Written with the cooperation of the Klein family (and therefore ABKCO), music journalist Fred Goodman has produced what I believe is the first in depth study of Allen Klein.
Goodman is a former RS editor and it is hoped might shed fresh light on the behind the scenes manouverings in the 1960s which led to ABCKO gaining control of the Stones work (and publishing) up until 1971.
It may also make reference to the current position regarding the 60s material and to what extent there might be any hidden gems hiding in ABKCOs security vaults.
Personally, I would also be interested to learn more about Andrew Oldhams role. His otherwise excellent autobiographies rather avoid dealing with such issues.
Also, how the group and its advisers seemed oblivious to their tax debts and why sufficient monies wasnt put aside at the time of receiving income.
Thats what Accountants are paid for!
Publication date:23 June.

Quote
jlowe
Written with the cooperation of the Klein family (and therefore ABKCO)...

Let me just get my salt shaker.

Read Goldman's bio of Lennon ages ago. Lots of contentious stuff in that one...

Quote
Send It To me
Read Goldman's bio of Lennon ages ago. Lots of contentious stuff in that one...

You're thinking of Albert Goldman, not Fred Goodman. And Goldman ain't writing anything new; he's dead. Goodman is the author of "Mansion on the Hill - Dylan, Geffen, Springsteen and the Collision of Rock and Commerce".



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-29 07:41 by Roscoe.

review of book here -- [www.iorr.org]



ROCKMAN

Thanks for posting. I'll look forward to reading!

this may be a discussion for a separate thread-

but I have questions about what went on between Klein and the Stones.

Jagger has mentioned, as has Keith, that he did a lot of good for them, then screwed them. Klein pulled some legal moves that are still affecting the Stones, in that his company owns their songs up to 1971, is that right?

was that the trade-off for getting out of their contract with him, in order to form Rolling Stones Records?

do I have that right?

Keith usually refers to Klein with a mixture of admiration and vague resentment.. ( " that's the price of an education..")

I reckon Mick's take on it is different..

Its a more complex picture ofcourse than the media paints.
When Klein renegotiated their Decca contract in 1965 he secured close to a 20% royalty rate which was very good at the time, better than The Beatles got from EMI at their renewal in 1967. However, I believe Klein's /ABKCOs rake off was 50%. I am not certain of this, but if so Col Tom Parker enjoyed the same level with Elvis.
This was Kleins strength, negotiating good deals for his artists but off course getting a generous cut for himself.He also cut an "outsider" figure, anti establishment which would have impressed 22 year old Keith in particular at the time. Mick would have been impressed by his grasp of figures, straight talking and the apparant financial rewards to come.
Most people wil be aware of the Nanker Phelge US company formed by Klein which then received the royalties direct.The deal also enabled Klein to pay relatively small sums over a 20 year period, this on the reasonable assumption that the groups shelf life might not stretch beyond 1970. It was also supposed to reduce tax liabilities (ironic as it later turned out).
Matters seemed to sour in time as:
1. As documented in Stone Alone Klein seemed reluctant to pay over monies to pay even office running costs. Why isnt clear, he had the monies. For example, in 1969 he was prepared to put up a substantial shareholding in MGM in order to bolster the Beatles bid to own Northetn Songs.
2.Klein seemed oblivious to their tax position, a very basic responsibility of any Management /Accountancy company. Again, difficult to understand his strategy.
3.By 1969 Mick in partucular saw little added value in a company or individual representing them, especially at such cost. Dylan, the Beatles, solo Beatles were also going independent.
4. The deals with Oldham which ensured that music recording and publishing contracts were lost forever. Wether the group had a chance to buy? Not sure. I had heard that the recording copyrights were offered to them but they were advised (by whom?) that it would lead to tax problems later!

So the marriage turned sour, it has to be said of course that ALO comes out badly also. Klein was always about money, ALO the clients interests first.

When the inevitable lawsuits occured in 1971 they sued for something like 29 million US dollars, a huge amount and settled a year later for around 10% of the figure! In the eyes of the law (contract) we must assume he acted legitimately.
The Stones could have sought independent advice (maybe did and ignored). The copyrights were never owned by the group in the first place (very few artists at the time had the foresight to achieve this, probably preferring income to assets).
So the settlement was hardly a victory for the Stones and Micks comment in 1972 that it would mean they would never have to deal with their ex Manager again, shows he still had a lot to learn about the music business.

When it comes to business, Mick is clearly less forgiving than Keith. No doubt Keith for his part is less forging on matters close to his heart.

Quote
duke richardson

Keith usually refers to Klein with a mixture of admiration and vague resentment.. ( " that's the price of an education..")

I reckon Mick's take on it is different..

Well, they can be quite cool about Klein NOW - after making so much money in the years following him.
Imagine if they'd broken up or got unsuccessfull in the early 70's.

I could write books about those years when we did a fanclub and got torn between Decca, Klein and the Stones.
Not really knowing what went on then we had lots of stuff from Decca.Stones office suddenly forbade to use any.Then we had to stop the newsletter. They even wanted to stop the club.
Then we got an offical permission - with some kind hand written words from Mick.But it was too late.Some 15 years old were "ruined".
During the proceedings or shortly after i have to say we were twice invited, once to an Hamburg pressconference - and to meet Keith and Anita in Vienna (or Munich) for an interview together with another fanclub guy from switzerland.Unfortunately we learned we had to pay for everything ourselves.So we had to decline (plus we were a bit embarrassed being so young).
But what I meant- the times were rough . .

Fortunately, their working relationship with Jody Klein seems to be both professional and sincere. The sins of the Father need not be visited on the son.

From the late George Harrison:

Watch out now,
Take care
beware of soft shoe shufflers,
Dancing down the sidewalks.
Pushing you in puddles
in the dead of night,
Beware of ABKCO.

So... What's the state of the internal affairs between them now? The book promises info on that subject.

Quote
duke richardson
this may be a discussion for a separate thread-

but I have questions about what went on between Klein and the Stones.

Jagger has mentioned, as has Keith, that he did a lot of good for them, then screwed them. Klein pulled some legal moves that are still affecting the Stones, in that his company owns their songs up to 1971, is that right?

was that the trade-off for getting out of their contract with him, in order to form Rolling Stones Records?

do I have that right?

Keith usually refers to Klein with a mixture of admiration and vague resentment.. ( " that's the price of an education..")

I reckon Mick's take on it is different..

You bet. Mick said he still wakes up at 3 am writhing in humiliation over how he lost the Stones' legacy to Allen Klein.

"Well your mouthpiece squawks as he spreads your lies
But you can't pull strings if your hands are tied
Well your teeth are clean but your mind is capped
You leave your smell like an alley cat..."
Lennon's stab at Klein. He has been famous in both Stones and Beatles lore. It says a lot that by the mid 70s all the former Beatles were suing him. And he lost. And he spent time in a Federal Prison for Tax evasion. Oh and he siphoned off millions from the Bangladesh shows! Sounds like he was the epitome of sleazy music managers. It would be interesting to read to see what kind of tact the book takes.