What do you want to see from the Estate? (fans wishlist thread)

What type of release would you prefer?

  • Hi-Res album release

    Votes: 16 69.6%
  • Faux Unplugged set

    Votes: 6 26.1%
  • Full-on club experience

    Votes: 3 13.0%
  • Symphonic Masterpiece

    Votes: 8 34.8%

  • Total voters
    23
I made a thread a while ago, but it hasn't been properly updated in ages. I should get on that!

I'm always looking for more info, so anyone who has heard unreleased songs and is willing to share some information (e.g., completion, lyrics, sounds), I'd love to hear about it!

Oh please do that. We need a proper list with all informations we have ?
 
Come on. Let's be objective here.

1. Prince was infinitely more prolific than Michael.
2. There aren't 35 finished songs available, unless you count the various leaks. There's also demos and early versions of already-released songs, the vast majority of which are scratch vocals over music we've already heard (with a couple exceptions). Go listen to the demos of "Wanna Be Startin' Somethin'," "Baby Be Mine," "Billie Jean," "Jam," "In the Closet," "Keep the Faith," or "Gone Too Soon." I dunno about you, but I'm not paying money for a demo unless it sounds nothing like the completed version (e.g., "The Girl is Mine," "Thriller"/"Starlight").
3. Matt Forger said there's maybe one album's worth of releasable material left. I'd rather they spread that out than dump it on us at once. There will come a day when we will hear the last finished Michael Jackson song. I'd rather that happen years down the line than right now.
4. Right now, the HBO lawsuit is a more pressing issue than giving us music or concerts. Prince isn't facing anything like this.

I imagine my Estate defending is sounding like a broken record, but there seems to be an awful amount of unfair criticism going on here, especially in light of the upcoming Prince project: "We know the Estate is knee-deep in a $100 million legal effort to expose a heinous 'documentary' and the company that funded it, but who cares? We want them to empty the vault in one fell swoop, and to give us concerts that we aren't sure they have access to and that weren't recorded on multi-track, most of which would be sourced from tapes that wouldn't allow an HD upscale!"

Estate released non Michael Jackson songs and after almost 10 years they are still in his official discography. Prince's Estate didnt do such shit. Instead of releasing "new" songs right now, they should apologize for that, erase fake song from MJs discography and give us ****ing original versions of rest track from feral album. Prince's Estate didnt do such shit.
 
There's no comparing on this thread but one thing i have to say even if Prince songs not new at least his estate doing something.
 
Well i guess that means Prince did do more then Michael. danggggg. :laughing: that's gonna take awhile to sink in. wow. congrats prince. you deserve it just like Michael did.
What is it that they deserve? If Prince has recorded more material, then that's just what it is. It would seem to me that if Mike had a lot of usuable songs, then there would be no reason for fake songs or putting music over snippet vocals like Love Never Felt So Good. I though they should have had Justin Timberlake sing the 2nd verse form the Johnny Mathis version than just repeating what Mike sang.

It's like the deluxe Beatles albums that have been released the last 2 years. Or the Paul McCartney ones with a book & DVD of videos & behind the scenes footage. That's where the alternate Say Say Say was on. In their case, there's unreleased songs and alternate versions of already released songs.
 
Estate released non Michael Jackson songs and after almost 10 years they are still in his official discography. Prince's Estate didnt do such shit. Instead of releasing "new" songs right now, they should apologize for that, erase fake song from MJs discography and give us ****ing original versions of rest track from feral album. Prince's Estate didnt do such shit.

No one here is saying the Estate hasn't royally f*cked up in the past. They have. But that doesn't warrant deconstructing and complaining about every single minute decision they make, even if that decision is to forestall projects while they focus on winning the HBO lawsuit.

On top of that, I've accepted we will never get a direct admission from the Estate. While that would be the ideal endgame, realistically that could only result in a PR disaster the likes of which the world has never seen. No company has ever released fraudulent songs of a deceased artist. Not saying this is a reason to forgive them, but it would not even remotely surprise me if they never commented on it again.

And again, I'll state the obvious: there are very few remaining songs and, so far as we know, very little video footage. It makes more sense to draw that out over decades than to void the vault at once. Prince's Estate can afford it because Prince was one of the most prolific (and organized) artists to ever live. Michael wasn't.
 
Very few remaining songs sure but they release absolutely nothing and haven’t for 5 years
 
I’d like them to put on a traveling exhibition of MJ items. Outfits, awards, random stuff they have.
If I were them I’d create an MJ exhibit as Versailles Castle :D
Like Jeff Koons and Takeshi Murakami some years ago.
 
dam2040;4269164 said:
Very few remaining songs sure but they release absolutely nothing and haven’t for 5 years

Posthumous albums don't make Sony or the Estate any money.

