Napster boss set to buy Metallica’s record label(rocknewsdesk.com)
rocknewsdesk.com
Napster boss set to buy Metallica’s record label
http://rocknewsdesk.com/world-news/napster-boss-set-to-buy-metallicas-record-label/1034/
19 comments
Not entirely accurate actually. All of Metallica's records came out (at least in North America, not sure about the rest of the world) under the Warner Music Group umbrella, which is what Sean is allegedly bidding on. Going all the way back to Master of Puppets they were signed in NA to Elektra Records, which is owned by WMG, and then more recently Warner Bros. Records (they moved them to WBR when Elektra briefly closed about 10 years ago), which is also owned by WMG.
Technically, if Sean and co. was to successfully purchase Warner Music Group, they would be in control of the company that has negotiated rights to Metallica's records, at least for the time being. So it is actually kind of a (potentially) juicy story.
Technically, if Sean and co. was to successfully purchase Warner Music Group, they would be in control of the company that has negotiated rights to Metallica's records, at least for the time being. So it is actually kind of a (potentially) juicy story.
Dude, you are such a schadenfreude kill. I liked it much better the other way.
Maybe he is trying to buy a record label for Facebook, as that is pretty much the only thing FB are not able to get into fast - music. Buying Warner Music (via SP) would enable FB to rapidly sell music via FB like iTunes. Also putting the recent FB purchase of Israeli startup Snaptu in the same context, they might well be trying to create their own mobile OS - which will be FREE to mobile phone manufactures similar to Android. Massive advantage to FB if they do this is they have 550+m users that mobile operators would love to tap into with very litte marketing effort.
They mention that Warner Music is also Metallica's label, but in my opinion this would probably not factor into a business decision to purchase a record label. Warner is a huge label, and in many ways has not adapted to modern times. If Sean were to purchase Warner, I can't imagine him allowing the label to continue operating as it has. Maybe he would shape it in way which would be more appealing to how people wish to consume music. Who knows, maybe even music start ups will have a much easier time with legal problems and costs? That would be cool.
Whether or not WMG is Metallica's record label, if he does pull this off, that would be pretty Epic.
Come to think of it, why has someone else from Silicon Valley not done this ?
Why has Steve Jobs not bought a major record label ? I think the music business needs a good old fashioned changing of the guard and some techifying.
If Bill G. or Jobs or Zuck or anyone that has a ton of money bought one (or some) of those large labels, that could be pretty momentous.
Come to think of it, why has someone else from Silicon Valley not done this ?
Why has Steve Jobs not bought a major record label ? I think the music business needs a good old fashioned changing of the guard and some techifying.
If Bill G. or Jobs or Zuck or anyone that has a ton of money bought one (or some) of those large labels, that could be pretty momentous.
> Why has Steve Jobs not bought a major record label ?
Didn't that whole Apple Computer vs Apple Corps (Records) debate make it impossible for Apple to sell music? They skirted by for a while after iTunes because they technically weren't selling their own music.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
And it looks like they have brought it up a few times in the past few years.
Didn't that whole Apple Computer vs Apple Corps (Records) debate make it impossible for Apple to sell music? They skirted by for a while after iTunes because they technically weren't selling their own music.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
And it looks like they have brought it up a few times in the past few years.
I think a better question is why hasn't Apple created the modern-day replacement for the record label of olde? You know, doing stuff to increase visibility of artists and pump up the various scenes than they currently do with their current "you upload, we take a cut" mode. Like having local iTunes concerts, performed by artists selling on iTunes. Free admission if you buy a $20 iTunes card. Or putting on impromptu gigs at various venues like coffee houses, dive bars, or local music clubs to generate some buzz around talent. Get Woz involved and resurrect the Us Festival under the iTunes brand, with indie artists from all sorts of genres. Music is about so much more than pumping sound into your ears.
I agree with the "changing of the guard" sentiment, but I think it better to disrupt from the outside, rather than prop up the old guard for a while longer. There's on old saying "once a pickle, never a cucumber". I just don't believe the industry can be un-pickled.
I agree with the "changing of the guard" sentiment, but I think it better to disrupt from the outside, rather than prop up the old guard for a while longer. There's on old saying "once a pickle, never a cucumber". I just don't believe the industry can be un-pickled.
This would be great for the music business and music start-ups. Im thinking music start-ups would be given better terms and or breathing room to create innovative services that in turn strengthens the music industries's bottom line.
Napster boss? Parker? Uh. No.
Turnabout is fair play.
ha ha ha... maybe I will return later with a better comment, but have been overcome by a fit of the giggles...
Sean Parker seems to have a huge problem with grudges. He should let it go, grudges and desire for revenge make for bad business decisions.
Being that rich means having the luxury to make "bad" business decisions. If you don't use your money (for example on revenge) what's the point in collecting it in the first place?
Are you serious? People love music, record label is set in its ancient ways, 21st century music business guru wants to buy label.
This is a fantastic opportunity for him to make money, in my opinion.
This is a fantastic opportunity for him to make money, in my opinion.
It could be a great business decision, hes an advisor for Spotify. There is more going on than meets the eye in this instance.
Now that makes sense iani, if what I predict below is correct about FB and the fact that Spotify have secured a US deal with Sony and EMI + they might buy Warner Music. All of these put together would give them a tried and tested advertising model away from search ads, at better margins than Apple. Plus maybe musicians would possibly feel better, as less companies are taking cuts before the musicians get paid. That said Spotify have 1m paid customers and musicians are sort of only just understanding this new model...imagine their tunes were selling (bought or in exchange of an add) to 550m+ listeners. Plus why do you want a Spotify app when you could access it all from FB. Love it or hate it, but for the end user simplicity counts.
He got money to blow. One can't bring money to grave. Why not make it to good use while alive? Not that it's a bad business deal.
Very very very very big difference, in that they don't own Metallica's music. Metallica music has been owned by their own 'label'/corp since the first album (which is why they went to court, directly).
Though the association they have creates a nice narrative for the story, so I can see why this writer jumped on it.