No disrespect intended. I was wondering how the band’s money is divided now that Charlie has died. How was the money for the 2021 US tour divided? How will it be done for the Sixty Tour? Do Darryl and Steve get the same amount of money? How is Charlie’s part divided or does it continue to go to his family? Again, no disrespect intended. Just curious.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-03-17 15:25 by NashvilleBlues.

Let me check their books and I'll come back to you

Same as before: Mick 50%, Keith 40% and the rest of the band and the crew get the last 10%. Just joking.

Mick 40%
Keith 40%
Ron 19%
Chuck 1%

Jordan : a beer and a sandwich after the gig.
"But you know man... that's cool!"

Quote
NashvilleBlues

Do Darryl and Steve get the same amount of money?

Maybe Steve will be paid as hired musician like Darryl since Steve is no official member. For the other questions I don't think you'll get an honest answer.

Quote
NashvilleBlues
No disrespect intended. I was wondering how the band’s money is divided now that Charlie has died. How was the money for the 2021 US tour divided? How will it be done for the Sixty Tour? Do Darryl and Steve get the same amount of money? How is Charlie’s part divided or does it continue to go to his family? Again, no disrespect intended. Just curious.

Chances are the tour is a completely different corporation from the main band corporation. (Rolling Stones Tour 2022 Inc instead of Rolling Stones Inc)

They could have provisions for such a thing involving death where either Charlie relinquishes his share, they are allowed to buy out or his heirs are non voting shareholders (example Shirley can't make corporate decisions but will still be getting paid). It's likely Charlie doesn't own a share of the 2022 tour.

Anybody not named Mick or Keith is likely on salary. It's a good gig but Darryl and Steve likely aren't splitting anything but getting a guaranteed paycheck and per diems. Mick and Keith might even draw a regular paycheck off the company (guaranteed payment) and split up the leftovers afterward.

Now when Joey Kramer wasn't playing the recent Aerosmith shows he was still getting paid but had to pay his replacement out of his share.

I have no information at all, this is just bits and pieces I have picked up about other tours over the years. (Another example, Nikki Sixx and Mick Mars are the sole owners of Motley Crue with control over trademarks but the touring corporation is divided equally among the 4 members, got this info from when they sued Tommy and his manager in 2006)

Just a guess: Keith, Ron and Sir Michael get their usual shares, Steve and Darryl a fixed amount (monthly or all at once). The same goes for all other employees.

Quote
dcba
Mick 40%
Keith 40%
Ron 19%
Chuck 1%

Jordan : a beer and a sandwich after the gig.
"But you know man... that's cool!"

Probably this, honestly. I would assume Mick and Keith get a bit more than Ronnie for being originals, and then the rest is evenly distributed to the backing players.

I would assume there is a fixed amount per gig. For example 1 million each for Mick and Keith and Ron.The other members between 10-100k. Then some extra money for filming, photos, promotional stuff etc.

Seriously now : Mick and Keith must get the lion's share of profits, Ron must get a lesser %.
As for the rest of the musicians they must get a fied sum per gig.

Now the real question is : does the newbie get as much as the old guys (Chuck Darryl). Logically Jones should get a bigger cut than Jordan because of "band seniority" so to speak.
BUT Keith might have put his weight in the deal, insisting Jordan doesn't get ripped off by the management (Mick actually).
"No Mick you won't give Steve the same type of deal Ernie Watts got in 81! He's family, man!!"

Maybe Mick mellowed a bit with age and gave Jordan a fair deal from the start?

Will we ever know? Will we ever know what songs were played each night at the Mocambo?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-03-17 17:12 by dcba.

Quote
dcba

Logically Jones should get a bigger cut than Jordan because of "band seniority" so to speak.

Darryl Jones plays with the Stones since 1993 and Steve Jordan plays with Keith (X-Pensive Winos) since the mid-1980s. Therefore Steve is no newbie and should be on the same level as Darryl.

The way money is shared is probably not "transparent", let's say "Rolling Stones Tour 2022 Bv" gets a guaranteed X million € per show and they pay out everything out of that, musicians, lighting, permanent crew, local crew (maybe shared with the promoter), maybe Mick, Keith and Ronnie have a guaranteed amount too, etc...whatever's left is owned by the shareholders. Maybe Mick, Keith, Ronnie and "Rolling Stones Bv" since that's where the "brand" is held.

Clearly the money is flowing in and probably not much is getting wasted ;-)

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

when john entwitle died, in a pre-tour who´s tour, his family don´t get anything

all the money stays with pete tonswhend and roger daltrey

and the tour was happening because john's finances were pretty bad...