Singers make the vast majority of their income via touring, merchandise, and sponsorships. Songs and albums are a very, very minute percentage of their overall earnings. That's sadly a reality of the current music industry, which makes it difficult for estates of deceased artists such as Michael to adapt: concerts are impossible, merchandise sales dissipate the longer removed we get from the artist's death, and sponsorships are lost to younger and more current artists.

That's why the Cirque shows and This Is It are the Estate's highest grossers, whereas Bad 25 lost money.

Worse yet, no company will come within spitting distance of Michael in the wake of Leaving Neverland, so any chance at another run with Pepsi or any sort of high octane marketing campaign with another household brand is gone for the foreseeable future.

New material has been scarce because it doesn't make financial sense. Just because the Estate and Sony are profitable companies doesn't mean they would or should spend money just because fans want them to. No business on Earth would do something without an expected financial return, and sadly that's isn't a guarantee in 2019 (especially parallel to the HBO lawsuit).

And it's again worth mentioning that (1) the Estate doesn't have half as much material as people insist they do, and (2) the material they DO have is either unfinished or in too poor condition to be released.

I want new stuff, too. But the Estate's logic is sound in my opinion. So many of these complaints seems to come from fan greed and an unfair sense of entitlement than anything. (All due respect.)
 
Cirque shows are nothing compared to new releases, or concerts released in real HD sourced from film and being shown in cinemas. do you really believe that they don't make any money? that's nonsense.
 
Singers make the vast majority of their income via touring, merchandise, and sponsorships. Songs and albums are a very, very minute percentage of their overall earnings. That's sadly a reality of the current music industry, which makes it difficult for estates of deceased artists such as Michael to adapt: concerts are impossible, merchandise sales dissipate the longer removed we get from the artist's death, and sponsorships are lost to younger and more current artists
The Rolling Stones probably haven't had a hit record since the 1980s. But their tours continue to be big money makers. Other veterans like Will Smith, Queen Latifah, & Ice Cube do more acting than music and Ice Cube also owns a basketball league. Rihanna has a popular makeup line with Fenty Beauty. Artists make very little money with streaming. But most artists didn't make a lot of money from record sales in the pre-internet days either because of the bad contracts labels signed them to.

Today there's oldies songs being used in movies, TV, commercials, and video games as well as movies & Broadway shows based on the catalog of different acts like the Four Seasons, Cher, Beatles, Abba, Dolly Parton etc. In the past songs were covered a lot so that is money for songwriters. Today's pop music is mainly hip hop, which doesn't really fit with cover versions. They tend to fit with the act who originally released it, not with someone else, so there's fewer remakes of modern hits. Just about anybody can perform a song like Stand By Me by Ben E King, but they cannot doKendrick Lamar, Megan Thee Stallion, Drake, or Cardi B songs. Also with sampling, any royalties is split with a lot of people, especially if the song contains multiple samples.
 
sales

Cirque shows are nothing compared to new releases, or concerts released in real HD sourced from film and being shown in cinemas. do you really believe that they don't make any money? that's nonsense.
How many concerts have been released to movie theaters over the decades? Not that many and very few made much money. The highest grossing one is Hannah Montana I think and that's because of her teen audience. Most albums by new popular acts don't sell a lot other than maybe Adele, Bruno Mars & Taylor Swift. Today's audience streams the music. They don't even put CD players in cars anymore as a default and newer laptops/PCs often don't have a disc drive. So the average person doesn't even own something to play a CD on. If a lot people bought music today, then Billboard wouldn't use streaming in their chart criteria and the RIAA wouldn't count a certain amount of streams as a sale of an album. Can't make a lot money from ghost sales.

It's hard for
any movie to make money today at the theater that's not superheroes, Disney remakes, family animation movies, and horror to a lesser extent.
 
Last edited:
what Michael released during his lifetime is everlasting. I couldn't ask for anything more :)
 
What i mean that Prince deserve fame just like Michael did. especially the fact he did more then him material work. i'm not comparing the two at all. i'm just saying though. congrats prince he deserve it just like Michael did.
 
Cirque shows are nothing compared to new releases

The Immortal tour is the eleventh highest-grossing tour in history with $371 million in ticket sales. The Vegas residency has been a consistent best-seller for nearly seven years, and has reportedly seen a huge upsurge in popularity in the wake of Leaving Neverland. And that isn't even accounting for merchandise sales, which (as established) is an artist's predominant source of income.

