I remember that I've read somewhere that the remaining Stones offered Brian a financial compensation for leaving the band. Does any one know something about this?

Is financial compensation not general practice, though? I'm not really founding this on anything in particular, but cannot imagine a prominent member of a group getting fired without some kind of a 'pay-off'

Quote
Big Al
Is financial compensation not general practice, though? I'm not really founding this on anything in particular, but cannot imagine a prominent member of a group getting fired without some kind of a 'pay-off'

it wasn't like being fired from a job. there was no salary. i'm not sure what the terms of their partnership were or how careful they were about tying up loose ends, but it would seem that he might have owned a portion of the "rolling stones" name that they would either have to buy out from him, or continue to pay him a licensing fee for. but if they were like other bands of that time, it's possible no one thought it through carefully and the loose ends became immaterial once he passed away, rather than the seeds for legal squabbles years later (e.g. like pink floyd).

it also seems likely that he was owed a balance of money from ABKCO that had been withheld, which he may or may not have been paid.

Quote
thabo
I remember that I've read somewhere that the remaining Stones offered Brian a financial compensation for leaving the band. Does any one know something about this?

Those that tells, don't knows...and those that knows, don't tells...

Wasn't it 100,000 quid? That would have been a half million US dollars.

There was some agreement, but all I recall about it is that an amount was to be paid yearly.
I also recall an interview from the mid '60s where Bill said the agreement was that the compensation
would only go to members who were fired rather than quitting. I sure wish I could locate that interview again -
it would explain a lot. :E

As for a "golden handshake" being "general practice": That's something every group decides for themselves.

I seem to remember reading it was either 50,000 or 100,000 quid which was a princely sum in 69 when a decent car cost £3000 and a house about £15,000.

Supposedly it was to be an initial sum of £100,000, then £20,000 per annum for as long as The Rolling Stones would exist as an active working entity.

Quote
stonehearted
Supposedly it was to be an initial sum of £100,000, then £20,000 per annum for as long as The Rolling Stones would exist as an active working entity.

This is what I recall as well.

This is what £100,000 is worth today -

£1,280,000 using the retail price index

£2,440,000 using average earnings.

How did they hope to pay that, since they were said to be broke with a big tax bill hanging over their heads?

Quote
Bliss

Quote
stonehearted
Supposedly it was to be an initial sum of £100,000, then £20,000 per annum for as long as The Rolling Stones would exist as an active working entity.

This is what I recall as well.

This is what £100,000 is worth today -

£1,280,000 using the retail price index

£2,440,000 using average earnings.

How did they hope to pay that, since they were said to be broke with a big tax bill hanging over their heads?

Well, at the time, The Stones themselves weren't aware of their looming tax dilemma, which didn't become a huge albatross for them until 1971 or so, after they had rid themselves of Allen Klein and realized how their financial affairs were being (mis)handled.

The Stones received their money through ABKCO, so I imagine it was Klein and company that was given the duty of handing over the payments to Brian that The Stones themselves (or The Stones' office) agreed upon.

Because ABKCO took over all rights to Rolling Stones recordings and performances up to and including 1970, that would mean that they are still responsible for paying out royalties to the Brian Jones Estate.

I wonder what Pete got from Brian?

2 1 2 0

Quote
stonehearted

Quote
Bliss

Quote
stonehearted
Supposedly it was to be an initial sum of £100,000, then £20,000 per annum for as long as The Rolling Stones would exist as an active working entity.

This is what I recall as well.

This is what £100,000 is worth today -

£1,280,000 using the retail price index

£2,440,000 using average earnings.

How did they hope to pay that, since they were said to be broke with a big tax bill hanging over their heads?

Well, at the time, The Stones themselves weren't aware of their looming tax dilemma, which didn't become a huge albatross for them until 1971 or so, after they had rid themselves of Allen Klein and realized how their financial affairs were being (mis)handled.

The Stones received their money through ABKCO, so I imagine it was Klein and company that was given the duty of handing over the payments to Brian that The Stones themselves (or The Stones' office) agreed upon.

Because ABKCO took over all rights to Rolling Stones recordings and performances up to and including 1970, that would mean that they are still responsible for paying out royalties to the Brian Jones Estate.

Depends on whether he received anything for his share of the stones' name, which abkco doesn't own.

....under what conditions?.....stormy



ROCKMAN

Gross indecency.

Quote
with sssoul
There was some agreement, but all I recall about it is that an amount was to be paid yearly.
I also recall an interview from the mid '60s where Bill said the agreement was that the compensation
would only go to members who were fired rather than quitting. I sure wish I could locate that interview again -
it would explain a lot. :E

This is an interesting info. There has been a lot of speculation in Brian Jones forums (and elsewhere), that Brian's departure was not simply that of getting fired, but he really wanted to go as well. If Bill's sayings are true that was a kind of difficult situation for Brian. He needed to get sacked to get the compensation. That might explain some of his irrational, unfunctional behaviour. But then again, in some of Bill's books he says that Brian had informed the rest that he will resign - which took place just before Mick, Keith and Charlie visited him.

I really don't have an opinion about this; the whole thing was so complex and many-dimensional. Mock Jogger would surely have some interesting to say about this.

