Yes that looks a large amount 20 years ago, but put in to context, how much did Morrissey & Marr earn?
Of course M&M would earn more for obvious reasons - but HOW much more?
Jukebox Jury
Well, it's quite a simple equation if the reported 10% / 25% discrepency is true. £50,000 x 10 = £500,000. With a reputed 40% stake in performance royalties, Morrissey and Marr would have recieved £200,000 in 1986. I said previously that Moz and Marr was responsible for the day to day running (administration of band expenses, hiring of roadcrew, sacking of band members / roadcrew, dealing with lawyers / accountants etc) of the band, plus the bands projected future ie - where to tour, when to tour, recording of next album, etc, so maybe that's why M&M feel they were not equal partners in the band - writing royalties all aside (Rourke and Joyce have no claim to this). To use a crass analogy, you would expect a MD of Barclays bank to earn more than a bank cashier, despite being part of the same company.
£50,000 a year is still a lot of money these days too.
I'm amazed how many people seem to think that all there is to being in a band is to show up to gigs and sit in the studio for a few hours.
If that was all the members of the Smiths did then I'd say 25% each was a fair split. But that isn't all that is required and it is well documented that all the other tasks were carried out by Morrissey and Marr. Presumably this was an arrangement between the band that suited them all at the time. Rourke and Joyce got paid a good wage for just doing all the fun bits while Morrissey and Marr had to deal with all the shit.
Well done - you said five words that cost Morrissey and Marr dearly.
''Presumably this was an arrangement''.
Everyone ''presumed'' this, that and the other. Nothing was ever written down in writing so neither party had concrete evidence. The judge - indeed two judges - both came to the same conclusion......
Jukebox Jury
Well, that's not strictly true, as it was a verbal agreement, not just a presumption, rather than a written one. Marr has himself said that Morrissey threaten to quit the band, if this 40-40-10-10% was not the agreed percentage split, at the start.
Morrissey's has every right to contest the judge's decision, so back to the original point of it being more financially beneficial if he didn't, that's not really the point is it? If he felt that he has been wronged on what was a clear verbal agreement, then why should he pay up?
Well, that's not strictly true, as it was a verbal agreement, not just a presumption, rather than a written one. Marr has himself said that Morrissey threaten to quit the band, if this 40-40-10-10% was not the agreed percentage split, at the start.
Morrissey's has every right to contest the judge's decision, so back to the original point of it being more financially beneficial if he didn't, that's not really the point is it? If he felt that he has been wronged on what was a clear verbal agreement, then why should he pay up?
Mike Joyce comes to this site because in his mind it's better to be hated than forgotten, but he's pissing all over the legacy of the music he says he cares so much about. I'm glad Stoner Kebab's gonna keep her eye on him.
Maybe because Ringo was paid what he was due at the end of every month and therefore has no reason to take issue with other band members. I do not hear the drummer from a thousand other bands complaining either, sorry, I find your comparison irrelevant.
This has to be one of the most embarressing threads ever posted
Jukebox Jury
dude. you. drive. a. bus.
He put me on ignore, you know. I guess that means that when I get on his bus my Oyster card won't get charged?
Baby you can drive my bus
Please don't try and make a fuss
Baby you can drive my bus
And maybe I'll poo in your cocaine
beep beep beep beep, yeah