celeb news Scooter on Taylor Again: "I was open to selling catalogs back at a fair market value"

[awesomepossum]

Can someone please explain to me what he did wrong?

 

He bought Big Machine, which he is entitled to do.

 

When she initially posted about this, Taylor said she objected to the sale because it was Scooter specifically. She said she didn't object to the sale of the label (and her masters) when she chose not to re-sign with Big Machine and move on and 'bet on her future' or whatever. The problem was Scooter. Because he bullied her in the past (spurious claim, but okay). Is that what it is, you hate him because he bullied her before? I don't get what that has to do with the sale of the label.

 

Do you seriously believe Scott Borchetta and Scooter Braun were just rubbing their hands together going 'muahahaha here's how we'll ruin her! Hahaha we hate Taylor!' How obsessed with herself can she actually be to believe this kind of conspiracy theory? He bought the label which included her masters (and several other artists that hardly sold any albums but still).

Edited March 8, 2023 by awesomepossum

[KeshaSwift]

37 minutes ago, awesomepossum said:

And what were they doing? Selling a business from the owner to a new owner? The ORDACITY

Selling the lifework of an artist without informing him is shady and unethical, call it however you want it. Especially when according to her she tried to buy the masters countless time but wasn't offered a fair deal, which I assume to be super frustrating. Additionally, it seems like Taylor and scooter have been on bad terms behind the scenes so it is understood why that upsets her. It's easy for you to speak as if its a simple business move, but it's not that black and white.

-

OT: The audacity of him lying through his teeth like that.

[The7thStranger]

He lost and he just can't handle it.

[Folklore89sm]

37 minutes ago, awesomepossum said:

Can someone please explain to me what he did wrong?

 

He bought Big Machine, which he is entitled to do.

 

When she initially posted about this, Taylor said she objected to the sale because it was Scooter specifically. She said she didn't object to the sale of the label (and her masters) when she chose not to re-sign with Big Machine and move on and 'bet on her future' or whatever. The problem was Scooter. Because he bullied her in the past (spurious claim, but okay). Is that what it is, you hate him because he bullied her before? I don't get what that has to do with the sale of the label.

 

Do you seriously believe Scott Borchetta and Scooter Braun were just rubbing their hands together going 'muahahaha here's how we'll ruin her! Hahaha we hate Taylor!' How obsessed with herself can she actually be to believe this kind of conspiracy theory? He bought the label which included her masters (and several other artists that hardly sold any albums but still).

 

There is no way she could have come up with $300 million dollars to buy them herself.

 

She is a spoiled brat and her fans are so freaking gullible 

Taylor Swift is literally 80% of the record label in question. There was only ever one reason he invested in BMR and it was because of Swift’s catalogue. To think otherwise is ignorant.
 

Also, on this “conspiracy”, this was how most people found out about the sale of BMR.

 

 

 

[Brooklyn Baby]

1 hour ago, awesomepossum said:

And what were they doing? Selling a business from the owner to a new owner? The ORDACITY

is ordacity a new word? haven't heard of that one

[Pandora30012]

On 4/29/2022 at 7:49 AM, JorgeM said:

Did I say anything about label? He was already trying to be candidate of democrat party and now it is going to be impossible for him, his public image is ruined. And we will see because there are strong rumors of Shamrock suing here for hide information and lie in order to sell them the masters, although he is already sue and asked for 200M 

literally no one, besides taylor fans and atrl cares

[Rv1709]

I believe scooter though given Taylor’s track record of lying and tweaking the narrative to make herself look like a victim 

[hungrymuffin]

2 hours ago, Rv1709 said:

I believe scooter though given Taylor’s track record of lying and tweaking the narrative to make herself look like a victim 

receipts?

 

the fact that even an artist he managed was scared of him speaks volume and these delusional stans cant even take off their stan googles for a second

[queenoftheclouds]

18 hours ago, JustHoran said:

If there vocals were on the song, they still get money from those masters whether they own them or not. They just don't get a  LOT of money, because they don't own it.

 

JoJo even gets royalty payments for her songs of her original albums now that they are on streaming, she just doesn't get a lot and makes more $ off her re-recordings. She chose to leave that part out, but she absolutely does make money off them.

Really? Why does she care if we stream the old ones? The 2018 Version is terrible.

