$30 Billion!! ...a 2Dec08 article says that Sony/ATV was recently valued at $30 bil

[ruchie]

I do like this quote from James Blaney: The market is changing, their audience is getting older, and there's only so many times you can get people to pay for something they already own.

That is so true.........

I guess if Paul should have not told Michael about owning Catalogs,
History would be different.....

Maybe JL and PMc should have gotten together before JL died,put aside their differences and tried to buy those songs that they both sweated and worked hard on.....
Boy he's still kicking himself now but yes,He will get his songs back in some future.
In the meantime Michael, Ride that pony and never get bucked off.
The ride will stop but you can still ride as much as you can.




Nice article Rasta Pasta....I'll see if I can find the book.

 

[terrell]

umm??? .... I really do not agree with you..

and I look at the glass 1/2 full.. and would say Michael must have some money.. otherwise he would have "really" sold Neverland and would be touring non-stop ...

because the media didn't jump on this supposed Neverland sales.. tells me that there is really more to it to that joint venture Michael has with Sycamore in regards to Neverland...

but if it makes more sense to you to think he isn't worth much.. thats ok too..

EXACTLY. Even RF did not say MIchael does not own Neverland (and we know he has been digging to see if Neverland was sold). I said maybe was a business move for Michael because he using the deed. I even gave an example of myself and my mother using her deed to get her business in order YET some fans said Neverland is gone. NOt true as of now. I do not believe that MIchael does not own Neverland anymore. People do all kinds of dealing with their deeds. It is called Business and keeping your affairs in order.

 

[terrell]

No, no; this is all wrong. Didn't you all hear? MJ is completely broke. Dirt poor. I read it in the papers, and on the net. I heard it on tv too, so it must be true...

:lol:

YOu are funny. The media however do not know nothing. I continue to say, "if it is not your money or your business, you do not know the deal". I knew a lady who begged for money and looked poor. When she died and her family seached her home for items, this woman had over $250,000 in her house CASH MONEY. This is why I say, you do not know a person's business.

 

[wendy2004]

Sweet! It's sorta kinda nice to know but I agree with whoever said already that this kind of news could just make the folks who are hateful and greedy even moreso. Yeeps!

I'm starting to think maybe Paul felt someone would be generous and just "give him" his songs back without him having to pay a dime for them (like Michael later did for Little Richard). ErrrrrrrrIdunthinkso. :lol: Paul wasn't cheated out of his songs or bamboozled into giving up his rights to them. He gave his "babies" up fair and square to bypass high British taxes and he reaped the benefits of that decision for a while. And regardless of what specific rights may or may not revert to him in the future, I'm sure he regrets all these years passing by where he's not reaping the full benefits.

Also, whether it's 3 billion or 30, it's still pretty impressive when you consider what MJ paid for it. I agree that all the acquisitions Sony/ATV have made over the past few years may have brought the value way up. The Famous Music cat had some serious stuff in it...major classics. And let's not forget how the internet is playing a major part in music publishing lately (past 5 years maybe?). Ringtones, legal downloading and all those other technological thingies are part of the expanding profits. There was also this thing a year or 2 ago where Sony/ATV had struck a deal with Yahoo music regarding publishing song lyrics. All these things add value. So it's not too farfetched, imo, that 30 billion COULD be a close figure.

Thanks for posting, Rasta. :flowers:

 

[144000]

YOu are funny. The media however do not know nothing. I continue to say, "if it is not your money or your business, you do not know the deal". I knew a lady who begged for money and looked poor. When she died and her family seached her home for items, this woman had over $250,000 in her house CASH MONEY. This is why I say, you do not know a person's business.

amen to that, brother!!!

 

[Snow White luvs Peter Pan]

Wow that's pretty amazing :yes:

so it means the media are mother f.....s for saying Michael is broke :rant:

Thanks for the article Rasta :happy:

 

[144000]

how do you know its not typo?

did you interview the author yourself?

Remember what T-Mez has said of the value in court back in 2005?

The asset can't make a jump like this and the world economy is in recession now.

