Posted January 11, 200817 yr Robbie Williams issues call to arms in protest at EMI Adam Sherwin, Media Correspondent The Times 11/01/08 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/graphics/2008/01/11/cnrobbie111.jpg Robbie Williams is going on strike in protest at the private equity firm that has taken over his record company, as other stars down tools in an artists’ revolt. Williams, who has sold 70 million records for EMI, is leading a number of stars refusing to work for the company since its £3.2 billion takeover by Terra Firma, the financier. He is withholding the next album in his £80 million deal from EMI and his manager said Guy Hands, the new boss of EMI, was behaving like a “plantation owner”. Coldplay, one of EMI’s few US chart-toppers, are also prepared to withdraw their labour. Their manager said that the band was considering its options after EMI’s head of music left this week, with thousands more redundancies expected. Radiohead and Sir Paul McCartney have already walked out on EMI, which has cut advance payments to stars and told artists to work harder at promoting their music. EMI’s share of the British album market, already damaged by downloading, fell from 16 per cent to 9 per cent last year. The US screenwriters’ strike, which brought Hollywood to a halt, has influenced pop stars, who believe that they can use their muscle to wrest control from the “bean-counters”. A new Williams album, due for September release, should be a huge earner for EMI. But Tim Clark, Williams’s manager, told The Times: “The question is, ‘Should Robbie deliver the new album he is due to release to EMI?’ We have to say the answer is ‘No’. We have no idea how EMI will market and promote the album. They do not have anyone in the digital sphere capable of doing the job required. All we know is they are going to decimate their staff.” Mr Clark discussed Williams’s future with Mr Hands, but said the financier was acting like a “plantation owner” who had stumbled into the record industry via a “vanity purchase”. Williams, 33, who is recording with the hit producer Mark Ronson, wants to follow Radiohead’s example and release new music directly to fans through his website. Lucrative mobile deals with T-Mobile and Sony Ericsson are on the table. He is seeking control over his back catalogue from EMI, the issue that prompted Radiohead’s departure, and a greater return on digital distribution of his music. Mr Clark said: “EMI can sue or pay up his contract. Robbie needs to know what services EMI can provide to an artist of his standing.” The 30-million album selling Coldplay, currently recording new material with Brian Eno, are upset at the departure of Tony Wadsworth, head of EMI’s UK music division. Dave Holmes, the band’s Los Angeles-based manager, told The Times: “Tony was the reason a lot of bands signed to EMI. Artists want to work with music people, not finance guys.” He added: “Why would you want to release an album with a record company in the midst of massive lay-offs? Coldplay have a lot of options. They are in no hurry to deliver their new album.” Mr Hands is keen to retain Williams. The £80 million deal signed in 2002 gives EMI a share of Williams’s substantial live and merchandise earnings. The deal protects the company from a downturn in his CD sales. Yet Williams is holding firm. He said: “I might just put the B-sides to the next album out first online. Then put an album out in 2009. There definitely won’t be a tour any time soon.” Chris Morrison, manager of Damon Albarn, the Blur and Gorillaz star signed to EMI, said that artists did not want record companies to take a chunk of their live earnings. Mr Morrison said: “Artists should have the freedom to make their own choices over concerts.” EMI sources said: “Many artists have raised fundamental questions about the record business in the digital age. EMI is working on a restructuring of its recorded music division to address the needs of artists in what is a very different market from the 1990s.” Sour notes 1994 George Michael fails to persuade a court that his Sony recording deal is “contractual slavery”. Resigns to Sony years after losing £4 million battle 1993 Prince stamped the word “slave” on his cheek and changed his name to a symbol in a battle with Warner Bros for artistic and financial control 1991 The Stone Roses pour paint over the offices of Silvertone Records as a £1 million move to Geffen is delayed three years by a legal dispute 1987 Geffen sues Neil Young for $3 million after he delivers Transformer, a flop synth-rock album. The writ claims that he was deliberately making music “unrepresentative of Neil Young” 1978 Graham Parker attacks Mercury Records in the song Mercury Poisoning. It contains the lines: “Their geriatric staff thinks we’re freaks. They couldn’t sell kebabs to the Greeks” 1977 EMI fires the Sex Pistols, citing “adverse publicity”. The group kept a £40,000 advance and paid musical tribute: “E.M.I., Unlimited edition with an unlimited supply” Source: Times database Robbie Williams 'goes on strike' http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44349000/jpg/_44349243_robbieget_203.jpg Robbie Williams signed a massive deal