[Digitalism]

Facts: 

*Everything that was done was legal. She can't choose who is buying

*Taylor should have been ofered her catalogue

* Taylor was smart enough to make even more money out of this with the re releases. Even if she could buy now she wouldn't because she is making more money now

* She won

 

[awesomepossum]

7 hours ago, Taeyong said:

is ordacity a new word? haven't heard of that one

It's a Real Housewives of New York reference

[byzantium]

On 4/29/2022 at 2:19 AM, Mohit said:

can swifties tell me why we should completely believe Taylor's side of the story and not his? is a man always the criminal? 

Given Taylor’s actions after the fact, it is extremely obvious that she wants to own her master and we all know that Taylor is more than wealthy enough to afford them.  
 

Why would she not buy them if given the fair opportunity? 

[awesomepossum]

7 hours ago, Folklore89sm said:

Taylor Swift is literally 80% of the record label in question. There was only ever one reason he invested in BMR and it was because of Swift’s catalogue. To think otherwise is ignorant.
 

Also, on this “conspiracy”, this was how most people found out about the sale of BMR.

 

Yes, and? I said she didn't have $300 million herself to buy it. I'm not denying the Taylor Swift catalogue is the reason BMR was valuable. I'm saying she couldn't afford to buy that catalogue/the label herself and that's the end of it. No one did anything wrong here. 

[awesomepossum]

52 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

I mean if the general argument is that everything he is doing is legal and just business, everything she has done is also legal and just business. So not sure why he is whining about it 

It's not an argument, it's a fact. I'm asking what he did that was morally wrong since that's what everyone is saying. I think it's morally wrong to try and get someone to kill themselves for making an investment. So that's one thing Taylor did that was morally wrong. What did he do that was morally wrong?

[byzantium]

8 hours ago, awesomepossum said:

There is no way she could have come up with $300 million dollars to buy them herself.

This is not true.  She could have easily gotten a loan from any bank to cover 80% of the cost meaning she would only need to contribute $60 million herself.   Then she could use the income from the masters to pay off the interest and principle.  

I know this because that is EXACTLY what shamrock holdings and scooter himself did when they bought her masters. 

Edited April 30, 2022 by byzantium

[awesomepossum]

7 hours ago, KeshaSwift said:

Selling the lifework of an artist without informing him is shady and unethical, call it however you want it. Especially when according to her she tried to buy the masters countless time but wasn't offered a fair deal, which I assume to be super frustrating. Additionally, it seems like Taylor and scooter have been on bad terms behind the scenes so it is understood why that upsets her. It's easy for you to speak as if its a simple business move, but it's not that black and white.

-

OT: The audacity of him lying through his teeth like that.

It's not just her work though. It's her, and the label, and the co-writers, and the musicians, and the graphic designers, and the photographers, marketers, promoters, etc. It's not just her work. I don't see how the masters should 'rightfully' belong to her. The label paid to put all that together with no guarantee that she would be successful. Most artists that get signed don't end up selling any albums after the label has invested upwards of $2 million to create their album and promote them. It's fair that they would have in their contract that the label would own the masters as part of the deal given the fact that they are advancing the money for it. They need to mitigate the risk they're taking somehow, otherwise they couldn't exist as a company and then no one would get signed and get their distribution and production. If she had gotten a loan from a bank instead then she could have probably negotiated to own the right to the masters, but then she would have to pay back the bank loan + interest regardless of whether or not the albums were successful. And a bank would never give a loan to an aspiring singer because the odds of success are so small. She has the writers rights and millions of dollars. This is not that big of a deal. It seems to me like she's making it into a big deal because she's greedy and entitled.

[Brooklyn Baby]

2 minutes ago, byzantium said:

This is not true.  She could have easily gotten a loan from any bank to over 80% of the cost meaning she would only need to contribute $60 million herself.   Then she could use the income from the masters to pay off the interest and principle.  

I know this because that is EXACTLY what shamrock holdings did when they bought her masters. 

Thank you. People just say sh** in here without knowing how any of this sh** works.

 

How did they think Rihanna or anyone else bought their masters?

Edited April 30, 2022 by Taeyong

[awesomepossum]

1 minute ago, byzantium said:

This is not true.  She could have easily gotten a loan from any bank to over 80% of the cost meaning she would only need to contribute $60 million herself.   Then she could use the income from the masters to pay off the interest and principle.  

