Lennon/Mccartney Songs........

roadrunners · Post by **roadrunners** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 3:58 pm

na, id say paul is the cause of the pettineess for even bringing up the notion that the songs should be changed

simer4001 · Post by **simer4001** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 4:24 pm

Alex, it goes back much further than that. This was just one of the latest volley's. One of the major reasons that Michael Jackson owns the Lennon/McCartney catalog is Yoko Ono. FYI... It isn't about the "SONGS" being changed. It isn't even about HIS SONGS being changed. It was ONE song. "Yesterday". What does she care? Does anyone think Lennon had anything to do with it? Is she going to lose money? Are any of us going to think less of John for it? She is a selfish, evil, petty, vindicitve woman. This will go on until they are both dead...maybe even longer.

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 4:37 pm

I thought the reason they lost the catalogue was supposedly because McCartney was too cheap and it got stolen out from under their noses? And if this trial goes the way I think it will go it will be for sale within the year too.

lawton · Post by **lawton** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 6:57 pm

Guys, I thought that he (Jackson) had already sold the publishing rights (to Sony, $300M), within the past six weeks? Did I read something wrong? And it wasn't McCartney that was too cheap. Paul wanted to raise the bid, but Yoko wouldn't go up with him.

And the albums that have the credits listed "McCartney/Lennon" were the subsequently ruled "illegal" Vee-Jay "Introducting the Beatles" albums (2 versions in stereo, two in mono). Those are quite valuable if authentic, btw... but most of the copies you see around today are actually forgeries. It's THE most forged album of all time.

alanz · Post by **alanz** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 8:25 pm

As Mick Jagger so eloquently puts it in The Rutles' "All You Need is Cash" movie:

"Women... always gettin' in the way."

360dave660 · Post by **360dave660** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 4:48 am

in mc cartney's '97 book "many years from now" there are several strange passages where he gives the percentages of his work and john's to a given song. I wish he had provided more info on the instruments used !!! That book also goes into detail about the heroine problems that the Ono-Lennons were suffering from '68-on.

From the Northern Songs listing problems in '69 on, the lack of market/finance knowledge bit the beatles several times on the behind.

The role of yoko in the breakup will officially a state secret for a good 100 yrs after they're all deceased I'd assume. As seen so clearly in the anthology history and a book like McCartney's, there is a chasm between what went down and what "officially occured".

Essentially it was all written by Rishikesh in '68; drugs, wives, "same-old, same-old", etc ended most of the inspiration. The back catalogue let them still do two albums as the beatles after the white album and each individually put out pretty good albums, if not great depending on the beatle, through early '71.

The beatles were also seen as pop-culture holy men. It never even seemed possible that they would get together in the seventies. No one ever imagined that it could have been okay just to take a hiatus, do their own things, get over the issues and come back, say in '75, to do it again. I still remember being shocked when Nike used "Revolution" in a commercial in '90; almost thinking that one could not do that with a Beatles song.

simer4001 · Post by **simer4001** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 8:15 am

Lawton,

I think you are correct re: Yoko holding out and MJ getting in there to buy the rights. I'm not sure if Sony owns the rights, but I know that they have the rights of first refusal. Meaning that if MJ were to sell, he has to offer the rights to Sony first. I may be wrong on this, but I think Sony may have helped him finance the purchase.

I've never heard the illegal thing before, but that may be true.

There are 2 different versions of "Introducing the Beatles". I think the first issue does not include "Love Me Do" or "PS, I Love You". Whatever the track listing differences are, I believe the first issue is rarer and worth more.

adam_swapp · Post by **adam_swapp** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 3:36 pm

This is what I remember (and I'm not an anal Beatles obsessivoid, so it may be wrong): The Beatles lost the rights to their songs when Allen Klein sold them. I seem to remember reading an interview from George wherein he said that it happened while both John and Paul were out of the country, and that he objected at the time, saying that they should at least have the opportunity to bid on the songs. I think it's also fair to say that, even at that time, the Beatles didn't realize the future value of these rights.

Re. Yoko: I've never seen any evidence that she had anything to do with this.