with EMI in 2002 Robbie Williams will refuse to make another album for his record label EMI, according to a report. The singer is still under contract with EMI, but is unhappy after the label was taken over by private equity firm Terra Firma, his manager has told The Times. Tim Clark told the paper Williams would not deliver a new album because he had no idea how the label would handle it. Radiohead and Sir Paul McCartney have already left EMI, with reports that Coldplay and Kylie Minogue may follow. EMI's UK chief executive - who signed many of the label's current stars - also left the company on Tuesday after 25 years. Mr Clark told The Times: "The question is, should Robbie deliver the new album he is due to release to EMI? "We have to say the answer is no. We have no idea how EMI will market and promote the album. "They do not have anyone in the digital sphere capable of doing the job required. All we know is they are going to decimate their staff." He accused Terra Firma boss Guy Hands of acting like a "plantation owner" who had stumbled into the music industry via a "vanity purchase". "EMI can sue or pay up his contract," Mr Clark said. "Robbie needs to know what services EMI can provide to an artist of his standing." A spokeswoman for Williams told the BBC News website: "They¿re Tim¿s words given in an interview to The Times and no further comment is being made." EMI did not return a request for a comment. Online plan Williams has sold almost 70 million albums around the world since leaving Take That in 1995, making him one of EMI's most successful artists. The star recently told fans there "might not be a proper album out this year and there definitely won't be a tour any time soon". "I might just put the B-sides to the next album out first online. Then put an album out in 2009," he said. Williams signed a four-album deal with EMI in 2002, reported at the time to be worth £80m. His last album Rudebox was released in 2006 but its sales failed to live up to the high standards of his previous best-sellers.
January 11, 200817 yr Author Robbie Williams to strike over EMI job cuts The Telegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/graphics/2008/01/11/cnrobbie111.jpg Pop star Robbie Williams is leading a revolt against his own record label, EMI, in a dispute which could jeopardise the future of the historic company. Robbie Williams' new album was due in September The singer, who signed an unprecedented £80 million contract with EMI in 2002, is withholding his next album in protest at the label's takeover by a private equity company. His defiance is a serious blow to EMI, which has lost several high-profile artists in the past two years including Sir Paul McCartney and Radiohead. Other leading bands such as Coldplay and Gorillaz are also thought to be considering their relationship with the label over the dispute. It is understood that Williams, whose next album is due for release in September, wants more control of his back catalogue. He also wants to follow in the footsteps of bands such as Radiohead who, because they are no longer tied to a label, can release music directly to fans and keep all the profit. Tim Clark, the singer's manager, said: "The question is, 'Should Robbie Williams deliver the new album he is due to release to EMI?'. "We have to say the answer is 'No'. We have no idea how EMI will market and promote the album. They do not have anyone in the digital sphere capable of doing the job required. All we know is they are going to decimate their staff." advertisement His comments come just days Tony Wadsworth, EMI's UK chief executive, quit the label after more than 25 years with the company. His departure is part of a radical shake-up of the label, which was taken over last year by the private equity firm Terra Firma run by Guy Hands. Mr Clarke accused Mr Hands of acting like a "plantation owner" who had stumbled into the music industry through "a vanity purchase". Representatives of Coldplay, one of the country's biggest bands who are currently signed to EMI, have hinted the group are considering joining the revolt. Dave Holmes, the band's manager, said: "Tony was the reason a lot of bands signed to EMI. Artists want to work with music people, not finance guys. "Why would you want to release an album with a record company in the midst of massive lay-offs? Coldplay have a lot of options. They are in no hurry to deliver their new album." Industry experts claimed Williams's revolt against EMI was "disastrous" for the label. Paul Stokes, the news editor at NME, said: "This is a massive blow for EMI. The label used to have a Rolls-Royce roster of names on its books but they are slowly but surely leaving." One industry insider claimed if Williams does not fulfil his contract with EMI, the label could sue him "an absolutely enormous amount". EMI declined to comment but a source at the company said: "EMI is very sad that a manager of Tim Clark's standing should decide to attack us wholly unjustifiably before we've had a chance to brief him on the plans for the business." The source added that Mr Clark had asked for a "massive advance" for Williams' next album, which the company firmly refused to grant.