30b is not realistic and you will never hear a similar figure from anywhere except in this one and only article.

one article can mean new discovery. people discover and correct new things every day. i'd like for you to recover for me, the tmez quote.(a link) how do u know that the thirty billion is a typo? you haven't interviewed the author either. and how do u know that MJ's accountant doesn't have info that tmez doesn't have? all that aside....people don't always know the full extent of other peoples' business..and apparently, it's better that way. tmez didn't have to know how MJ brushes his teeth to help him. he just needed to know pertinent info.

i keep hearing one song..ONE song in a commercial, hundreds of times a year. that ONE song is in this catalogue. and that's just one of many. you can't tell me that's not reaping benefits. i'm hearing others from the logue in other commercials as well. not to mention britney spears raging renewed success. and beyonce. they're all atv. and Celine Dion who is currently performing a long stint in Vegas. MJ owns her publishing too, which means those songs are being repeated every night, just about.
did this new article not say that 'somebody' had the foresight to know the beatles' worth when Paul didn't and his management downplayed it? that somebody was Michael. now you are repeating what Paul felt back then.
you sound as if you don't have confidence in how many times radio will play the beatles. i'm telling you, the radio station where i lived and live in two states was inundated and still is, with beatles songs, programming, specials, ad infinitum. you don't think that is going on all around the world?

a bad economy is when the things you really want are no longer recession proof. just because you can't imagine it, doesn't mean it's not true. there are some items that i can think of that never seem to be affected by a 'recession', because there are some things that people will FIND a way to buy, no matter what.(some are worth mentioning, some aren't) that's where my reasoning comes from. you have to ask yourself... how come some people flourish in a 'bad' economy and others don't? there are people who say you can become rich in a bad economy, and others who say you cannot. why is it, that there are people who cannot imagine big numbers when it comes to Michael Jackson?

 

[144000]

Michael Jackson is a very BIG reason for the existence of the two biggest publishing companies in the world..Universal and Sony/BMG. it would be nice of some people would be able to believe that he is capable of and is holding onto much of that fortune, for life. kudos to those who do believe. and to those in the media who do believe but don't want to admit it..well..lol..no comment.

 

[terrell]

amen to that, brother!!!

Thank you; but again, I am a SISTA (GIRL).

 

[144000]

Thank you; but again, I am a SISTA (GIRL).

i knew that was a risk, and i had a feeling i'd get it wrong. sry.

 

[noa2]

I think it's 50 years after something is published its free to use. So beatles from back in 1958 is free. I don't know exactly how it works.

 

[Hess]

Wow that's pretty amazing :yes:

so it means the media are mother f.....s for saying Michael is broke :rant:

Thanks for the article Rasta :happy:

YEAH, the media has been wrong about that for years! They just don't want to write positive news about MJ!

 

[King]

So if Michael was to sell his half thats a huge $15bn...and just think that the collection gets bigger all the time! Michael Jackson might be struggling for cash but look at his assets...Wow!!

 

[mello1]

how do you know its not typo?

did you interview the author yourself?

Remember what T-Mez has said of the value in court back in 2005?

The asset can't make a jump like this and the world economy is in recession now.

30b is not realistic and you will never hear a similar figure from anywhere except in this one and only article.

So it's duly noted that you don't believe it.

But it's not unrealistic.

 

[mello1]

Actually, the value of catalogue has gone up as sales of records decline. Also, T-Mez was not telling the cort about the value of Mj's catalogue, he probably didn't know the true value himself.
I am not surprised that Mj fans should want to downplay Mj's worth, it never stops.

Exactly. It's like an antique. Unique and rare product, as compared with today's songs which like 50% or more of them are mere samplings of original works.

Makes original works all the more valuable.

 

[mello1]

I think it's 50 years after something is published its free to use. So beatles from back in 1958 is free. I don't know exactly how it works.

50 years after the DEATH of the original author and that's based on US copyright law. I don't know if the Beatles' songs were copyrighted under US or UK law. UK law is probably different.

 

[raingirl]

RO: Epstein also signed away a shocking 90 percent of the Beatles' merchandising sales to the Seltaeb company. Is this his biggest blunder?

