Tell Me :  Talk
Talk about your favorite band. 

Previous page Next page First page IORR home

For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.

Goto Page: 12Next
Current Page: 1 of 2
Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: Midnight Toker ()
Date: December 3, 2005 10:11

What kind of dough do you think MT receives in royalties on a yearly basis ?

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: retired_dog ()
Date: December 3, 2005 13:14

Now that's an interesting question! As far as I remember it, Taylor was on a wage, means that he was paid like an employee. I'm afraid that if this monthly or weekly wage covered all his work for the Stones, including performances, he receives no royalties at all nowadays cause it was all covered by his wage back then. Like as studio or session musician - they get paid one time and that's it. Unlike Bill Wyman, Taylor never was a member of the band in legal terms, he was just a hired gun like Darryl Jones is nowadays. Taylor was a member for the public, of course, but never a member in legal terms. So Wyman still receives royalties from sales of records he played on, but I highly doubt that this is also the case with Mick Taylor.

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: The GR ()
Date: December 3, 2005 13:23

He got song writing credit on a couple of songs so that might put a few pennies in the bank.

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Date: December 3, 2005 14:03

The GR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He got song writing credit on a couple of songs so
> that might put a few pennies in the bank.

As far as I know there is exactly one song for which he's credited and that's "Ventilator blues" which is contained on EXILE ON MAIN ST - an album that (despite its merits) never sold very well.

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: StonesTod ()
Date: December 3, 2005 18:49

had he gotten song-writing credits for the songs he actually wrote, he'd be a much wealthier man, though...

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: J.J.Flash ()
Date: December 3, 2005 19:21

we should all send mick taylor some cash for all the great boots of his early 70's blistering guitarwork.

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: StonesTod ()
Date: December 3, 2005 19:27

i hear ya, JJF. probably 80% of the spine-tingling moments I have had listening to the Stones has something to do with Taylor-era-spiced stuff....

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: Midnight Toker ()
Date: December 3, 2005 19:49

StonesTod you are right on the money here. Listened to the boot Brussels Affair last night. Taylor lights it up for sure.

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: J.J.Flash ()
Date: December 3, 2005 19:54

never heard gimmie shelter quite the same since.

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: Anonymous User ()
Date: December 3, 2005 20:51

>>As far as I know there is exactly one song for which he's credited and that's "Ventilator blues" which is contained on EXILE ON MAIN ST - an album that (despite its merits) never sold very well.>>
With every kind of rereleases, CD-backcatalouge etc. even the albums like EOMS gained their sales up to very comfortable numbers.


Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: Stranger ()
Date: December 5, 2005 23:37

I can not believe that people can honestly think that Mick Taylor was never an official member of the band.

I have read these kind of misguided comments here way too often. Just because the Stones are attempting to write Taylor out of the band's history, doesn't mean you should start believing whatever it is that is being put out by their publicity machine.
Maybe some of the remaining bandmembers might like to think that Taylor is not entitled to artist royalties or anything, but that's just because some people Just Can't Be Satisfied (inspired by Muddy Waters ?) and always want a bigger piece of the cake.
Simple mathematics: if you divide a cake by four instead of five you end up with a bigger piece. (Not too hard to work out for a former student of the London School of Economics who is not exactly known for his generosity).

So I'll attempt to set this straight once and for all: Taylor was on a wage for maybe a couple of weeks in total. They needed to go on tour AS SOON AS POSSIBLE because they had not done any tours for quite a long time. They were kind of pulling their hair out because Brian was in no state to go on the road and there was no way they could compete with the other guitar based bands of that era without a LEAD guitarist of Taylor's calibre.
Before they hit the road, Taylor signed an official contract as a fully fledged BAND MEMBER.

They desperately needed someone like Taylor and he was given exactly the same rights and legal status as any of the other four members of the band.
I'm surprised that no-one seems to remember he was officially introduced as the new band member fin May '69 not long before the Hyde Park gig. There was a photo opportunity for all the newspapers and a press conference. Nobody here remembers the headlines?

So Taylor was not a hired gun (as opposed to Ronnie who was indeed a hired gun for about 15 years after he joined).
After they finished Let it Bleed, they decided they wanted to get rid of Allen Klein and form their own company to manage their affairs plus their own record company Rolling Stones Records. From that point on, all the RS business affairs were run through subcompanies based in Amsterdam. It was decided that the five bandmembers (Keith, Mick J, Mick T, Bill and Charlie) were going to be the directors of these companies.
While he was with the band, Taylor was actively involved with designing their business strategies during meetings with Prince Rupert Loewenstein and the rest of the band. Like when Keith was getting into trouble a lot and being fined for possession of drugs, Taylor would suggest a way to resolve the problem.
Taylor was also helping Jagger out a lot both in terms of mental support (Jagger did often get exasperated because of Keith's behaviour) and with writing songs while Keith was not bothering to show up or not physically capable to come to the studio. Despite Jagger's promises, the songs Jagger and Taylor wrote together ended up as Jagger-Richards compositions on the album credits.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2005-12-06 00:12 by Stranger.

