Quote:
Quote:
What’s next, Beatle ringles? Chrome cassettes?
It’s hard to believe that the Beatles used to be first, paving the way for other artists. Now they’re so far behind the curve as to be laughable. Sure, I’d like to hear the new product, there will be a revenue-generating event, but Sony should have licensed Beatle albums for the introduction of SACD. Just like Sirius overpaid Howard Stern to avoid bankruptcy (you may have forgotten that Sirius was fading before it hired the King Of All Media, ultimately, Sirius purchased XM).
The Beatles should sell these same remastered files in a lossless format online. The Beatles should be the act selling subscriptions at the iTunes Store. The Beatles can lead, they’re the number one brand in popular music, but so afraid of ****ing up their reputation, they’ve become followers. Not only does it tarnish the brand, it doesn’t generate enough revenue.
|
The legacy of Howard Stern or the financial dilemma of Sirius Radio is in no way relevant to the management of the Beatles. Making Beatles songs available in the looseless format, so iTunes can make a bundle, is not a big priority for the four principal trustees who govern the Beatle's financial trust.
Bob Lefsetz has his head his ass when he tells us about what a great "revenue generating event" it would have been for Sony to gain licensing rights to the Beatle's catalog for SCAD. Bob, please... The Beatles and their heirs aren't the least bit interested in the pathetic attempts of Sony Inc. to stage "revenue generating events" on their behalf. The Beatles are capable of staging revenue generating events, without Sony or iTunes. The Beatles started Apple Corp. to protect the artistic integrity of their creative legacy from "revenue generating events."
Bobby Boy also says "
The Beatles should be the act selling subscriptions at the iTunes Store." It's as if Bob thinks selling iTunes subscriptions is in the same humanitarian category as the Concert for Bangeladesh or Farm Aid. Sheesh...
Let remind Bob that the Beatles's musical legacy will eclipse any creative endeavors of Steve Jobs, iTunes and Apple Computer. The Beatles waged legal warfare on Apple Computer for 25 years to stop Steve Jobs from using both the Apple Corp. name and logo on their computer products. The primary talent of Steve Jobs has been convincing a lot of stupid people that he's a genius. The Beatle's genius speaks for itself.
So tell me Bob... Why should Apple Corp even be the least bit interested with doing business with the egomanical jerk who stole their creative name brand to sell a bunch of overpriced computers?
Musicians are under no moral or ethical obligation to bow to the demands of the marketplace. What frustrates free market musical entrepreneurs, like Bob, is the Beatles refuse to place a price tag on the value of their artistic product.