|
|
Post by daniel on Dec 17, 2003 10:36:45 GMT -5
just wondered what fellow westerberg fans thought about Vagrant records. personally, i can't stand the label, although i suppose i appreciate the simple fact that they put out paul records. first, i can't stand their extremely over-the-top advertising (open any music magazine and you'll see what i mean) and of course i can never forgive them for releasing such crimes against music like dashboard confessional and the get up kids, etc, etc. secondly, i think they exploit any fans of artists they have - with paul, there was the 'limited' edition of the stand-alone 'mono,' which is so limited i see copies sitting around stores to this day, and which noting new was added, even artwork, than the version that came with stereo. and i hate that fucking written thing in there - 'real? unquestionably'. idiotic. and anyway, what about this whole CFMT dvd at best buy only, and then for all those who actually did force themselves to go to best buy to get it, they put out a 'new' version with extra songs. what drivel. i think paul try to get a full deal with 'anti-'. i think they've handled DMS pretty well, and they have put out so much great stuff. enough rambling for now...
two other things: 1) can anyone tell me the origin of the Stereo/mono outtakes, ie: did they just seem to show up one day on the internet or what?
2) did anyone see the recent issue of UNCUT (i think) with the clash on the cover - paul (and tommy) give a couple comments relating to individual songs. actually, i think paul gives one, and it sort of sounds like he never really liked the clash anyways...
|
|
|
|
Post by elgoodo on Dec 17, 2003 11:01:08 GMT -5
daniel-sahn,
The Get-Up Kids' Something To Write Home About is a good record....
I did catch their live act last year though, and it wasn't very good...
now,
did you hear about the initiation fee?...
|
|
|
|
Post by claypigeon on Dec 17, 2003 11:02:37 GMT -5
2) did anyone see the recent issue of UNCUT (i think) with the clash on the cover - paul (and tommy) give a couple comments relating to individual songs. actually, i think paul gives one, and it sort of sounds like he never really liked the clash anyways... I didn't see the interview, but I do think he liked the energy and attitude of the Clash more than the actual music. His punk preferences seem to lean more to the less serious stuff like the Ramones, Buzzcocks, Johnny Thunders. As far as Vagrant, any label that's willing to let Paul release whatever he wants, whenever he wants, and does a good job promoting it is ok with me. Out of curiosity, does anybody know how the sales for his Vagrant stuff have been compared to the others? |
|
|
|
Post by daniel on Dec 17, 2003 11:35:11 GMT -5
initiation fee? is this a joke i'm not in on? as for vagrant, i think paul could easily hook up with any number of labels which he won't be lost in the shuffle with. and yes, i know it may just be part of his curmudgeonly (sp?) nature, but he has made a couple disparaging remarks about vagrant, as in they want him to do this or that. i dunno...i just really hate the get up kids and dashboard....  |
|
|
|
Post by Kathy on Dec 17, 2003 17:14:13 GMT -5
and i hate that f*cking written thing in there - 'real? unquestionably'. idiotic. and anyway, what about this whole CFMT dvd at best buy only, and then for all those who actually did force themselves to go to best buy to get it, they put out a 'new' version with extra songs. what drivel. i think paul try to get a full deal with 'anti-'. i think they've handled DMS pretty well, and they have put out so much great stuff. enough rambling for now... Paul wrote that "real? unquestionably" thing so you can't be blaming Vagrant for that one. And Vagrant didn't have anything to do with the CFMT DVD release - it was released by a completely seperate company, one which is owned by Best Buy. I'm no apologist for Vagrant, believe me - I asked them for a couple of posters back in October and it's a good thing I didn't hold my breath waiting cause I'd be good and dead by now. So if you want to hate on them, be my guest, just hate on them for stuff they have actually done k. |
|
|
|
Post by ClamsCasino on Dec 18, 2003 0:46:46 GMT -5
And Vagrant didn't have anything to do with the CFMT DVD release - it was released by a completely seperate company, one which is owned by Best Buy. Did Vagrant really have nothing to do with the DVD? Redline did the distribution, but didn't Vagrant still put the whole thing together? |
|
|
|
Post by torethatbridgeout on Dec 18, 2003 5:33:01 GMT -5
two other things: 1) can anyone tell me the origin of the Stereo/mono outtakes, ie: did they just seem to show up one day on the internet or what? 2) did anyone see the recent issue of UNCUT (i think) with the clash on the cover - paul (and tommy) give a couple comments relating to individual songs. actually, i think paul gives one, and it sort of sounds like he never really liked the clash anyways... 1) yes but first they were carried around the world by hand 2) yes he never really liked the clash |
|
|
|
Post by Kathy on Dec 18, 2003 9:46:23 GMT -5
Did Vagrant really have nothing to do with the DVD? Redline did the distribution, but didn't Vagrant still put the whole thing together? Not to my knowledge. It was released by Redline and distributed by Ventura Distribution. I don't think Vagrant had anything to do with it, other than co-marketing the DVD and CD releases. k. |
|
|
|
Post by BigWheel on Dec 18, 2003 13:38:31 GMT -5
You have to realize that the vagrant deal is not structured like any record deal I have ever heard of.
