Anybody knows if UMG record contract is expired, or they must make another archive release?!One year ago there were rumours about two Box: a Sticky Fingers Deluxe Edition and a "Don Was eve sessions '93/'05".Any news about it?!

It would have expired by now, because it was a 5-year deal, signed in July 2008.

It was never confirmed officially how many records they had to release. Primarily it was signed to secure rights to their back catalogue. I think there was the desire to make two albums, but they werent contractually bound to deliver them.

If that was the case, then I suppose the Exile and Some Girls bonus discs fit the bill. A Sticky Fingers deluxe was supposedly on the cards for late 2013, but it seems to have gone quiet on that front. I dont think the 93-05 rumour had any substance.

Not sure the length of the UMG deal was ever officially confirmed.

NY Times said it was "for about five years":

"The worldwide contract covers three new albums and the rights to release the band’s valuable catalog of music recorded since 1971 for about five years, according to people with knowledge of the negotiations who were not authorized to speak about them publicly."

Elsewhere - including UMG's press release - it was simply reported as a "long-term" deal:

[www.universalmusic.com]

[abcnews.go.com]

[www.billboard.com]

Its strange how cloak and dagger the whole thing was compared to how their world record deals with Columbia and Virgin were shouted from the rooftops!

Quote
Gazza
Its strange how cloak and dagger the whole thing was compared to how their world record deals with Columbia and Virgin were shouted from the rooftops!

Strange, yes - but quite understandable considering that the Universal deal was quite a bargain compared to the multimillion Columbia and Virgin megadeals.

All of the different versions of "Sweet Summer Sun" were issued by Eagle Rock.
I guess we'll have to wait and see which company issues the next studio album.
(I'm not holding my breath!)


"As we say in England, it can get a bit trainspottery"

Since as far as I know, the records are still in print, the distribution agreement is still in effect I'm guessing there was a renewal clause. Gazza is correct though, this is basically all about the back catalogue at this point.

I remember that when there were rumors of a Paris gig in February a denial had been "published" (possibly on Twitter) by UMG acting as their "record company". So it seems there is some sort of ongoing relationship.

--------------
IORR Links : Essential Studio Outtakes CDs : Audio - History of Rarest Outtakes : Audio

Quote
Deltics
All of the different versions of "Sweet Summer Sun" were issued by Eagle Rock.
I guess we'll have to wait and see which company issues the next studio album.
(I'm not holding my breath!)

there was a separate deal signed with Eagle Rock for DVD releases. I think Eagle Rock at the time said they hoped to do two per year and that it would generally be geared towards archive releases. Hasn't quite been as regular as that but theyve been pretty busy, I suppose

Stones in Exile (2010)
Ladies & Gentlemen (2010)
Some Girls Live in Texas (2011)
Checkerboard Lounge (2012)
Sweet Summer Sun (2013)


There have been other DVD/blu ray releases in recent years (Crossfire Hurricane, Charlie is My Darling, etc) but they were issued by different labels.

I know Queen had a deal with UMG that they signed in 2010 and lasted 3 years. They recently got their contract renewed to release rare and unreleased material.

Oh and Gazza, Crossfire WAS released on Eagle Rock !

It was indeed. Thank you, Kevin.

This is a question I have posed more than once on this forum, but could never get a straight and definite answer. What's more, a Google search reveals nothing on the subject. They seem to be past the point where a multi-year megamillion dollar signing would be profitable to both the record company and the band.

If memory serves, in the course of search engineing there was a separate piece about the band signing a special distribution deal to cover their back catalog dating from 1971. This distribution deal covered publishing rights as well. So it seems that UMG remains their distributor. If this weren't the case, then their albums would be disappearing from the record store bins. They're not about to let a neatly remastered package--deluxe reissues included--to slip so quickly out of print.

What the distribution deal covers is merely keeping their back catalog available, and does not obligate the band to release new studio material. The two songs on GRRR! was part of the original 5-year contract, where they were obligated to release something new.

So it seems that UMG is the first record company the Stones ever signed with never to get a new album out of it. UMG are merely the keepers of the flame.

Quote
stonehearted
This is a question I have posed more than once on this forum, but could never get a straight and definite answer. What's more, a Google search reveals nothing on the subject. They seem to be past the point where a multi-year megamillion dollar signing would be profitable to both the record company and the band.

If memory serves, in the course of search engineing there was a separate piece about the band signing a special distribution deal to cover their back catalog dating from 1971. This distribution deal covered publishing rights as well. So it seems that UMG remains their distributor. If this weren't the case, then their albums would be disappearing from the record store bins. They're not about to let a neatly remastered package--deluxe reissues included--to slip so quickly out of print.

