Neal Posted January 8, 2020 Posted January 8, 2020 2 minutes ago, Ghent said: I mean he can, but he doesn't own the music anymore so someone could make him take it down. Just weird to think about. Also no Quote
Ghent Posted January 8, 2020 Posted January 8, 2020 1 minute ago, Neal said: Also no Then why did we have instagram videos removed for using blink songs due to copyright claims? Quote
Neal Posted January 8, 2020 Posted January 8, 2020 Again i commend you to find out what hipgnosis is or does. They essentially put their giaint songpool and its revenues on the stockmarket for their AND THE ARTISTS benefit. Nobody will sue tom for promoting that material. But if somebody performs his songs e.g blink or tom himself and gains revenue, the money ends up at hipgnosis and they deal with the investing, take their cut and then pay out. Its not even remotely what you guys are saying it is 2 1 Quote
Speedo Posted January 8, 2020 Posted January 8, 2020 3 minutes ago, Neal said: Again i commend you to find out what hipgnosis is or does. They essentially put their giaint songpool and its revenues on the stockmarket for their AND THE ARTISTS benefit. Nobody will sue tom for promoting that material. But if somebody performs his songs e.g blink or tom himself and gains revenue, the money ends up at hipgnosis and they deal with the investing, take their cut and then pay out. Its not even remotely what you guys are saying it is I mostly just form my opinions based on facts Ive made up in my head! 2 1 Quote
fElon Posted January 8, 2020 Posted January 8, 2020 13 minutes ago, Neal said: Again i commend you to find out what hipgnosis is or does. They essentially put their giaint songpool and its revenues on the stockmarket for their AND THE ARTISTS benefit. Nobody will sue tom for promoting that material. But if somebody performs his songs e.g blink or tom himself and gains revenue, the money ends up at hipgnosis and they deal with the investing, take their cut and then pay out. Its not even remotely what you guys are saying it is The bold makes no sense at all. They are a company that buys music and in the hopes that they profit off of it. They bought the rights to Tom's music. Why is this so hard to understand? 2 Quote
JarJarBlinks Posted January 8, 2020 Posted January 8, 2020 13 minutes ago, Neal said: Again i commend you to find out what hipgnosis is or does. They essentially put their giaint songpool and its revenues on the stockmarket for their AND THE ARTISTS benefit. Nobody will sue tom for promoting that material. But if somebody performs his songs e.g blink or tom himself and gains revenue, the money ends up at hipgnosis and they deal with the investing, take their cut and then pay out. Its not even remotely what you guys are saying it is this actually makes it sounds riskier and even dumber for Tom. Quote
Neal Posted January 8, 2020 Posted January 8, 2020 Just now, Donald Trump's Bulge said: The bold makes no sense at all. They are a company that buys music and in the hopes that they profit off of it. They bought the rights to Tom's music. Why is this so hard to understand? Why is it so hard for you to take a break from this place? 3 1 Quote
Neal Posted January 8, 2020 Posted January 8, 2020 17 minutes ago, JarJarBlinks said: this actually makes it sounds riskier and even dumber for Tom. I actually have no idea what that company does or is Quote
Ghent Posted January 8, 2020 Posted January 8, 2020 19 minutes ago, JarJarBlinks said: this actually makes it sounds riskier and even dumber for Tom. haha yeah, what he said is totally wrong, but if it was right, it would be like playing UK stock market roulette with his songs. It is not a partnership. Tom sold the rights to all his music. End of story. 2 Quote
zzzz Posted January 8, 2020 Posted January 8, 2020 This is pretty simple, instead of Tom getting $ for streams/sales of past music, the new company does...lol Quote
Cheerios4u98 Posted January 9, 2020 Posted January 9, 2020 I’m not really sure what to think of this. I mean, I’m not gonna lose any sleep over it, but it is interesting at the very least. Maybe Tom was desperate for a large amount of fast money for some big To The Stars project or something. I don’t really care but this is just about the only interesting blink-related news right now. So does this mean he won’t make any more money off of blink unless he makes new music with them? Quote
radioactive tomdog Posted January 10, 2020 Posted January 10, 2020 pretty sure he's made all the money he can off his back catalogue and this was a way to get a shit load of cash for it one last time. i would imagine a decision like this could easily be made by weighing how much money he would get from the sale vs how much he had been making per year off owning 1/3 of it, especially in the last five years. maybe he really wasn't making shit off those songs anymore. and it's not like the band was ever going to do special re-releases anyway. 1 Quote
CatDude Posted January 10, 2020 Posted January 10, 2020 In a few years Tom might be broker than he was in 1992. I would be shocked if he invests any of this money wisely. We all know it's going to be poured into TTSA. I bet all those employees are throwing a party this weekend knowing they have jobs for the next few years. 1 Quote
Adrianm14 Posted January 11, 2020 Posted January 11, 2020 On 1/8/2020 at 4:55 PM, Donald Trump's Bulge said: The bold makes no sense at all. They are a company that buys music and in the hopes that they profit off of it. They bought the rights to Tom's music. Why is this so hard to understand? I mean it somewhat makes sense Even on my taxes my income generated from songwriting is classified as investment income. Quote
zzzz Posted January 13, 2020 Posted January 13, 2020 That guy does super rad customs, his Alk3 one is even more impressive. 1 Quote
Ghent Posted January 13, 2020 Posted January 13, 2020 On 1/10/2020 at 1:18 AM, wannabe corn dog said: pretty sure he's made all the money he can off his back catalogue and this was a way to get a shit load of cash for it one last time. i would imagine a decision like this could easily be made by weighing how much money he would get from the sale vs how much he had been making per year off owning 1/3 of it, especially in the last five years. maybe he really wasn't making shit off those songs anymore. and it's not like the band was ever going to do special re-releases anyway. If he wasn’t making money off of it then this publicly traded company wouldn’t have spent some 15 million dollars on it. Quote
radioactive tomdog Posted January 13, 2020 Posted January 13, 2020 10 minutes ago, Ghent said: If he wasn’t making money off of it then this publicly traded company wouldn’t have spent some 15 million dollars on it. they probably have the time to try to license out random songs to be used in the background of reality tv shows, music venues, chain restaurants, movie theaters, etc by offering packages of music from artists' catalogues they own. so, they can easily make their money back over time. since tom's back catalogue isn't super relevant anymore, i doubt anyone was seeking out the ability to license his music for anything. he's certainly not going to take the time to try to do what this company does just to make money off it again. 2 Quote
Ghent Posted January 13, 2020 Posted January 13, 2020 Can they license out songs without the other two member’s permission? I doubt it. I smell a tombot 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.