January 11, 200817 yr Author What a shocking development :o This is all so interesting. It seemsRobbie is refusing to release his album due to EMI being so $h!t at promoting and ahve got rid of loads of the top people who ran the company. Well done Rob for making a stand, and now it seems Coldplay are withholding their new album for a similar reason. EMI's two biggest acts are refusing to release their albums. EMI truly are falling apart :D By the sounds of it, Tim is saying that Rob will not release the final album because EMI won't promote it properly, and he wants them to pay Rob out of the contract or sue him. I don't know how they can sue him tbh, as him delaying to release of his album is not a big deal when you consider Coldplay havn't had an album out since 3 years ago, Rob's last was out a little over a year ago, so he should be given as much time as he wants. If they won't promote it, then i would hope they release him fromt he contract and let him finally be rid of the bast*rds for good. Then he can find the best way of releasing his next album. :D
January 11, 200817 yr haha BRILLIANT! :w00t: IF EMI go down the pan, and Robbie renews a one/two-album deal contract with someone like Universal/Sony, then everything will end up a hell of alot better. It's quite intresting actually, with stars going on strike and that. :lol: Oh and I said that the album would be released in Sep. :smoke:
January 11, 200817 yr Author Indeed you did :smoke: It appears it was meant to be released in September but now Rob is refusing to release it as EMI are now obviously even $h!tter at promoting then they were before now they have fired loads of staff since the takeover. :lol: At this point I wish they would just release him from his contract. I know it is a bit pointless considering he only had one album left, and the press will have a field day and say he has been dropped etc, but that is better than him releasing another album, and it getting similar promotion to Rudebox ie. fukk all. He can't afford to have another album that does'nt sell big like Rudebox, so i would much rather he signed a deal with either Sony or Universal, both which seem to be pretty great when it comes to promo, for an album or two, and then that would ensure hs next album was given the best chance possible, which he deserves. He has put up with EMI's c**p for far too long and I am delighted he is gone on strike :D
January 11, 200817 yr Isn't there a way of ending his contract? He has enouth money to pay it all back. :lol: Rudebox was never a hard-hitting produced studio album anyway, it was very much just a doss about. BUT if he left EMI, then I'm pretty sure that if he wanted to stop doing music completley, then he'd do a sort of Goodbye/Last album on a company like I've said above. EMI will be f***ed though, Robbie's + Coldplay's albums would easily be 2008's best sellers. :lol:
January 11, 200817 yr Author Look at this. Tim has now given an interview to Billboard, and has said alot more about the subject. Very interesting stuff. Artist Managers Protest New EMI Regime Billboard.com January 11, 2008, 10:45 AM ET Andre Paine and Mark Sutherland, London http://www.billboard.com/billboard/photos/art/w/williams_robbie_03l.gif Robbie Williams EMI is facing the prospect of an artists' revolt, with representatives of major acts Robbie Williams and Coldplay expressing concern at the current state of the company. Williams' manager, Tim Clark of ie: music, told the London Times that, since Terra Firma's £3.2 billion ($6.3 billion) takeover of EMI in September, the new EMI Group chairman Guy Hands has behaved like a "plantation owner," with the paper reporting Williams was effectively "on strike." High profile artists Radiohead and Paul McCartney have already left EMI in the past year. Speaking to Billboard today, Clark clarified Williams' position. "That term going on strike is such an emotive one and it's certainly not what he (Williams) would say," said Clark. But he expressed concern about whether EMI is capable of successfully releasing a Robbie Williams album. "Given where EMI were, the state they were in, the changes they were making, how could any artist deliver an album -- we wouldn't know how it would be marketed, distributed