Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

> The Songwriting of Live
SJN1279
post Nov 27 2012, 12:20 pm
Post #1



Lakini

Group Icon

Reputation: 1908.5 Rep Power: 1908.5
SJN1279 is off the scale  ()
Group: Members
Posts: 7,863
Joined: Feb 2006
From: NJ








QUOTE(Badman @ Nov 27 2012, 11:49 am) *

In Ed's head, he is talking about how he has changed from rock and roll excess to finding god/family. Many of us here twist it into him singing about how he has changed to become a guy who backstabs his friends CC&P. This is probably the clearest way I can explain it here for someone who is new to the board smile.gif


CCP had no problem taking 75 percent song writing credit and money for songs that Ed basically wrote 100 percent himself. I think that is a pretty crummy thing to do to a friend.


User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Replies
FishOutaWater
post Nov 28 2012, 12:14 pm
Post #2



Cheetah

Group Icon

Reputation: 2658.5 Rep Power: 2658.5
FishOutaWater is off the scale  ()
Group: Members
Posts: 1,327
Joined: Feb 2006








The answer to the question that Nick is asking over and over again is really simple. Is it fair that CCP received 30% of the royalties on songs that Ed wrote?

Setting the entire argument aside about whether CCP contributed to the final songs or not, the answer is still yes. That was the contractual agreement presented by Ed and signed by all four of them. Ed had a contractual agreement to pay them 30%. So they were entitled to it, and receiving it was fair. If Ed later rethhought it and decided it wasn't fair to him and then went off and signed another secret contract and took 100% of a $1 million payment, that doesn't make Ed right. That was not fair of Ed. That was breaching a contract.

Number two, and I know this is something Nick should understand because it relates to album sales. If the numbers OTD metnioned a few pages ago are correct and SFBM sold 250,000 and Alive sold 25,000 - why do you think that is? It's because the Live brand and franchise and fanbase, built up by all four members over a 20 year period and touring the world, enables the band Live to sell 250,000 copies of a piece of shit. And Ed got 70% of 250,000 copies sold. Ed alone, without Live, sold 25,000 copies of Alive. Why the big drop-off? Because not only was it also a piece of shit, but it wasn't Live. Live was a four-way entity and if you want to sell your Ed-written shit using the Live name and sell 250,000 copies, you have to attribute some of that success to the fact that all four of them together as Live meant something and all four of them are entitled to share in it.

If SFBM (with BM being the operative acronym there) could sell 250,000 copies, I can't wait to see what LIve's next album will sell. Won't it be cool if they sell hundreds of thousands of copies without Ed and he is left with his little solo career while CCP go on to find continued success?

I really love this arguing. This is fun.


User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
5 Pages V  1 2 3 > » 


Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 users are reading this topic (1 guests and 0 anonymous users)
0 members:

 


Lo-Fi Version Current date & time: July 12th, 2026 - 2:45 am