I know this because that is EXACTLY what shamrock holdings did when they bought her masters. 

That's true, she could have. Do you think she would have? I don't believe that if her and Scooter were offering the same price that they would just push her out of the deal for no reason. Nor do I believe that Scooter would have not sold them to her for the price he sold them to someone else. She could have outbid them even. That just makes no sense that he wouldn't accept that out of spite.

I don't believe she feels she should have to pay the full market value because she obviously believes they 'rightfully' belong to her. She has said that many times. I don't agree that they 'rightfully' belong to her.

She is making a lot of money and breaking a lot of chart records with the re-recordings. She's also helping to fortify her brand after it was somewhat tarnished with the Kimye situation and the 2016 election (her not endorsing Clinton after claiming to be a feminist through all of 2014 and 2015 when she was trying to sell her album). It seems like she has found a way to position herself as a victim, yet again, and it's all working out very well for her financially and legacy-wise. But I'm not buying the narrative she's selling here. It just doesn't add up. It makes more sense that she's leaving out relevant details and framing the situation in a way that benefits her, as she is known to do. 

[awesomepossum]

4 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

Did Taylor try to get him to kill himself? How so?If you are talking about the idiots on Twitter and instagram in his comments, then every celebrity gets those and at a much worse extent than scooter did. He wanted to become a public figure and then he couldn't take the heat. If anything, I think he was playing that up to garner some sympathy which he didn't really get. It's not like Justin bieber's manager of all people doesn't know how brutal social media comments can be. 

 

For your morality bit, Scooter and Scott lied throughout the drama. Lies which Taylor's team continuously refuted. Even AMA had to refute one of their lies. I would list them for you, but I don't think you are asking in good faith anyway. So believe what you will. 

 

At the end of the day, what she is doing is legal and strictly business. So he should stop whining. 

If he should stop whining because what she's doing is legal and strictly business, then she should also stop whining because what he's doing is legal and strictly business. She is the one who started with the whining.

 

When people were trying to 'cancel' her after the Kimye situation, she said that receiving that many hateful messages was equivalent to telling her to kill herself. She knows what she's doing.

[Headlock]

I see someone has taken over as Scooter’s #1 stan after Divine got perma-ed 

[Folklore89sm]

14 minutes ago, awesomepossum said:

It's not an argument, it's a fact. I'm asking what he did that was morally wrong since that's what everyone is saying. I think it's morally wrong to try and get someone to kill themselves for making an investment. So that's one thing Taylor did that was morally wrong. What did he do that was morally wrong?

You are not wrong in that Scooter’s acquisition of BMR and therefore Swift’s catalogue was entirely legal and - on a surface level - not “wrong”. She knew her masters were being sold and accepted that she wouldn’t be able to make an offer for them because they were not made available for her to buy, but assumed that she would be able to work with whoever the new owner would be to move forward with business. That was until she found out who now owned her life work. Braun was Kanye West’s manager. He piled on the hate train of Summer 2016 which saw rivals of Swift attempt to bury her career and legacy. The photo of The FaceTime between Bieber/West/Braun with the snarky comments from Bieber directed at Taylor is public, inarguable proof in (literal) black and white that Braun had bullied Taylor Swift (in some form) long before anything to do with her masters or record label. Braun oversaw everything that happened in 2016 as manager of Kanye West. 
 

Scott Borchetta is the real snake in the grass here. Scooter and Taylor were never going to see eye-to-eye given everything that happened, but Borchetta was there by her side through all of the character defamation and incessant harassment, bullying and career destruction of his client Swift - who he took a shot on as a child because he believed in her talent - at the hands of Braun, his clients and their fans. He went behind her back and sold every piece of music she had written and performed to a person he knew would hurt her deepest. (My theory is that Borchetta had butt-hurt over Taylor leaving BMR despite his unfair conditions). If Swift had not been able to bounce back after all that **** happened (and let’s be real, not many people would have), it would have been an entirely different story. 

[byzantium]

10 minutes ago, awesomepossum said:

That's true, she could have. Do you think she would have? I don't believe that if her and Scooter were offering the same price that they would just push her out of the deal for no reason. Nor do I believe that Scooter would have not sold them to her for the price he sold them to someone else. She could have outbid them even. That just makes no sense that he wouldn't accept that out of spite.