- Doxa

Anyone interested in the topic of this thread, and many things connected to it, I'll advice to take a look at this thread, and what Mock Jogger says there. There are a lots of sidepaths and whatever crap, but his posts are highly recommended to anyone who has an open mind to the issue. I don't necessarily agree with him, but his points are wonderfully argued:

[www.iorr.org]

- Doxa

Quote
thabo
I remember that I've read somewhere that the remaining Stones offered Brian a financial compensation for leaving the band. Does any one know something about this?

fired under bad conditions no matter what the compensation was.

I think Brian Jones was paid the equivalent of $200,000 plus $40,0000 every year the Stones were together.

[youtu.be]

I only read one clear answer on this question and it cames from: swiss
"""Those that tells, don't knows...and those that knows, don't tells..."""

From Bill Wyman interview in K-SHE95 "Real Rock News"

"As part of his agreement to quit the Rolling Stones, Brian Jones was offered a settlement, which gave him a lump sum of nearly $200,000, as well as a yearly salary of $40,000 for as long as the band stayed togethe"r.

"He was also allowed to issue a statement saying that he had quit the band. He then reportedly tried to form a supergroup with John Lennon, who had stayed friendly with Jones after his firing".

Quote
VideoJames

" He then reportedly tried to form a supergroup with John Lennon, who had stayed friendly with Jones after his firing".

Someone posted this on Beatles Bible forum:

"Some say that he also recorded (in 1968) a demo with John Lennon and Denny Laine a track called "Go to the Mountains" in an ad hoc band called, of all things, BALLS.

October 1968 Returning to Britain, Denny Laine jams with the ad-hoc outfit Balls, which features John Lennon and Rolling Stone Brian Jones. The band reportedly records a song titled Go To The Mountains for Apple but it is never released"


Don't know of there's any truth to it, but maybe someone knows?

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

I doubt that he was able to play great music by late 1968. He was a living corpse.

It's probably fair to say his services were (or could have been)terminated on medical and competency grounds.
Not turning up to recording sessions would be classed as unauthorised absence and therefore misconduct. Ultimately RS Inc is a business like any other.

Financial terms are Commercial in Confidence, we can assume however:
1. Brian had a 20% share of 'the business' which would have a value based on fixed assets, past and future earnings (on product up to 1969), the brand etc. This would have to be taken into account.
2. ABKCO seemed to be holding in reserves, huge past recording royalties, as part of the '20 year payment plan'.
3. Brian left debts (1969 figures) of £160k and about £40k assets (essentially Cotchford Farm).
4. Brian's Estate paid off its debts by the 1990's...his parents and now his sister will receive whatever share has been agreed for the 1960's recordings.

The release of the 'BBC sessions' might prove a windfall for the Estate.Dependent on whats been agreed, it should receive 20% of 'profits" or share of, as agreed between the various parties.
Don't forget Pete Best apparantly earned a fortune from his rather modest input to the Beatles Anthology series.

It was probably under partly cloudy skies with temperatures in the 60F range.

Quote
jlowe
It's probably fair to say his services were (or could have been)terminated on medical and competency grounds.
Not turning up to recording sessions would be classed as unauthorised absence and therefore misconduct. Ultimately RS Inc is a business like any other.

Financial terms are Commercial in Confidence, we can assume however:
1. Brian had a 20% share of 'the business' which would have a value based on fixed assets, past and future earnings (on product up to 1969), the brand etc. This would have to be taken into account.
2. ABKCO seemed to be holding in reserves, huge past recording royalties, as part of the '20 year payment plan'.
3. Brian left debts (1969 figures) of £160k and about £40k assets (essentially Cotchford Farm).
4. Brian's Estate paid off its debts by the 1990's...his parents and now his sister will receive whatever share has been agreed for the 1960's recordings.

The release of the 'BBC sessions' might prove a windfall for the Estate.Dependent on whats been agreed, it should receive 20% of 'profits" or share of, as agreed between the various parties.
Don't forget Pete Best apparantly earned a fortune from his rather modest input to the Beatles Anthology series.

That you Mick?

The conditions were bad. I understand why they finally did it but they treated him like shit and he didnt dare turn up, especially not after Anita left him. I think theres some truth to what Marianne said about Mick and how he drained people like Brian and herself. Mick is a pro though.

The Brian Jones estate is handled by an Oxford accountant. Brian's parents died in 2009/2011. His sister Barbara receives around 15000 pounds a year from air play royalties.

Quote
paulspendel
The Brian Jones estate is handled by an Oxford accountant. Brian's parents died in 2009/2011. His sister Barbara receives around 15000 pounds a year from air play royalties.

.....and £xxx per annum from ABKCO for his share of record royalties presumably?

No. Jody Klein does not have to pay royalties to any of the Stones for the Sixties recordings. He owns all the rights.

Quote
jlowe

Quote
paulspendel
The Brian Jones estate is handled by an Oxford accountant. Brian's parents died in 2009/2011. His sister Barbara receives around 15000 pounds a year from air play royalties.

.....and £xxx per annum from ABKCO for his share of record royalties presumably?

Any idea why his (Five ?) children did/do not receive all royalties instead of his parents and now sister Barbara?

jlowe - what was the source for the info on Brian debts (£160k)? Any breakdown on this figure, that's a lot of money in 1969. I remember the story from a few years ago that a local store in his town was finally paid in full (40+ years late)...