Mudcat Café message #2058191 The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #101458   Message #2058191
Posted By: GUEST, bystander
22-May-07 - 03:05 AM
Thread Name: Bright Phoebus/Watersons/Bulmer
Subject: RE: Bright Phoebus/Watersons/Bulmer
Performer? Moi? If only!

Actually, in the interests of a proper debate I'd like to go through George's post again, as maybe we've misundertsood him even worse than usual!

Are you saying, George, that Dave has every right to earn money on his investment? I think you are, in which case I'd say yes absolutely.

Are you saying that not all artists have the gumption or wherewithall to make and sell their own albums, so the world needs people who specialise in this field? If so, again yes.

Are you saying that it's reasonable for a record company to recoup its costs and make a fair profit too - before starting to pay out to the artists? If so, maybe, but it's not good business in the long term. In all endeavors you need something called goodwill and that's something Dave's not been great at.

Are you saying that it's not Dave's fault that some of the original contracts were iffy? If so, of course - but they were written and signed in a different era, and involved different personalities. So the outcomes would have been very different to the way they look on paper now. Again, a good crerative businessman understands the human aspects of commerce and that you need everyone on you side if you're going to make any proper money. Dave's position may be legally sound, but even if we ignore any moral or ethical issues, it's not good business. He needs to work WITH the artists concerned to get these recordings promoted, so he can make money - and to do that he has to make it worth their while. It's just common sense really.

Is your comment about sound checks just a general swipe at professional folk musicians, and not perhaps aimed specifically at Duncan (as we all assumed)? If so, yes, a handful of pros do behave apallingly, but as i say, usually if someone's overrun a check it's because 1) They were not allocated enough time by some damnfool organiser (this is commonplace, unfortunately), 2) the crew were not ready or not efficient 3) there's been a technical problem somewhere. If so, it has nothing to do with this discussion. It was a mistake to make it and you do owe Duncan an apology for seeming to attack him.

You're wrong about royalties on traditional music, by the way. If you register an arrangement of a public-ownership work, you'll get exactly as much for your performance of it as for your own compositions.

I happen to think Dave gets some unfair press too, but he's brought it all on himself. He didn't make a huge success of his own record company (and there have always been grey areas). Buying up all those other businesses was also bad business when he didn't have what it took to exploit them properly. By hanging on and digging in and doing all of the above he's made it much worse. And meddling with PRS and MU matters is merely making him more enemies among people who might have helped out.