They wanted Westerberg, amd in return for getting him were willing to accomodate his wishes.
The records may say "Vagrant" on them, but in reality it is pretty much like Westerberg having his own label.
generally a record label pays an artist for studio time. A producer. Some money for instruments or techs.
Then they master and press the record.
Then they advertise, ship, and sell the record.
Every single cost incurred with making, marketing, (even promos to radio) gets re-couped by a label before the artist can collect one cent.
In Westerberg's case there is no studio cost.
No cost for a producer.
No cost for anything except maybe tape to record on.
he sends them a finished work that they had to invest nothing in.
Vagrant packages things inexpensively. I am sure this appealed to Westerberg as well.
Westerberg even controlled the advertising (or lack of) for the vagrant releases.
There is nothing really for the label to re-coup before Westerberg starts earning on his records.
it is really quite bright. I have no idea of how the percentages are split between he and vagrant, but I would guess very favorably towards Westerberg.
They wanted him, and he wanted a label that gave him absolute control.
I think it is a real good match.
From what I have read vagrant honors his every wish, so if you have beef with vagrant, you are probably blaming the wrong party.
Don't forget that vagrant has some seriously high grossing acts on their roster. They are hardly a little indie company making it up as they go along.
My wish is that soon Westerberg will have accumulated enough money that he might venture out of his basement to another studio and give us a big time record.
The basement stuff is wonderful, but 4 is enough. We deserve a break. get a drummer and get a studio with a big room, and give it another try.
vagrant would pay for this I am sure. the question is does Westerberg want to gamble now that he has found a guaranteed way to earn money as an artist?
Having a kid is a big responsibility.
I hope he makes another record somewhere other than home.
The man needs to get out a little.
|
|
|
|
Post by ElegantMule on Dec 19, 2003 22:29:19 GMT -5
Sorry Big Wheel, I gotta disagree and agree with some of the others about Vagrant.
It's widely known that the in-store gigs tour PW did was only in stores heavily weighted by SoundScan to get some momentum behind S/M - as well as the special edition for us nutso fans who had to have the record early. They wanted it on Billboard to get the word out and hopefully sell more copies.
Second, I can't verify this but I've heard a lot of Vagrant promo staff were culled from Interscope's payroll, and when I was in radio Interscope was playing some of the dirtiest promo around. If that's the case Vagrant has their well oiled machine very well oiled. (Sorry, I have no hard facts on this - I completely bow that it's rumor.)
Vagrant also runs many of their younger bands ragged with touring. I've read interviews where bands - young kids really - say their touring schedules are grueling at best. And I know it's a management thing too, but I am willing to bet Vagrant is pulling some strings to make that kind of work happen. This also goes with the previously mentioned in-your-face advertising.
There was an big article in Punk Planet about Vagrant right after S/M came out, and all of the quotes from Egan were justifying their actions because you gotta play dirty in a dirty business and the bottom line is what counts. I'm a pragmatist, I'll buy that, but having an ounce of integrity once in awhile wouldn't hurt.
Sorry I went on and on but the whole Vagrant thing just sticks in my craw - there is something off about the whole deal between them and PW. I have a hard time believing that they followed Paul around for six years begging him for a record, and I also have a hard time believing that they did it *just* because they love Paul so much.
I want PW to finally make a buck, and if he felt he had to go the quick and dirty route just to see if anybody still cared, then the goal was achieved.
|
|
|
|
Post by BigWheel on Dec 20, 2003 9:35:53 GMT -5
I have to disagree with you now.
I am yet to see how Vagrant has screwed Westerberg or his fans.
Young bands complaining about grueling touring schedules are probably better off geting out of the van and going to college or joining the workforce. It is not suppossed to be easy, and it is not suppossed to even be fun.
According to Egan and Westerberg they are both happy to have each other. They had met before when Westerberg was on another major label and Egan was employed by that label.
As for interscope employing dirty promotional tactics, I have nothing to add. I am not sure how this applies, but I would guess if vagrant now employed these people and their practices maybe we would hear Westerberg (or any vagrant band other than dashboard) on the radio or even more often on cable radio.