and promoted," said Clark. "They're decimating staff and it would be wilfully irresponsible of any manager to say, 'Let's deliver this album, they'll sort it out.' Well, actually no -- we have to be persuaded that the services that they offer to their artists are going to be of the highest quality." Clark told Billboard he's had two meetings with Guy Hands, but says he's unwilling to commit to a label that has yet to convince him of a clear strategy and says it needs to be sold to Williams before they sign up. "We have to wait and see what happens," said Clark. "We recognize that Robbie Williams is still under contract to EMI. There's absolutely no ill-feeling. We have to be pragmatic and we also have to recognize the extraordinary change digital technology is having on our industry." Asked how EMI could convince him that they should release the album, Clark added, "They absolutely have to persuade us the services they are offering are top notch." Clark added that it remains to be seen what happens if Williams and ie:music are not happy with EMI's strategy under the current contract, which includes one studio album and a greatest hits set. "We have a contract so let's see the contract out," said Clark. "But we want to be working with a company that really can deliver. We can't afford to place an album with a company that won't promote it or market it effectively. We've got to be convinced of that because you're playing with somebody's career here." Clark also voiced his dismay after EMI U.K. chairman and CEO Tony Wadsworth left the company this week. "It's a concern when somebody of Tony Wadsworth's standing and ability leaves," said Clark. "He has been a great supporter of artists and it is a problem that's he's left, for many of those artists he's had a hand in signing directly or who he's supported strongly over time. So, yes, a lot of people are very upset over his departure." Coldplay's management have also expressed their "confusion" over Wadsworth's departure. The band had the biggest selling album in the world in 2005 with "X&Y" and is due to deliver its new record, "Prospekt," later this year. "I am both saddened and confused that the current owners of EMI have chosen not to include Tony Wadsworth as part of their future plans for the company," the band's L.A.-based manager David Holmes of 3D Management told Billboard. Asked about the band's future relationship with EMI, Holmes added, "I am not really sure what EMI is right now. I guess we shall see next week when Guy makes his announcement (Hands is due to deliver his future strategy for the company in mid-January). "As for signals (Wadsworth's departure sends) to the industry, again it will depend largely on what other announcements EMI make regarding their new strategy." EMI declined to comment.
January 11, 200817 yr Is it only me then that thinks this 'strike' news is all a bunch of cr*p ?! I can't see Tim Clark giving 2 interviews in a very short amount of time about Rob and EMI. I also don't see Tim laying it all out publically like that, I don't think that would be very wise of him and he's a very smart business man. Its all to coincidental for me, that all this news is on the heels of Rob's blogs that there will be no album this year. I could totally see the press twisting it all into Rob is withholding the album from EMI. First we had, Rob is quitting EMI. Then we had Rob is releasing an album in 2008 as part of the big 'comeback' Then we get Rob's blog, squashing those rumours and saying there's no album coming out. Now we have Rob is withholding the new album from EMI. I don't know, its all too much of a coincidence for me. As for Rob signing with Sony. Hell no I definitely would rather him stay with EMI. That Tommy Mattola is as evil as they come and I don't think Rob is too keen to work with him anyways after meeting him. Plus George Michael has had a horrible relationship with them not to mention other artists. I want Rob to stay as far away from Sony as he possibly can. Either stay with EMI or just go independent. There's no reason for him to sign with any other record company. The reason In Good Company was set up was to release Escapology so they can do that with the next album if he leaves EMI now.