Quote
gustavobala
when john entwitle died, in a pre-tour who´s tour, his family don´t get anything

all the money stays with pete tonswhend and roger daltrey

and the tour was happening because john's finances were pretty bad...

But yet he had a collection of about 500 basses and who knows what else.

You might as well ask what colour of under pants they will wear.

To simplify it: Everyone on stage are paid as hired musicians, a set fee. Keith, Ron and Sir Michael are not.

yea well, it's no one's business really

--------------
ColonialstoneNZ
--------------

Up a dead end alley flippin
bit coins ta see who gets what ....



ROCKMAN

Quote
PaintMonkeyManBlack
Let me check their books and I'll come back to you

Best answer by a mile.

Too many cooks spoil the books!

Too many chefs cook the books



ROCKMAN

Ronnie a lot. Mick & Keith a real lot. The rest, not so much.

Charlie did give his blessing, and it was probably based on other factors beyond being friends with Steve.
Knowing how well Mick and Charlie ran this end of things, I would guess Charlie's estate still earns something, which they would have agreed to long before Charlie got sick.

Quote
Jeter1984
Charlie did give his blessing, and it was probably based on other factors beyond being friends with Steve.
Knowing how well Mick and Charlie ran this end of things, I would guess Charlie's estate still earns something, which they would have agreed to long before Charlie got sick.

I’m guessing something along these lines.

The same formula will apply to all past events where revenue still streams in from. So nothing to change for historical stuff.

For new stuff, they probably had an agreement that should the band continue, the estate of any band member that had deceased would still get a percentage, probably a smaller amount for a period of time into the future.

The rest of the band are hired hands and are rewarded as such. No opportunity for an equity position at this stage in the game.

I'd thought that the division between the 4 of them was as equal partners for the performances, though I may be wrong on that, and of course songwriting royalties primarily go to Mick & Keith.

Quote
Dan

Quote
NashvilleBlues
No disrespect intended. I was wondering how the band’s money is divided now that Charlie has died. How was the money for the 2021 US tour divided? How will it be done for the Sixty Tour? Do Darryl and Steve get the same amount of money? How is Charlie’s part divided or does it continue to go to his family? Again, no disrespect intended. Just curious.

Chances are the tour is a completely different corporation from the main band corporation. (Rolling Stones Tour 2022 Inc instead of Rolling Stones Inc)

They could have provisions for such a thing involving death where either Charlie relinquishes his share, they are allowed to buy out or his heirs are non voting shareholders (example Shirley can't make corporate decisions but will still be getting paid). It's likely Charlie doesn't own a share of the 2022 tour.

Anybody not named Mick or Keith is likely on salary. It's a good gig but Darryl and Steve likely aren't splitting anything but getting a guaranteed paycheck and per diems. Mick and Keith might even draw a regular paycheck off the company (guaranteed payment) and split up the leftovers afterward.

Now when Joey Kramer wasn't playing the recent Aerosmith shows he was still getting paid but had to pay his replacement out of his share.

I have no information at all, this is just bits and pieces I have picked up about other tours over the years. (Another example, Nikki Sixx and Mick Mars are the sole owners of Motley Crue with control over trademarks but the touring corporation is divided equally among the 4 members, got this info from when they sued Tommy and his manager in 2006)

Ronnie is a Rolling Stone, officially, pay wise, since 1990, for tours.

I don't like to think about the money. I like to pretend they do it for the love of the music and crowds. And I wouldn't lie about something like that because then I won't get my Christmas presents from Santa.

I fink ya should sit down
and have a good chat wiv Superman .....



ROCKMAN

Ronnie, as he does, talking about getting paid for being a Rolling Stone:

Ron Wood (2003): Equal on the payroll after 15 years
Before we went to Japan, on the Steel Wheels tour, my pals Charlie and Bill stood up for me. They said, Are you earning as much as we are? and I said, No. So they said, Unless you earn as much as us, we're not going to carry on. They brought this up at a meeting and I thought, Thank you very much! Bill and Charlie were very supportive. They made a stand for me without me having to beg and say, I'm being unfairly treated. They said, Ronnie's slaved away as hard as we have and he's not getting as much as us. And the rest of the band said, Right, OK, we'll finally end your apprenticeship, you're finally part of the band.

[timeisonourside.com]

Concerning the backing musicians on tour, I read on this forum some time ago, they'd be having free travel and accommodation plus a mere 500 or 1000 Dollars per gig. With a view to the principals, it doesn't really sound generous.