What the distribution deal covers is merely keeping their back catalog available, and does not obligate the band to release new studio material. The two songs on GRRR! was part of the original 5-year contract, where they were obligated to release something new.

So it seems that UMG is the first record company the Stones ever signed with never to get a new album out of it. UMG are merely the keepers of the flame.

You put it right - the Stones CAN release new material, but they are not contractually obligated to do so. Fair enough!

Quote
Gazza

Quote
Deltics
All of the different versions of "Sweet Summer Sun" were issued by Eagle Rock.
I guess we'll have to wait and see which company issues the next studio album.
(I'm not holding my breath!)

there was a separate deal signed with Eagle Rock for DVD releases. I think Eagle Rock at the time said they hoped to do two per year and that it would generally be geared towards archive releases. Hasn't quite been as regular as that but theyve been pretty busy, I suppose

Stones in Exile (2010)
Ladies & Gentlemen (2010)
Some Girls Live in Texas (2011)
Checkerboard Lounge (2012)
Sweet Summer Sun (2013)


There have been other DVD/blu ray releases in recent years (Crossfire Hurricane, Charlie is My Darling, etc) but they were issued by different labels.

crossfire hurricane is on eagle rock

UMG's acguired Eagle Rock Entertainment:

[www.prnewswire.com]

[www.billboard.com]

Quote
stonehearted
They seem to be past the point where a multi-year megamillion dollar signing would be profitable to both the record company and the band.

Those days are over. It's gone from record labels signing the big acts to big deals to promoters signing the big acts to big upfront deals strictly to recoup and make money on touring and product placement of sponsors, not necessarily of the band/artist, wherever. U2 and Madonna did deals of that nature.

Quote
stonehearted
If memory serves, in the course of search engineing there was a separate piece about the band signing a special distribution deal to cover their back catalog dating from 1971. This distribution deal covered publishing rights as well. So it seems that UMG remains their distributor. If this weren't the case, then their albums would be disappearing from the record store bins. They're not about to let a neatly remastered package--deluxe reissues included--to slip so quickly out of print.

I recall that being strictly something to do with licensing (borrowing) simply to promote books, t-shirts, cologne, wine and whatever etc. The official use of a song. They purchased licensing agreements on X amount of songs. It was nothing to do with albums.

Quote
tklawson
Since as far as I know, the records are still in print, the distribution agreement is still in effect I'm guessing there was a renewal clause. Gazza is correct though, this is basically all about the back catalogue at this point.

The albums will remain in print ie available as UMe product until a new label acquires the 1971 onward catalogue, which, after the original round of reissues by Virgin in 1994, hasn't been profitable for the rest of what Virgin reissues (live releases, hits comps) or what UMe reissued and wouldn't surprise me if no one was interested based on such incredibly weak sales.

Quote
bye bye johnny
UMG's acguired Eagle Rock Entertainment:

[www.prnewswire.com]

[www.billboard.com]

And that press release is dated today? Jeez, way to get on it BBJ.

I will expect more archive releases, and look forward to them.
The band are slowly gearing down by now. Maybe we will get occasional small tours over the next couple of years, but time is not on their side anymore.

Sticky Fingers, Beggars Banquet and Let It Bleed Deluxe editions will be fine. More concerts from the past would be more than welcome.

And to round it off, a true odds and sods complilation with all the b-sides and loose ends should help complete the picture.

I remember that it expires this year...It should be important a new contract with a precise clause about the issuing of a new studio album!

The back catalogue is hardly profitable. Of all the albums only 4 are probably somewhat selling (Sticky Fingers, Exile, Some Girls, Tattoo You). With so many greatest hits comps out the back catalogue is basically pointless.

Huh.

Quote
GasLightStreet
The back catalogue is hardly profitable. Of all the albums only 4 are probably somewhat selling (Sticky Fingers, Exile, Some Girls, Tattoo You). With so many greatest hits comps out the back catalogue is basically pointless.

Huh.

staggering to me that the whole of the sixties stones output is boiled down to hot rocks for most people (obviously not on this board).

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GasLightStreet
The back catalogue is hardly profitable. Of all the albums only 4 are probably somewhat selling (Sticky Fingers, Exile, Some Girls, Tattoo You). With so many greatest hits comps out the back catalogue is basically pointless.

Huh.

staggering to me that the whole of the sixties stones output is boiled down to hot rocks for most people (obviously not on this board).

But... what about disc 1 of Forty Licks and disc whatever of the monkey comp?