Is Stevie Still Signed... - Page 2

mikebise · #16 06-03-2010, 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vivfox

How the hell would I know?
Maybe you should be asking iamnotafraid?

LOL!!!!!!!! Hilarious!

BTW, does anyone else besides me actually picture Vivica for real saying these snarky, bitchy, hilarious posts when they read them?

Maybe she's cranky since she didn't get to be The Cougar, only the Hostess?

SapphireSister · #17 06-03-2010, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StreetAngel95

ok, well as of RIGHT NOW Stevie is indeed still signed to Warner's, but Fleetwood Mac is not...(i don't think that's news - besides, were we ever really going to get anything new from them?)

I just talked to my source at Warners who works in promotions to verify that Fleetwood Mac is still signed with Warner Brothers and they are for sure. I didn't ask her about Stevie because every time I do she says "I don't know anything about Stevie. You'll have to ask her publicist".

Nathan · #18 06-03-2010, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikebise

LOL!!!!!!!! Hilarious!

BTW, does anyone else besides me actually picture Vivica for real saying these snarky, bitchy, hilarious posts when they read them?

Maybe she's cranky since she didn't get to be The Cougar, only the Hostess?

No, not anymore, but I tripped out for a long time because I was sure that it really was Vivica, and I just thought it was so cool that she was a fan.

SapphireSister · #19 06-03-2010, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nathan

No, not anymore, but I tripped out for a long time because I was sure that it really was Vivica, and I just thought it was so cool that she was a fan.

She's just a huge Vivica fan right? Viv, help me out here...

louielouie2000 · #20 06-03-2010, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SapphireSister

She's just a huge Vivica fan right? Viv, help me out here...

He.

SapphireSister · #21 06-03-2010, 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by louielouie2000

He.

Seriously? I'm going to bow my head in shame lol.

louielouie2000 · #22 06-03-2010, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SapphireSister

Seriously? I'm going to bow my head in shame lol.

It's a common misconception using a name like VivFox

. The above picture is a hint at what his real name is

Fannymac · #23 06-03-2010, 01:33 PM

I thought FM resigned with Warners for a one album deal....considering how they did NOTHING to promote SYW, I would think the band would realize it's time to find a new label....come up with a great album, and they would have no problem!

StreetAngel95 · #24 06-03-2010, 02:39 PM

^maybe thinking about going to Interscope again?

APerfectLie · #25 06-03-2010, 03:14 PM

I am no recording contract guru, but from my understanding, since Stevie and Fleetwood Mac were both under contract to WB for their last albums, WB still and will for many many years have the rights to that music and the rights to sell and promote it however they wish. Since they own these rights and these are the last albums they have done, they are still considered as being under the WB label even tho they may have fulfilled their contracts. Stevie released Soundstage last year, and WB still has the rights to sell and promote it and since Stevie hasn't released anything new under a different label, she is still under WB since they own all her stuff at this moment, however I don't believe that means she is contracted to do any more albums for WB, nor does Fleetwood Mac.

Fannymac · #26 06-03-2010, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by APerfectLie

I am no recording contract guru, but from my understanding, since Stevie and Fleetwood Mac were both under contract to WB for their last albums, WB still and will for many many years have the rights to that music and the rights to sell and promote it however they wish. Since they own these rights and these are the last albums they have done, they are still considered as being under the WB label even tho they may have fulfilled their contracts. Stevie released Soundstage last year, and WB still has the rights to sell and promote it and since Stevie hasn't released anything new under a different label, she is still under WB since they own all her stuff at this moment, however I don't believe that means she is contracted to do any more albums for WB, nor does Fleetwood Mac.

Just because the label owns the rights to their back catalog, it doesn't mean an artist is still "with" the label. As far as new recordings go, both FM and Lindsey had honored their deals with WB, but (in my opinion) mistakenly re-uped with them for their last releases, to less than stellar results.
Going to another label for any future releases, be it Stevie, Lindsey or FM would in no way effect their royalties, but you can also bet there's NO WAY Warner's is letting go of that cash cow catalog.
It might be wise to think about a new label ~ say, Sony ~ that might actually be excited about having the band, but you can bet even money it will only be new recordings...no one else is getting their hands on the back catalog!

APerfectLie · #27 06-03-2010, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fannymac

Just because the label owns the rights to their back catalog, it doesn't mean an artist is still "with" the label. As far as new recordings go, both FM and Lindsey had honored their deals with WB, but (in my opinion) mistakenly re-uped with them for their last releases, to less than stellar results.
Going to another label for any future releases, be it Stevie, Lindsey or FM would in no way effect their royalties, but you can also bet there's NO WAY Warner's is letting go of that cash cow catalog.
It might be wise to think about a new label ~ say, Sony ~ that might actually be excited about having the band, but you can bet even money it will only be new recordings...no one else is getting their hands on the back catalog!

That's exactly what I mean. Some people have pointed out in earlier threads that Stevie and FM are still on the WB site, still listed as being WB artists, and they still have WB links and such on the nicksfix and fleetwoodmac.com therefore they MUST still be under contract with WB. What I am trying to say is that WB makes a lot of money off of FM and Stevie, therefore they don't want to drop them like a hot potato just because they fulfilled their contracts, so they still associate with them, keep them listed as their artists, and promote their stuff since they own all of the rights to their stuff right now, but it doesn't mean that Stevie or FM is still in any way "signed", or contracted to stay with WB for any new music they release. I guess what I am trying to say is that Stevie will continue to be considered to be under Warner Brothers until she officially announces she is leaving them and/or signs on with someone else even tho she may not have an ongoing contract with WB.