Furthermore, Forbes has credited the Cirque shows as one of the Estate's predominant sources of income in their year-end list of highest-grossing dead celebrities every year since 2012 (and even called them the number one generator in 2013 and 2015).

That's not nothing.

or concerts released in real HD sourced from film and being shown in cinemas. do you really believe that they don't make any money? that's nonsense.

Digitally remastering film to theater standards (2K resolution minimum) costs several hundred thousand dollars on average. The last theatrically-released concert film to gross over $1 million (One Direction: This is Us) came out six years ago. Since studios operate on the classic adage of "double your budget = break even" (which oftentimes doesn't apply when considering promotion, distribution costs, and theater fees), the likelihood of success is low.

There is literally and objectively no financial incentive for the Estate to release a concert right now. They'd lose money.
 
They could release ONE new song every two or there years. Let’s say they have 10 complete songs in the vault. That’s 20-30 years of new MJ music. That should be possible. After that they could start with making duets out of half-completed tracks.
 
mjfan_93;4269220 said:
They could release ONE new song every two or there years. Let’s say they have 10 complete songs in the vault. That’s 20-30 years of new MJ music. That should be possible. After that they could start with making duets out of half-completed tracks.

I had a similar idea: release one new song a month for the entire year, but alternate between demos and finished songs.

So basically:
January - demo of already-released song
February - never-before-heard song
March - demo of already-released song
April - never-before-heard song

So on and so forth.

That way, we get six new songs, six demos of never-before-heard songs, and a full year of excitement.
 
That way, we get ...

And what do they get? One quickly pirated misstep after another.

You must face reality: MJ's estate is a business entity that wants to maximize its profits. MJ didn't give us his unreleased songs and demos, too. So, his estate isn't handling this any differently, if you are totally honest.
 
The Immortal tour is the eleventh highest-grossing tour in history with $371 million in ticket sales. The Vegas residency has been a consistent best-seller for nearly seven years, and has reportedly seen a huge upsurge in popularity in the wake of Leaving Neverland. And that isn't even accounting for merchandise sales, which (as established) is an artist's predominant source of income.

Furthermore, Forbes has credited the Cirque shows as one of the Estate's predominant sources of income in their year-end list of highest-grossing dead celebrities every year since 2012 (and even called them the number one generator in 2013 and 2015).

That's not nothing.



Digitally remastering film to theater standards (2K resolution minimum) costs several hundred thousand dollars on average. The last theatrically-released concert film to gross over $1 million (One Direction: This is Us) came out six years ago. Since studios operate on the classic adage of "double your budget = break even" (which oftentimes doesn't apply when considering promotion, distribution costs, and theater fees), the likelihood of success is low.

There is literally and objectively no financial incentive for the Estate to release a concert right now. They'd lose money.
They dont even have to release in cinema. We just want an HD remastered concert from the King of Pop. Queen has done this several times. If I'm greedy then guilty as charged. Mj deserves a quality release handled with care top to bottom. I guarentee if Wembley looked like Moonwalker it would have done much better sales wise. This is also why MJ deserves a collectors label.
 
Depends on how much is in the vault they should release items at least every 2 or 3 years. they claim it's a lot of stuff is in there not counting the stuff that already been release. i feel they need to go slow with it. it's been 5 years since the last time they release something. it's time to release something else.

i just hope we all be alive when they release Michael very last item.
 
They dont even have to release in cinema. We just want an HD remastered concert from the King of Pop. Queen has done this several times. If I'm greedy then guilty as charged. Mj deserves a quality release handled with care top to bottom. I guarentee if Wembley looked like Moonwalker it would have done much better sales wise. This is also why MJ deserves a collectors label.

1080p film restoration costs anywhere from $80,000 to $450,000. Add in marketing, distribution, and promotional costs, and that figure balloons to anywhere from $1 to $5 million. Sales of Blu-Rays and DVDs have halved over the last five years, so a return on investment via home media is highly unlikely, whereas streaming services like Netflix and Amazon are said to only pay anywhere from $40,000 to $100,000 for multi-year exclusive rights (assuming, of course, that they'd even be willing to buy). Sony/the Estate would run the risk of losing money, which no company would (or should) do.

Queen released four different concerts on Blu-Ray over the last twelve years. Three of them failed to chart. One charted in eight countries, none of them being the US, Japan, Germany, or the UK (four of the world's five largest home-media markets).

Wembley disappointed because it was aimed at the diehards, which are but a small percentage of the overall audience. Check the reviews of any shopping website and you'll see that the general public wasn't privy to the VHS controversy. Concert films just don't engender good business anymore.