January 11, 200817 yr Author I definatly don't think it is in any way bull$h!t. Tim is known for giving interviews, not only about Rob but about the music business in general. There is no way the Times would make up an interview with him, they are the last paper to do such a thing. And Billboard, an American site would have little intrest in also making up an interview. Tim clearly did give these interviews, for what reason I do not know, but he gave them as a spokespersonf or Rob confirmed it in the Telegraph article. I can only presume he feels EMI have turned into a bunch in incompetent fools, who are completelly out of touch with the music business, especially since the take-over, and wants to make it public in order to put more pressure on them. I don't think it's a coincidence. Tim said a while back that Rob would not be re-signing with EMI, which is something we have known since last year when Rob said it himself. The 2008 comback was just the British media harping on with their usual made up c**p. The blog Rob wrote makes perfect sence now. It is not like him to be unsure of his future or when he is releasing an album. He went from saying at the end of 06, that he will be releasing 2 albums in 07, to now not being sure if he will even release one by 09. I take it Rob just did'nt want to comment on it via his blog, and wanted to leave it up to his managment. I agree about Sony actually, forgot about that w*n**r. But I do think Rob needs a big successful next album, and it appears to be very important to him and his manament that the album gets big promotion and makreting. EMI clearly have always been $h!t at this, and now it seems they have no trust in them at all with regard to it. If he went indepentdent now, he would lose the backing of a major record label to promote him. I would perfer if he signed even a one-album deal with Universal, just for the next album and leaved EMI. Then his next album will get the promotion it deserves to be a big success, obviously him promoting it as well.
January 11, 200817 yr Oh God. They'll take him to Court for breach of contract and he'll lose the case (as always :rolleyes: ) and he'll have to pay EMI £300 million and he'll have to sell his house, dog and girlfriend and live in a skip in Stoke. :drama: :(
January 11, 200817 yr Author :lol: Don't be so dramatic :lol: The same happened to Geoge Michael and he only had to pay £4m, and he had alot more than one album left as I recall. Besides, if anyone is at fault it's EMI. It would've surely been part of the contract that they had to do a sufficiant amount of promotion for each album he released. I am sure Rob would much rather hand out a few million quid than release an album without any backing from the out of touch and useless EMI. They can't sue Rob for not releasing an album. There is no limit to when he has to release an album. He has flown through his contract, so him actually taking a few years out is in no way a big deal, as all their other big acts take at least 3 years. They will give in if they are not completelly stupid as he is their biggest cash cow. This part is interesting. ""We have a contract so let's see the contract out," said Clark. "But we want to be working with a company that really can deliver. We can't afford to place an album with a company that won't promote it or market it effectively. We've got to be convinced of that because you're playing with somebody's career here."
January 11, 200817 yr That's why I thought he would release another swing album. Just to see out his contract. But it looks like he won't even be doing that. :lol:
January 11, 200817 yr Author Apperently this is all over Sky News :o *switches over the Sky News* :lol:
January 11, 200817 yr This part is interesting. ""We have a contract so let's see the contract out," said Clark. "But we want to be working with a company that really can deliver. We can't afford to place an album with a company that won't promote it or market it effectively. We've got to be convinced of that because you're playing with somebody's career here." I think you have hit the nail on the head. I think Rob & his management are "sabre rattling" whereby, either the record company guarantees that they will spend X amount of money on videos, advertising & promotion for Robbie's next album, or come to a deal so that Robbie can buy out his contract and sign with someone else who would, like Polydor UK (Universal Worldwide). .. A bit like a top world class professional Footballer who is coming towards the end of his contract with a club, who either wants an improved deal or for the club to release him early and waive any buy out clauses he would otherwise have to pay.
January 11, 200817 yr What gets me in this is that EMI did not turn incompetent overnight or ever since the take over. They were always horrible especially with marketing any of Rob's stuff so why did they wait so long to dig in their heels ?? That makes absolutely no sense when Rob only has one original album left on his contract. They should have done this years ago when it actually would have mattered or maybe they're a bit jittery since Rudebox didn't perform up to Rob's standards. A little too late I'd say. And Tim should have been sticking up for Rob when Rudebox got mashed with dirt in the UK press and maybe put a little blame on EMI then when it mattered more than it does now.