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: T&A ()
Date: December 5, 2005 23:40

thanks for the history lesson, stranger - and don't be such a .... er, stranger



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-12-05 23:41 by T&A.

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: john r ()
Date: December 5, 2005 23:42

Also Exile is one of their 5 biggest albums ever, probably after Hotrox, SF, LIB, maybe SG or TY. Even in 72 it spent 4 weeks at #1 in the US (42 weeks on the album chart). MT lost a lot of $$$ to his drug habit after he left.

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: Miss U. ()
Date: December 6, 2005 00:32

Stranger Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I can not believe that people can honestly think
> that Mick Taylor was never an official member of
> the band.
>
> Maybe some of the remaining bandmembers might like
> to think that Taylor is not entitled to artist
> royalties or anything, but that's just because
> some people Just Can't Be Satisfied (inspired by
> Muddy Waters ?) and always want a bigger piece of
> the cake.
> Taylor was also helping Jagger out a lot both in
> terms of mental support (Jagger did often get
> exasperated because of Keith's behaviour) and with
> writing songs while Keith was not bothering to
> show up or not physically capable to come to the
> studio. Despite Jagger's promises, the songs
> Jagger and Taylor wrote together ended up as
> Jagger-Richards compositions on the album credits.
>


Funny isn't it? Same way people think Brian didn't found the band and that he was strung out in the end, didn't write any songs....revisionist history with a purpose-- more $$$. It's amazing Keith sometimes couldn't even make it down to his own basement at Nellcote to record EOMS. No wonder MJ was exasperated. Interesting to hear of Taylor's larger role in terms of supporting the band, making those decisions.

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: davido ()
Date: December 6, 2005 00:49

So does he still get any money from the Stones?
I suppose the name recognition means he can always
play club gigs or do session work if he so dersires.
And get royalties on VB. But is that it?

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Date: December 6, 2005 00:49

john r Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Also Exile is one of their 5 biggest albums ever,
> probably after Hotrox, SF, LIB, maybe SG or TY.
> Even in 72 it spent 4 weeks at #1 in the US (42
> weeks on the album chart). MT lost a lot of $$$ to
> his drug habit after he left.

EXILE ON MAIN ST isn't as big as one might think. These are the certified US sales:

LET IT BLEED -- 2 million
GET YER YA-YA'S OUT -- 1 million
STICKY FINGERS -- 3 million
HOT ROCKS 1964-1972 -- 12 million
EXILE ON MAIN ST -- 3 million (this album includes the only Taylor songwriting credit, and it's only 1 of 18 songs. Since it is still a Jagger/Richards/Taylor tune Mick Taylor will get just 1,9% of all songwriting royalties for this album!)
MORE HOT ROCKS -- 0,5 million
GOATS HEAD SOUP -- 3 million
IT's ONLY ROck'N'ROLL -- 1 million
MADE IN THE SHADE -- 1 million

All these numbers ain't that big if compared to SOME GIRLS (6 million) or TATTOO YOU (4 million)

source: [www.beatzenith.com]

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: Jed Clever ()
Date: December 6, 2005 02:36

Gosh, Stranger, it's great that you were able to be hanging out with the Stones to get all this info first hand. And especially cool that you were privy to the key clauses of the Stones' contract with Mick Taylor. Oh, you weren't? You're just talking out of your ass? Never mind.

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Date: December 6, 2005 02:53

How does one guy found a band by himself?

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: Markdog ()
Date: December 6, 2005 03:18



I checked and MT's checking account is overdrawn. The November 2005 "Ventilator
Blues" royalty is late coming in. It's ok thought, MJ is going to wire him $500 to get him through. MJ hates to lend out any of his $300 million, but for an old friend he will.

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: mttlacroix ()
Date: December 6, 2005 03:20

What are their relations like?

I heard that he attended one of their shows, and he attempted to come backstage, but keith wouldn't let him. is that true?

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: oldkr ()
Date: December 6, 2005 03:21

mick t was salaried as was ron for over 20 years -- doesnt change their status as a band member

OLDKR

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: Stranger ()
Date: December 6, 2005 03:24

fPosted by: john r (IP Logged)
Date: December 5, 2005 23:42

Also Exile is one of their 5 biggest albums ever, probably after Hotrox, SF, LIB, maybe SG or TY. Even in 72 it spent 4 weeks at #1 in the US (42 weeks on the album chart).
"MT lost a lot of $$$ to his drug habit after he left".
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's negligible compared to what he lost because of what his old band took from him !