JB: It sounds like a massive blunder, but the real shocker is the fact that Lennon and McCartney ended up losing the rights to their own songs. The last time Sony/ATV, which owns Northern Songs, was valued, it was said to be worth $30 billion!

What they lost in merchandising is peanuts compared to what they lost in royalties when they lost control of Northern Songs. The merchandising bubble would have only lasted a few years at best, but the royalties from songwriting will keep pouring in for as long as their music lasts. And it looks like that is going to be a long time.

I always wondered how in a world did that happen??? The Beatles losing the rights. I guess too much stone will do that to you. Today, even a school kid would know how to protect his/her rights.

 

[raingirl]

The reason people will never know Michael's true worth is because he unlike other stars doesn't go through the process of divulging all of his assets to such magazines like Forbes or Fortune to be included on their rich lists. Bottom line people don't sue people who are broke and then the supposed broke person Michael in this case generally is able to settle the debts and lawsuits.

Is that how it is? Wow, I never knew that. So people who want to tell the world that they are rich only get to be on on the list. In other words: They only list the people who give details of their assets.
Even in that field Michael doesn't like to brag. *thumbs up*

 

[144000]

I always wondered how in a world did that happen??? The Beatles losing the rights. I guess too much stone will do that to you. Today, even a school kid would know how to protect his/her rights.

that doesn't mean they will. the lure of fast easy money is greater than people think, until they are confronted with it. how do u explain how bad off so many people are today? it's the have it now, have it all attitude. and that hasn't stopped in the music industry. Michael is just one of the exceptions.

 

[144000]

Is that how it is? Wow, I never knew that. So people who want to tell the world that they are rich only get to be on on the list. In other words: They only list the people who give details of their assets.
Even in that field Michael doesn't like to brag. *thumbs up*

yeah. rare, isn't it?

i admit, there are people out there who like to talk about 'bling'..and they do get in trouble for it.

 

[hopespringseternal]

Is that how it is? Wow, I never knew that. So people who want to tell the world that they are rich only get to be on on the list. In other words: They only list the people who give details of their assets.
Even in that field Michael doesn't like to brag. *thumbs up*

Yep, that's how it is. Those magazines in many cases get the stars themselves along with their reps telling and talking about the value of various assets they have then Forbes goes about checking to make sure they are being factual before putting them on a number of rich lists they publish. Michael clearly just isn't trying to be all out like that, who can blame him when you have nutboobs always trying to sue not only him but any celebrity.

 

[Dri]

opcorn:

 

[Ta-mir]

First of all, having assets that are worth that much doesn't mean he has access to that amount in cash. He may still have cash problems from time to time. We don't know if this is the case or not. (I think not, but that's my guess.)

Second of all, we don't know whether he's even sold Neverland, much less why. Brian Oxman said only last week that it's all a joint venture with the intent of developing Neverland so that it can turn a profit. If this is true, it makes a lot of sense since Michael declared years ago that he would never live there again. He can't just let it sit there for ever without making some sensible use of the place.

Yep ... i agree with ya :yes:

 

[michaelsson]

i thought it was between 1-8 billion but hey im not shootin down 30 lol

 

[mkgenie]

No. one article doesn't mean it has to be new discovery

especially for the large sum of money

I can provide a link which clearly states:

Estimates of its total worth have risen sharply over the course of Jackson's trial on child molestation charges, from $US400 million to $US1 billion, The Wall Street Journal says, to as much as $US4 billion to $US5 billion, an assertion made last month by Jackson's lawyer, Thomas Mesereau.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/people/w...went-for-a-song/2005/06/14/1118645807684.html

If here remains anyone who followed the trail in 2005 from the start to end (I mean from November 2003 - June 2005) and collected every single information, I think they will all remember this.



I think I follow Michael Jackson and his finance and catalog assets more than you did, as you can see when I registered in here. When T-Mez said US$4-5b, many industry insiders still think it was overestimated then. Sony also had an option to buy MJ's half investment (which means 25% of whole Sony/ATV) for 1.1 billion, as the court file in my hand clearly states. I can show you if you PM me.