I don't believe she feels she should have to pay the full market value because she obviously believes they 'rightfully' belong to her. She has said that many times. I don't agree that they 'rightfully' belong to her.

She is making a lot of money and breaking a lot of chart records with the re-recordings. She's also helping to fortify her brand after it was somewhat tarnished with the Kimye situation and the 2016 election (her not endorsing Clinton after claiming to be a feminist through all of 2014 and 2015 when she was trying to sell her album). It seems like she has found a way to position herself as a victim, yet again, and it's all working out very well for her financially and legacy-wise. But I'm not buying the narrative she's selling here. It just doesn't add up. It makes more sense that she's leaving out relevant details and framing the situation in a way that benefits her, as she is known to do. 

Honestly, the tone of this sounds like you have your stan blinders on. 

Her actions have very clearly demonstrated that she wants to own her masters, and as you agree she is in more than capable financial position to have purchased them.

She also has demonstrated numerous times to be a savy and capable business person who understands that world.  There is no reason to assume she would not believe she would need to pay for the fair value of those assets.  

Why why is it hard to believe her narrative especially given the history of these two industry leaders.  It is documented that Swift had been trying to get her masters from Big Machine and she was never allowed the reasonable opportunity.   The label tried to use that to force her to sign a record deal extension.  

What I genuinely think happened is that Big Machine Records sold to Ithaca Holdings without her knowledge especially since she was no longer signed under that label.  She responded vocally on social media.  Then like Big Machine, Ithaca said they would only give her the opportunity to negotiate if they received additional promises from her.  This was very likely unusual, but then again most of the people looking to buy the masters are not vocal artist themselves.  However, given her previous history with BMR she was unlikely to agree to concessions to even have the opportunity to negotiate since that would not appear as good faith negotiating.  

[KeshaSwift]

5 hours ago, awesomepossum said:

It's not just her work though. It's her, and the label, and the co-writers, and the musicians, and the graphic designers, and the photographers, marketers, promoters, etc. It's not just her work. I don't see how the masters should 'rightfully' belong to her. The label paid to put all that together with no guarantee that she would be successful. Most artists that get signed don't end up selling any albums after the label has invested upwards of $2 million to create their album and promote them. It's fair that they would have in their contract that the label would own the masters as part of the deal given the fact that they are advancing the money for it. They need to mitigate the risk they're taking somehow, otherwise they couldn't exist as a company and then no one would get signed and get their distribution and production. If she had gotten a loan from a bank instead then she could have probably negotiated to own the right to the masters, but then she would have to pay back the bank loan + interest regardless of whether or not the albums were successful. And a bank would never give a loan to an aspiring singer because the odds of success are so small. She has the writers rights and millions of dollars. This is not that big of a deal. It seems to me like she's making it into a big deal because she's greedy and entitled.

All of this huge paragraph is assumptions and personal opinion of yours ONLY. As Taylor herself claimed, she was never given a fair chance to buy the masters which I tend to believe. Take that + the fact that according to her, Scooter brown and herself had a lot of drama behind the scenes, and not being notified about the purchase - I get why she’s upset and wants to take back the things to her own hands. Again, this is not a black and white matter - this is the lifelong work of herself BEFORE everyone else, and it’s her right to be mad about how the purchase have been made. 

[BlackJesus]

He needs to stop playing victim and throw himself in the trash where he belongs. Nobody likes him. 

[brazil]

From what I understand of this issue, Taylor's former label decided to sell her masters to Scooter because they wanted to sell the entire company, Taylor probably only wanted to buy her masters and not the rights to all other artists under the label. 

 

Since buying her masters, Scooter would be ok with selling it to Taylor if she stopped talking **** about him publicly. 

 

Taylor didn't want to do that, and honestly probably didn't want to spend 300M buying her masters. So she decided to release her own versions, at the end of the day nothing wrong with her wanting to do that, she prides on being a businesswoman and this is a very smart approach commercially. 

 

I just think she seems to be a bit narcissistic to think someone would spend 300M just to spite her and also she's making herself seem to be too much of a victim in a situation that's honestly common in the industry.