As Westerberg says in the DVD "I am playing these shows because I signed a contract and they gave me money, and I am obligated to let people see me". I think he did the absolute minimum he could do to honor his contract and it matters not what stores the instores took place in. I am sure he would have played a state fair just to fulfill the contractual obligation of shows in the contract.
That line in the DVD really struck me wrong "to let people see me".
I am still at a loss as to how Vagrant has failed in this particular instance.
|
|
Brad
Star Scout
Posts: 364
|
Post by Brad on Dec 20, 2003 17:17:35 GMT -5
I tend to agree with Big Wheel on this one. I think that ALL record labels are concerned with the bottomline but that is just good business. I don't know but it seems to me that Vagrant has been really good to Paul. I can't think of another label that would let it's artist go off and make another record as an alter-ego on a different label. I know that Lost Highway let Ryan Adams do it with "The Finger" but that is the only example I can think of.
It seems with the low production on Westerberg's albums that it is a win/win situation for everyone involved.
I thought the 'limited release' of "Mono" was a little shady but it really didn't bother me since there wasn't an extra cost when it came out again with "Stereo". I just gave the extra "Mono" to a friend of mine who hadn't listened to Paul and he really liked it. So it actually worked at well for everyone again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kathy on Dec 20, 2003 19:20:46 GMT -5
On the in-stores, I can't say that I would look down on the label or Paul for performing in stores where the increased record sales would have an impact on the charts -- that's just business. The record store tour did a lot - it got press, it helped sales, it helped charting, it re-connected Paul with the fans and gave him a way to get his feet wet with performing again. You gotta get the biggest bang for your buck when you're spending marketing dollars. And while I think Vagrant is a good home for Paul in that they pretty much let him do what he wants, I think that him being the odd man out in their roster makes advertising and promoting him much more costly since they can't do any cross-promotion with other bands on the label.
As for the financial part of all this, who knows how much of the basement years are because of finances or because of a desire to be at home or a desire to be a one-man show after 20 years of working with other people. Prolly some combination of all of that and other stuff we don't know about.
From what I can see, they are aiming the records at Paul's established fan base and trying to bring in new listeners not thru radio play but by exposing his music to new listeners in alternative venues - soundtracks, tv shows, samplers (Starbucks), online listening (vh-1.com) and potentially thru commercials (amazon). These are much less expensive than getting radio play I would guess.
I dunno, it just seems like, if Paul is happy and making some money and the label is happy and making some money and we're getting new music on a very regular basis....where's the bad?
k.
|
|
|
|
Post by ElegantMule on Dec 21, 2003 21:58:25 GMT -5
I definitely don't think PW is being screwed by Vagrant. In fact, I really think he's finally figured out how to do his thing in a way he can deal with and it's damned impressive.
Big Wheel, Brad, and K, you make good points. I suppose I am still stuck on the emotional end of "Don't position yourself as a DIY punk label and then employ major label tactics to make it big" ethic that has dogged Vagrant since pretty much day one. I wonder a bit about some of the shady promo tactics - some of them are clever while some are just in your face stupid. In a general sense I don't like Vagrant and probably never will.
|
|
|
|
Post by BigWheel on Dec 22, 2003 9:26:09 GMT -5
I would NEVER consider vagrant to be a DIY or indie label.
I simply think somewhere there (Egan) gave Westerberg all the rope he wants and he can either run with it or hang himself with it.
I applaud vagrant for giving the man a contract that got him excited again.
other than that I have no feelings really for Vagrant. I like a few of their other bands though.
They are almost a "major" in disguise.
I personally have not seen a 12- 17 year old girl in 10 months without somekind of dashboard clothing on. The hoodies seem to be real popular..........
|
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Dec 22, 2003 10:12:28 GMT -5
I had the same reaction to the 'I had to let people see me" remark. that is so obnoxious, and what a turn-off.
perhap he IS a bitter old bitch, just like whatshisface said.
now I'm extra pleased that I called him a 'shithead' to his face.
|
|
|
|
Post by BigWheel on Dec 22, 2003 10:35:54 GMT -5
Most of that DVD gave me the creeps. I wish it had chapters so I could just go to the video portions for the 3 or 4 songs from Tremble.
Some of the live stuff (High Times) in particular sounds like he is playing guitar with vienna sausages instead of fingers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Dec 22, 2003 11:58:22 GMT -5
vienna sausages, huh? now I almost want to see the DVD. what was so creepy about it?
|
|
|
|
Post by GtrPlyr on Dec 22, 2003 12:23:43 GMT -5
Inow I'm extra pleased that I called him a 'shithead' to his face. What's the story with this? |
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Dec 22, 2003 13:30:32 GMT -5
it's just a stupid story, and it's not even worth going into, ok?
I want to know what's creepy about the DVD....
|
|