It's not a coincidence that the only concert Branca ever suggested theatrically releasing (Munich '97) already exists in 1080p, nor that the forthcoming Prince release isn't going to Blu-Ray (nor is it getting a separate release from the box set).

I completely agree that Michael deserves a high-quality release. But the Estate and/or Sony's reluctance to waste money on a film that statistically has a guaranteed likelihood of under performing (if not outright failing) makes total sense.
 
I’m more saying that we get NOTHING yet every one else gets huge box sets and can enjoy new material.

So frustrating
 
dam2040;4269237 said:
I’m more saying that we get NOTHING yet every one else gets huge box sets and can enjoy new material.

So frustrating
The other acts can have huge box sets because they recorded a lot of songs, more than was needed for an album. The other acts didn't milk 1 album for 2 or 3 years like Mike did, nor take long breaks between releases. So they had a lot more excess material. Some acts used extra songs for non-album B-sides on 45s and maxi singles like Prince, Depeche Mode, Sting, Paul McCartney, etc. Janet had a lot of B-sides too, Madonna had some in the 1980s. Mike didn't really do the B-side thing. He just usually put another track from the album or an instrumental version of the A-side.

Some of those box sets & deluxe versions of albums contain alternate versions of released songs and even messed up takes, unfinished songs, and studio chatter. I don't think the average Michael Jackson fan is interested in such material. Mike is kind of a too perfectionist artist for a set like that anyway
 
dam2040;4269237 said:
I’m more saying that we get NOTHING yet every one else gets huge box sets and can enjoy new material.

So frustrating

Not sure who "everyone else" is supposed to mean. The estates of other deceased artists have either been completely inactive (e.g., Tupac, Notorious B.I.G., John Lennon, George Harrison), shown limited activity (e.g., Amy Winehouse, Whitney Houston, Chris Cornell), or repackaged previously-released material with no incentive to purchase (e.g., Elvis, David Bowie). Even with the new Prince project, you're still required to buy an album you've already heard to gain access to the material you haven't.

I'm also frustrated by the lack of material. But that's not the Estate's main concern right now, nor should it be.

NatureCriminal7896;4269239 said:
I understand how you feel. it's unfair. Michael would not let this happen.

He sorta did. Bear in mind that the Estate (faults and all) has released more new material in the ten years since Michael's death, than Michael did in the final five years of his life.

I really don't mean to be on this constant pro-estate crusade, but so much of these complaints seem to come from a place of, "I'm not getting what I want and therefore the Estate sucks," which is skewed logic.
 
Not saying Estate sucks and I fully understand why no releases and no big cool box sets like Prince fans get or tonnes of concerts Elvis fans get on that label but it would be nice just to have something release I guess.
 
AlwaysThere;4269241 said:
He sorta did. Bear in mind that the Estate (faults and all) has released more new material in the ten years since Michael's death, than Michael did in the final five years of his life.

I really don't mean to be on this constant pro-estate crusade, but so much of these complaints seem to come from a place of, "I'm not getting what I want and therefore the Estate sucks," which is skewed logic.

It is not skewed logic.

Quantity does not translate into quality here.

A large part of that posthumously released material from the Michael Jackson’s Estate consists of contemporizations, remixed versions, songs with incomplete Michael Jackson's vocals, songs with inauthentic Michael Jackson's vocals, compilations of previously released material, and so on.

Such material is not exactly what his fans anticipate in general, and thus are understandably not really willing to pay for it.
 
Michael himself told in interview he recorded 100+ songs for every album. So I don’t believe the rumors that his vault is empty. Don’t know where this rumor came from. The BAD album alone was supposed to be a triple album. There is so much left, finished or unfinished. For invincible alone there is so much left in finished state that you can fill a whole album and release it.

It’s so obvious that the estate released songs which were leaked online before and then some. They have enough left. But they play the lazy annoying game.
 
Does anybody know if there is a more complete version of „Ghost of Another Lover“? I love the demo that leaked a few years ago.
 
IMWhizzle;4269287 said:
Michael himself told in interview he recorded 100+ songs for every album. So I don’t believe the rumors that his vault is empty. Don’t know where this rumor came from. The BAD album alone was supposed to be a triple album. There is so much left, finished or unfinished. For invincible alone there is so much left in finished state that you can fill a whole album and release it.

It’s so obvious that the estate released songs which were leaked online before and then some. They have enough left. But they play the lazy annoying game.

He wrote a lot of songs for each album. He didn't properly record all of them. And no way he recorded 100 songs for every album, that's nuts. And that contradicts what he said in the Mexico deposition. Most of the stuff he recorded that wasn't used wouldn't have good enough vocals or any vocals suitable for release.
 
Back
Top