 1991 was the full stop, Made In Heaven was the Post Script, and No-one But You and the Ballet were the goodbye.
Cameron goes to see Queen on tour (he may have actually gone with his dad), and he went to see the film as well. I really think that anything said about John's relationship with the band is just hearsay. Yeah Roger said something about John being sociopathic, but I don't know that was the word Roger meant. I can imagine the last meetings going like this:
John: Guys with you going out on tour, and you knowing that I'm not coming, I guess I don't have to be at these meetings.
Maylor: Probably not
John: well, maybe we could just get Miami to stay in touch and forward the royalties?
Maylor: I suppose we could. Are you alright with us doing all this stuff Deaky?
John: Yeah whatever, it keeps the wolf from the door for all of us.....
Maylor: Alright, see you at the next Queen meeting
John: Possibly. See you later.
Also John's voice - sounds like John, yeah a bit older than the interviews from 1991 OBVIOUSLY, but it's him alright!
Cameron goes to see Queen on tour (he may have actually gone with his dad), and he went to see the film as well. I really think that anything said about John's relationship with the band is just hearsay. Yeah Roger said something about John being sociopathic, but I don't know that was the word Roger meant. I can imagine the last meetings going like this:
John: Guys with you going out on tour, and you knowing that I'm not coming, I guess I don't have to be at these meetings.
Maylor: Probably not
John: well, maybe we could just get Miami to stay in touch and forward the royalties?
Maylor: I suppose we could. Are you alright with us doing all this stuff Deaky?
John: Yeah whatever, it keeps the wolf from the door for all of us.....
Maylor: Alright, see you at the next Queen meeting
John: Possibly. See you later.
Also John's voice - sounds like John, yeah a bit older than the interviews from 1991 OBVIOUSLY, but it's him alright!
The Real Wizard
[QUOTE] [b]miraclesteinway wrote:[/b]
I really think that anything said about John's relationship with the band is just hearsay.[/QUOTE]
It's obviously not good. They haven't spoken in 20 years, except through lawyers.
He hasn't just withdrawn from public life. He has completely left behind this part of his life behind.
Of course he's free to do what he likes, but it's pretty extreme and more or less unparalleled. This is just one step away from the Manic Street Preachers guitarist disappearing completely. It's obviously a concerted effort if you can count the number of Deacon sightings this century on one hand.
I really think that anything said about John's relationship with the band is just hearsay.[/QUOTE]
It's obviously not good. They haven't spoken in 20 years, except through lawyers.
He hasn't just withdrawn from public life. He has completely left behind this part of his life behind.
Of course he's free to do what he likes, but it's pretty extreme and more or less unparalleled. This is just one step away from the Manic Street Preachers guitarist disappearing completely. It's obviously a concerted effort if you can count the number of Deacon sightings this century on one hand.
The Real Wizard
[QUOTE] [b]miraclesteinway wrote:[/b]
Roger said something about John being sociopathic, but I don't know that was the word Roger meant.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, he probably meant some kind of social anxiety disorder. And that shouldn't surprise anyone.
Bad choice of words, though. It didn't look too good on him.
Roger said something about John being sociopathic, but I don't know that was the word Roger meant.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, he probably meant some kind of social anxiety disorder. And that shouldn't surprise anyone.
Bad choice of words, though. It didn't look too good on him.
miraclesteinway
The difference between John Deacon and Richey Edwards is that John Deacon can play guitar....
The Fairy King
[QUOTE] [b]miraclesteinway wrote:[/b]
The difference between John Deacon and Richey Edwards is that John Deacon can play guitar....[/QUOTE]
Richey has co-written the first three MSP albums before his disappearance. Don't understand why you are comparing him to Deaky as he was mainly the rhythm guitarist, songwriter and overall image the band.
The difference between John Deacon and Richey Edwards is that John Deacon can play guitar....[/QUOTE]
Richey has co-written the first three MSP albums before his disappearance. Don't understand why you are comparing him to Deaky as he was mainly the rhythm guitarist, songwriter and overall image the band.
Negative Creep
[QUOTE] [b]The Fairy King wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]miraclesteinway wrote:[/b]
The difference between John Deacon and Richey Edwards is that John Deacon can play guitar....[/QUOTE]
Richey has co-written the first three MSP albums before his disappearance. Don't understand why you are comparing him to Deaky as he was mainly the rhythm guitarist, songwriter and overall image the band.[/QUOTE]
Edwards didn't play on the records as he couldn't play, and he wrote the lyics which the band then re-adapted for songs - big difference.
[QUOTE] [b]miraclesteinway wrote:[/b]
The difference between John Deacon and Richey Edwards is that John Deacon can play guitar....[/QUOTE]
Richey has co-written the first three MSP albums before his disappearance. Don't understand why you are comparing him to Deaky as he was mainly the rhythm guitarist, songwriter and overall image the band.[/QUOTE]
Edwards didn't play on the records as he couldn't play, and he wrote the lyics which the band then re-adapted for songs - big difference.