Re. Michael Jackson: I believe that he pledged his share of the rights as collateral towards a loan from Sony against future earnings. Since he sells about as many records as I do these days, he's either got to come up with $250 million or fork over the rights. Of course, I'm not privy to the agreement, but he might be able to sell the rights (i.e. to the surviving Beatles and their estates) and pay Sony back with cash.

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 4:41 pm

How do you know if you have a fake VeeJay Introducing The Beatles?

simer4001 · Post by **simer4001** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 4:55 pm

Adam,

In 1967 John and Paul had the opportunity to purchase Northern Songs from Clive Epstein and NEMS after Brian Epstein passed away. Due to their inexperience as businessmen and the influence of certain substances, Lennon and McCartney dragged their feet. Clive eventually sold the catalog to Sir Lew Grade, chairman of EMI. In the 80's Sir Lew Grade put the rights up for sale. McCartney approached Yoko who balked. This is when MJ swooped in and purchased the rights. I'm not saying Yoko is responsible, afterall McCartney had the means to purchase the rights. However, I believe Yoko stalled so Paul wouldn't get the catalog.

adam_swapp · Post by **adam_swapp** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 5:50 pm

"McCartney had the means to purchase the rights. However, I believe Yoko stalled so Paul wouldn't get the catalog."

These two statements are inconsistent on their face. As you say, McCartney had the financial means to buy ATV with or without Yoko. I think it's more likely that McCartney balked at the ~$47 million price that included a lot of stuff besides Beatle songs. He is, after all, notoriously cheap.

Moreover, I don't believe that Clive Epstein and NEMS ever owned a majority share of Northern Songs. In fact, I think they only owned about 7.5%. I believe that the sale of Northern Songs to Lew Grade was initiated by Allen Klein in 1969. As the Beatles manager (and a man with an unethical dispostion), he stood to reap a percentage of the proceeds, even if it was not in the long-term interests of his clients. To this end, he convinced Dick James (of Dick James Music) and Charles Silver (Northern Songs' chairman) to sell their shares (37.5%) of the company to Grade. Given that Northern Songs was a publicly traded company, these shares allowed Grade to acquire a majority stake, and thereby take the company private, even in the face of a counteroffer from Lennon and McCartney. This forced Lennon and McCartney to sell their shares, even though they owned 30% of the company.

In 1984, ATV (the entity that included the former Northern Songs and several thousand other titles) went up for sale. That's when McCartney declined to buy and Michael Jackson purchased the rights.

Or not.

simer4001 · Post by **simer4001** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 6:05 pm

Bob,

I wouldn't know how to tell a fake from the real thing. I had never heard that this album had been forged and released. I do know, however, that VeeJay themselves re-released this album several times in different formats to try and cash in on Beatlemania with the only songs they owned rights to. It worked for a while, but the public finally got on that they were purchasing the same album.

simer4001 · Post by **simer4001** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 6:16 pm

Hmmm. That still doesn't sound right to me. I will have to do some research. But I know that the deal for John and Paul to buy Northern Songs involved Clive Epstein. Maybe he wanted to sell his shares to John and Paul.

You answered your own question about why Paul didn't flip for the entire cost. He is cheap. I also remember something about the Lennon estate being able to either earn more royalties or something along those lines after a certain number of years. That part is fuzzy to me. But that was one of the reasons Ono balked at the deal.

You may be right, but I would have sworn that is how it happened. Regardless, Yoko's delay cost them the rights.

adam_swapp · Post by **adam_swapp** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 6:27 pm

I still don't understand how you can say that "Yoko's delay cost them the rights" when you admit that McCartney had both the means and the opportunity to buy them himself. Regardless of the events of 1969, McCartney could have purchased the songs in 1984 - with or without Ono's participation or cooperation. He didn't do so. IMO, that's solely on him.

atomic_punk · Post by **atomic_punk** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 7:03 pm

I remember at the time, hearing an interview with him, and him telling Michael J that publishing was a good business to be in. When the time came to buy his own songs back, Paul did try and put together an offer, but was outbid. He said that he REALLY had a problem paying that much for songs that he wrote for free! But that's what publishing is all about...