slw84 Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 2 minutes ago, Headlock said: Oh shut up, the fact that he wants to be a public figure and is so worried about his image is beyond ******* weird. You are a manager, and a horrible one at that considering he routinely runs his clients into the ground by over-working them Well, he did his job and it's up to their family to protect them from being overworked and overexposed. His tactics worked. 33 minutes ago, Holiest Dreams said: Does he get tired of pulling up to a publication every 6 months to straight up lie it’s so funny how the new narrative he’s pushing completely contradicts the one he initially pushed back in 2019–20, proving Taylor was right (wbk, but ) This. We get it. Why do we have to relive it every 6 months? Get over it. Cry in your hundreds of millions of profit
family.guy123 Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 Yeah that’s not what he said lol. “Imagine how tired we are” yes, how tired we are of miss tay victimizing herself over and over for the past few years (and for the foreseeable future) in order to scam her adolescent fanbase. Didn’t her father look over her contract or something? Wonder why she isn’t publicly calling him out for….. actually I still don’t know what she’s upset about lol. Following the terms of a contract? Idk maybe someone can fill me in
family.guy123 Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 4 minutes ago, slw84 said: Well, he did his job and it's up to their family to protect them from being overworked and overexposed. His tactics worked. This. We get it. Why do we have to relive it every 6 months? Get over it. Cry in your hundreds of millions of profit This.
youreyesgocold Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 3 minutes ago, family.guy123 said: Yeah that’s not what he said lol. “Imagine how tired we are” yes, how tired we are of miss tay victimizing herself over and over for the past few years (and for the foreseeable future) in order to scam her adolescent fanbase. Didn’t her father look over her contract or something? Wonder why she isn’t publicly calling him out for….. actually I still don’t know what she’s upset about lol. Following the terms of a contract? Idk maybe someone can fill me in She had a normal contract that anyone would sign. That’s not really the issue shes trying to bring attention to. She has said in interviews that she understands the value of a label to help fund your records when you’re a nobody, and it makes sense that they own the music because they’re paying for it and taking a risk on you. Her issue wasn’t with her initial contract - owning your masters out the gate is not common practice. She was pissed that when her contract was up she wasn’t offered the opportunity to just buy her songs back in the way the label was offering them to everyone else. The label wouldn’t sell them to her without locking her into that label in perpetuity (“for every new record we own, you get ownership of an old one”). All she wanted was to pay what everyone else paid to get them (or perhaps more???), none of these strings and frills and clauses. What she tries to preach now about contracts (where you’re probably getting confused) is just to ensure there’s a clause in them from the start that ensures you can earn back your music over time, or at least ensures you get first pass at purchasing your music flat out when it is sold, no frills attached. That seems fair to me. How is not shady to say “you can only have them if you sign this contract, but that guy over there can have them at a flat rate you’d be willing to pay”. I understand it’s just business, and their goal was to keep her making them money, but yeah I’d be pissed if it was me. Anyone would be.
Sesame Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 1 hour ago, Ricky Wilson said: Honestly I wouldn’t be interested in owning those basic songs about quinceaneras with sub par vocals either Of course you wouldn’t be interested since you can’t even afford one second of the audio in question
PoisonedIvy Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 4 minutes ago, youreyesgocold said: She had a normal contract that anyone would sign. That’s not really the issue shes trying to bring attention to. She has said in interviews that she understands the value of a label to help fund your records when you’re a nobody, and it makes sense that they own the music because they’re paying for it and taking a risk on you. Her issue wasn’t with her initial contract - owning your masters out the gate is not common practice. She was pissed that when her contract was up she wasn’t offered the opportunity to just buy her songs back in the way the label was offering them to everyone else. The label wouldn’t sell them to her without locking her into that label in perpetuity (“for every new record we own, you get ownership of an old one”). All she wanted was to pay what everyone else paid to get them (or perhaps more???), none of these strings and frills and clauses. What she tries to preach now about contracts (where you’re probably getting confused) is just to ensure there’s a clause in them from the start that ensures you can earn back your music over time, or at least ensures you get first pass at purchasing your music flat out when it is sold, no frills attached. That seems fair to me. How is not shady to say “you can only have them if you sign this contract, but that guy over there can have them at a flat rate you’d be willing to pay”. I understand it’s just business, and their goal was to keep her making them money, but yeah I’d be pissed if it was me. Anyone would be. This is eloquently put. She’s never cried about the original contract, she’s felt betrayed by the fact that she wasn’t treated the way literally anyone else interested in purchasing the catalogue would have been.