Also, I think one of the reasons Mick T left was seeing from up close how one of his bandmates was getting so deep into a drug fuelled lifestyle that it had started to take a heavy toll on everyone around this person.

One of the first things Mick T did after he left was fly to NY to have a meeting with CBS. When he got back to London to see his "old friends", Keith was fuming with anger when it turned out that he got himself a better deal than the rest of the band together at that point.

After some efforts to form a band with Jack Bruce - which didn't work out after a year of touring, it wasn't long before MT settled in on the US East Coast (Long Island) - the house where the Great Gatsby was filmed. Maybe I should bring to your attention that his solo record or his new place were not funded by the royalty cheques he kept finding in his mailbox. As the Stones instructed their accountants to stop paying Taylor's share of the royalties. (Since Taylor was one of the five directors in the record company and all the other subcompanies they had formed while he was with the band, this was an action that was unjustified or even illegal but they did it anyway).

So even if he did use some of his money to buy drugs (name me some musicians that didn't in the 70's ? particularly those involved with any of the major bands from that decade), the amount he spent can only be a tiny fraction of the amount of money that was robbed from him by his old bandmates.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-12-06 03:51 by Stranger.

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: Stranger ()
Date: December 6, 2005 03:32

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: oldkr (IP Logged)
Date: December 6, 2005 03:21


mick t was salaried as was ron for over 20 years -- doesnt change their status as a band member

OLDKR


---------------------

Salaried ? You mean as in receiving a regular salary for employment? Wrong.
I'll say this one more time: he was not on a salary, he was one of the five company directors after they fired Allen Klein and set up their own business structure.

Taylor was also one of only five bandmembers (as opposed to people on a salary like Bobby Keys or Nicky Hopkins or any other musicians they used in the studio or on tour).

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: ROPENI ()
Date: December 6, 2005 03:44

I f what Stranger says was true lam sure that Mick Taylor would have sued the others to get his fair share. l do believe that he was paid a salary as a hired gun although a very good one.
Perhaps Stranger could tell us where he is getting his facts from?
Somehow he sounds a lot like the ones posting about Brian being murdered on orders from the band.
x files kind of stuff

"No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock"

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: Stranger ()
Date: December 6, 2005 03:46

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: Jed Clever (IP Logged)
Date: December 6, 2005 02:36


Gosh, Stranger, it's great that you were able to be hanging out with the Stones to get all this info first hand. And especially cool that you were privy to the key clauses of the Stones' contract with Mick Taylor. Oh, you weren't? You're just talking out of your ass? Never mind.

--------------------------

You don't know what my sources of information are, do you ?
Just because you are not going to get this first hand you shouldn't exclude the possibility that there might be a select few that have been shown certain classified information. I do realise that there might not be very many people that know this and I'm not at all surprised if it has never been brought up here on the IORR board...

So I guess my previous statements can't be true then and anyone that brings up something that you haven't read on IORR before is automatically full of bullshit ?
Never mind indeed.

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: Markdog ()
Date: December 6, 2005 03:54



Perhaps someone could clarify what the fiancial difference is for a member vs. a hired hand.

IMO, if MT was an official member he would have been in on the cut for all Stones merchandise revenue on top of his pay to play during the tours.

Is there more to it then that?

What did Ronnie get once he became official after 15 years that he did not have up to that point?



Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: ROPENI ()
Date: December 6, 2005 03:55

Ok Mr Stranger after reading your previous post l know you are as they say in spanish "MUCHO LOCO".

"No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock"

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: Stranger ()
Date: December 6, 2005 04:14

Mucho Loco or Poco Loco, name it what you want... That's ok with me.

Obviously you have gotten used to your own interpretation or way of looking at things. After all these years you may even be convinced that the way things are portrayed in the media is in fact the real story.
It's a natural reaction of the human mind to reject anything that doesn't fit in with the picture that you have been perceiving as complete for such a long time.
So you dispose of that little piece of new info that looks different. Label it as crazy so you don't need to adjust your way of thinking.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-12-06 04:31 by Stranger.

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Posted by: StonesTod ()
Date: December 6, 2005 04:30

Stranger is on a roll!! You go, dude!

Re: Mick Taylor's Checking Account Since 1974
Date: December 6, 2005 07:38

see post


[iorr.org]

"mick's my wife, and we can't get divorced"

"Alright keith, gimmie some of them women"

"And now, dressed as mick jagga........mick jagga"

AIM- ohnonotyouagainn

Goto Page: 12Next
Current Page: 1 of 2


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 1480
Record Number of Users: 206 on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests: 9627 on January 2, 2024 23:10

Previous page Next page First page IORR home