I don't care how popular Beatles in your states, their heyday was in 1960's but the catalog wasn't valued like what is for today. Anyway, plz know I do DID SO MUCH research on music industry all through the years. I bought court files, I bought Beatles books, I bought Michael Jackson's books, I gather any info as I can on the Internet.

So I won't believe the 30 billion even though I think its interesting. I think it is too optimistic. After a decade I may believe this figure, but in 3 years, whether its value can make a jump from 5 billion to 30 billion, I have my doubts. if you want to believe, that's fine.

one article can mean new discovery. people discover and correct new things every day. i'd like for you to recover for me, the tmez quote.(a link) how do u know that the thirty billion is a typo? you haven't interviewed the author either. and how do u know that MJ's accountant doesn't have info that tmez doesn't have? all that aside....people don't always know the full extent of other peoples' business..and apparently, it's better that way. tmez didn't have to know how MJ brushes his teeth to help him. he just needed to know pertinent info.

i keep hearing one song..ONE song in a commercial, hundreds of times a year. that ONE song is in this catalogue. and that's just one of many. you can't tell me that's not reaping benefits. i'm hearing others from the logue in other commercials as well. not to mention britney spears raging renewed success. and beyonce. they're all atv. and Celine Dion who is currently performing a long stint in Vegas. MJ owns her publishing too, which means those songs are being repeated every night, just about.
did this new article not say that 'somebody' had the foresight to know the beatles' worth when Paul didn't and his management downplayed it? that somebody was Michael. now you are repeating what Paul felt back then.
you sound as if you don't have confidence in how many times radio will play the beatles. i'm telling you, the radio station where i lived and live in two states was inundated and still is, with beatles songs, programming, specials, ad infinitum. you don't think that is going on all around the world?

a bad economy is when the things you really want are no longer recession proof. just because you can't imagine it, doesn't mean it's not true. there are some items that i can think of that never seem to be affected by a 'recession', because there are some things that people will FIND a way to buy, no matter what.(some are worth mentioning, some aren't) that's where my reasoning comes from. you have to ask yourself... how come some people flourish in a 'bad' economy and others don't? there are people who say you can become rich in a bad economy, and others who say you cannot. why is it, that there are people who cannot imagine big numbers when it comes to Michael Jackson?

 

[144000]

No. one article doesn't mean it has to be new discovery

especially for the large sum of money

I can provide a link which clearly states:




http://www.smh.com.au/news/people/w...went-for-a-song/2005/06/14/1118645807684.html

If here remains anyone who followed the trail in 2005 from the start to end (I mean from November 2003 - June 2005) and collected every single information, I think they will all remember this.



I think I follow Michael Jackson and his finance and catalog assets more than you did, as you can see when I registered in here. When T-Mez said US$4-5b, many industry insiders still think it was overestimated then. Sony also had an option to buy MJ's half investment (which means 25% of whole Sony/ATV) for 1.1 billion, as the court file in my hand clearly states. I can show you if you PM me.

I don't care how popular Beatles in your states, their heyday was in 1960's but the catalog wasn't valued like what is for today. Anyway, plz know I do DID SO MUCH research on music industry all through the years. I bought court files, I bought Beatles books, I bought Michael Jackson's books, I gather any info as I can on the Internet.

So I won't believe the 30 billion even though I think its interesting. I think it is too optimistic. After a decade I may believe this figure, but in 3 years, whether its value can make a jump from 5 billion to 30 billion, I have my doubts. if you want to believe, that's fine.

you are making a guess based on industry insiders' guesses. how do you know that THEY know?

why can't u just admit that you are gueessing as much as the rest of us, but you choose to guess the glass half empty(which is the case for some people when it comes to MJ and these matters), while we guess half full. you can do all the research in the world, but you are not MIchael's accountant. you have no idea whether MJ instructed his accountant to give Tmez all his finances in the world or not...nor do u or i know that tmez gave all the info there is...maybe he was protecting mj too, while giving enough info to protect him in court.

you choose to believe the lesser articles..we choose to believe this one. but none of us know any exactness of anything, no matter how long you have been here. you are not a fly on MJ's wall either. it's not impossible for a jump to occur in someone else's mind. but you have made it clear that it's impossible in your mind. that doesn't make it totally impossible.