January 11, 200817 yr Well that is what EMI get for ' biting the hand that feeds it '...I am sure Robbie is completely sick of them....maybe the lack of promotion of Rudebox last year was the nail in the coffin as far as Robbie & Ie Music were concerned...EMI were quite happy to let Robbie bring in all the money from his tour while at the same time not offering any support to Robbie on his album....Robbie was on tour & could not promote it himself. Robbie puts in a lot of hard work in writing his songs & I am sure that he must find is very disrespectful of EMI to not acknowledge that hard work by providing all support required to successfully promote an album. -_-
January 11, 200817 yr Author In fairness they did promote Escapology alot, same with the GH. IC did'nt have alot of TV adds, but it did quit alot of billboards, and they promoted it via all those deals like T-Mobile. I think though that with Rudebox, the total lack of promo was much more noticable due to the fact that Robbie himself did nothing as he was on tour. Usually he would be all over the TV for months on end so, lack of TV ads would'nt matter to such an extent. At this stage though, It appears Rob and his managment want his next album to be really successful after the whole Rudebox fiasco, so they want the best possible marketing possible. It was fine up till Rudebox as the albums were all massive sellers, but now these issues have to be looked into which is what is happening now. This Mr Hands seems highly incompetent, which is just infuriating because as Tim says it is Rob's career that is at stake here. These billionaires don't give a $h!t though. The sooner he gets rid of EMI the better. I don't know what will happen though, because if they 'pay up his contract', then the press will have a field day and say he was dropped due to flagging sales or whatever, but if his next album has promotion similar to that of Rudebox, then it could be even less of a success. You would wonder why the bloody hell this firm has taken over as they clearly have no idea how to run the place. EMI have always been very poor, but at this stage, Rob is one of their very few 'cash cows' left, and he only has one last album with them so you would think they would want to make as much off him as possible and spend loads of promoting and marketing it, to ensure the highest sales possible. They enver fail to amaze me with their utter incompetence.
January 11, 200817 yr Author Well that is what EMI get for ' biting the hand that feeds it '...I am sure Robbie is completely sick of them....maybe the lack of promotion of Rudebox last year was the nail in the coffin as far as Robbie & Ie Music were concerned...EMI were quite happy to let Robbie bring in all the money from his tour while at the same time not offering any support to Robbie on his album....Robbie was on tour & could not promote it himself. Robbie puts in a lot of hard work in writing his songs & I am sure that he must find is very disrespectful of EMI to not acknowledge that hard work by providing all support required to successfully promote an album. -_- You are right, album sales mean so little these days. When you consider Rob's last tour grossed £150m, and Rudebox sold 4.5m (with EMI making approx £3 per copy), they made £13.5m. Obviously the tour made EMI an increadible amount more money that an CD would, so they are not going to lose sleep over not spending alot of money on an album. It does make me wonder whether he is contracted to do another tour though, considering that was probebly the main reason he was paid £80m, because his tours bring in record amounts. He's done two tours, I can't imagine that is all he has to do for a six record deal. :unsure:
January 11, 200817 yr Well Robbie is certainly in the news today ...it makes the Sun's usual patethic attempt at what they call news totally embarrassing. I am sure that Tim Clark & Robbie know exactly what they are doing & have been well prepared for this day & it was a very good move that the first shots have been fired by the Robbie team.....these guys are businessmen who are well used to planning ahead so I guess anything they are doing now has been planned for sometime. I have no doubt that more than likely EMI will get their last album but I would find it very hard to believe that it would be Robbies next original studio album....EMI have shown total disrespect for Robbie so why would he give them his best songs as a leaving present. Robbie is certainly getting worldwide free advertising of the fact that there is an album on the way ...it is certainly not going to be a dull year...