each of our beliefs cover our own territory. they don't speak for someone else's. so, you believe what you believe, but that doesn't cover what MJ might believe, and what it may amass him.

but as the emboldened print states, even You admit that the catalogue's value is much greater today. so..that makes a big jump possible, and disagrees with what you said before.
plus, you don't know how much of the trial i followed. you only know what you followed. and that article you linked is from three years ago. a lot can happen in three years. you choose to believe one article over the other. that means, you just have an opinion. not a fact.

anyway...u didn't provide me the link i asked for, plus u made it impossible for me to pm you. you have a block. but if tmez made such a statement, it proves nothing about today's value of the catalogue.

and finally, you say the beatles' heyday was in the 1960's? actually, their heyday lasts as long as they get radio airplay, travel in musicals, get passed from generation to generation, etc. etc. etc.

 

[wannabestartinsomthin21]

In the least the catalog IS worth in the billions. Last I heard it was 2 billion. Which either way would make Michael's assests worth billions. Michael isn't broke and never has been. He's had cash flow problems, all of which he could do away with no problem by selling his assets. He doesn't want to though, and he's smart to hold on to them as their value keeps increasing.

 

[mkgenie]

interesting, if you have to put things this way

what you have said is also just opinion not fact

and estimation by you or by the book's author, are also just opinion

you are not accountant of MJ, and you can't give me the proof and evidence , even a court file to support your theory either.

you are making a guess based on industry insiders' guesses. how do you know that THEY know?

why can't u just admit that you are gueessing as much as the rest of us, but you choose to guess the glass half empty(which is the case for some people when it comes to MJ and these matters), while we guess half full. you can do all the research in the world, but you are not MIchael's accountant. you have no idea whether MJ instructed his accountant to give Tmez all his finances in the world or not...nor do u or i know that tmez gave all the info there is...maybe he was protecting mj too, while giving enough info to protect him in court.

you choose to believe the lesser articles..we choose to believe this one. but none of us know any exactness of anything, no matter how long you have been here. you are not a fly on MJ's wall either. it's not impossible for a jump to occur in someone else's mind. but you have made it clear that it's impossible in your mind. that doesn't make it totally impossible.

each of our beliefs cover our own territory. they don't speak for someone else's. so, you believe what you believe, but that doesn't cover what MJ might believe, and what it may amass him.

but as the emboldened print states, even You admit that the catalogue's value is much greater today. so..that makes a big jump possible, and disagrees with what you said before.
plus, you don't know how much of the trial i followed. you only know what you followed. and that article you linked is from three years ago. a lot can happen in three years. you choose to believe one article over the other. that means, you just have an opinion. not a fact.

anyway...u didn't provide me the link i asked for, plus u made it impossible for me to pm you. you have a block. but if tmez made such a statement, it proves nothing about today's value of the catalogue.

 

[144000]

interesting, if you have to put things this way

what you have said is also just opinion not fact

and estimation by you or by the book's author, are also just opinion

you are not accountant of MJ, and you can't give me the proof and evidence , even a court file to support your theory either.

so we are both in the same boat.

but the difference lies in one sentence that you said.

you said that the estimation is 'too optimistic'. that is a statement totally predicated on what you believe, not any fact. and how can anything ever be too optimistic? for you to say that, says a lot. i am willing to believe that if MJ thought there was such a thing as being too optimistic, then THriller would not have done as well as it has done.

how can anyone use the term 'too optimistic'? that term alone is a great limiter. but it's something that you cannot put on Michael. you think that it's possible for something to be too optimistic? then that's on you.

 

[AllTheLovelyFlowers]

In the least the catalog IS worth in the billions. Last I heard it was 2 billion. Which either way would make Michael's assests worth billions. Michael isn't broke and never has been. He's had cash flow problems, all of which he could do away with no problem by selling his assets. He doesn't want to though, and he's smart to hold on to them as their value keeps increasing.

No, he doesn't have to sell any of his assets. All he has to do to make cash is release new music and tour.