Freakshowvato Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 He made a business deal. The way it is construed as evil is nonsensical. Owning your own masters is not a standard in the music industry, doesn't mean you do not own the songs as the rightful artist or that you do not have songwriting credits. Anywho good for Taylor for re-recording her stuff since she feels so strongly about this.
Anye Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 OTH said he would win the war, I guess they’re wrong
Freakshowvato Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 8 minutes ago, youreyesgocold said: She was pissed that when her contract was up she wasn’t offered the opportunity to just buy her songs back in the way the label was offering them to everyone else. The label wouldn’t sell them to her without locking her into that label in perpetuity (“for every new record we own, you get ownership of an old one”). All she wanted was to pay what everyone else paid to get them (or perhaps more???), none of these strings and frills and clauses. And how is that Scooter's fault, he isn't the label executive who didn't offer her the deal.
SmittenCake Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 59 minutes ago, WeFoundTrouble said: You clown, he doesn’t regret it because he doesn’t want to own them, he regrets it because it ruined his image and it made him look like a shady businessman. He made a **** ton of money sadly and her catalogue, both old and new, is worth so so much that anyone who owns her masters is exorbitantly wealthy. F*cking dumb ass and the quinceañera drag doesn’t even make sense, who tf is playing folklore or evermore or reputation at a quinceañera. Hell who is playing ANY Taylor music at a quince. It’s such racial ignorance I can’t even bother to debunk it. Drag it
wwshooter Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 1 hour ago, Ricky Wilson said: Honestly I wouldn’t be interested in owning those basic songs about quinceaneras with sub par vocals either I mean, do you even have 300 millions that someone would want to even listen to your pretentious take?
JDC Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 His rep went down He lost million of dollars He ended up looking like a clown after the re-recordings Of course he regrets it, he regrets it so much that he needs to talk about it every now and then and change the narrative so he can still be on the spot... I think we're all over it, this horrible situation turned into something completely iconic, profitable and fun for Tay/Swifties cementing her as the ultimate girl boss so, in the end, thank u Scooter.
PoisonedIvy Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 10 minutes ago, Freakshowvato said: And how is that Scooter's fault, he isn't the label executive who didn't offer her the deal. She’s never blamed Scooter, in fact the songs she’s written about her feelings regarding the deal are pretty much all centered around Scott Borcheta, the label head that she thought she could trust who screwed her over. And while she didn’t blame him, she definitely didn’t wanna interact with him. The only reason she didn’t make a deal with Scooter is because he’s literally antagonized her along with other men who have ridiculed her at certain points throughout her career. She says she would’ve been open to working with literally anyone else.
Frogger17 Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 14 minutes ago, Freakshowvato said: He made a business deal. The way it is construed as evil is nonsensical. Owning your own masters is not a standard in the music industry, doesn't mean you do not own the songs as the rightful artist or that you do not have songwriting credits. Anywho good for Taylor for re-recording her stuff since she feels so strongly about this. Legality and ethics are two completely different things, baby doll. Sure, it’s perfectly legal for Amazon and other billion-dollar companies to not pay any taxes, but is it ethical? That’s the difference. Rihanna was told her masters were going on sale and was allowed to buy them. Taylor was never given the opportunity and then his client bragged he’d “bought Taylor Swift.”
LosingHimWasBlue Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 1 hour ago, conquxror said: Of course he regrets it Not only it backfired tremendously and it made him look like an *******, it also literally consolidated Taylor’s dominance in today’s pop scenario with the re-recordings. She’s not going anywhere and she’ll stay winning for a least three more consecutive years by dropping those albums. This and made his client’s number looking tragic nowadays
Cloröx Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 He made profit, right? So why the fume and whining? Unless his real intention was to destroy and control Taylor, and it backfired since Taylor is boosting her career to new level with rerecordings
LustSpell Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 (edited) He is very much so a narcissist. He's angry his image in the music industry is ruined, not because he didn't make enough money off it. Though idk why he really cares overall because the general public doesn't give a **** at all Stop crying about it, sit with your millions you made and shut up. No one cares how you feel Edited October 1, 2022 by LustSpell
Freakshowvato Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 (edited) 24 minutes ago, Frogger17 said: Legality and ethics are two completely different things, baby doll. Sure, it’s perfectly legal for Amazon and other billion-dollar companies to not pay any taxes, but is it ethical? That’s the difference. Rihanna was told her masters were going on sale and was allowed to buy them. Taylor was never given the opportunity and then his client bragged he’d “bought Taylor Swift.” I understand but isn't thst scott borchetta's fault for not ethically offering the artist the catalogue before venturing to another industry person? can we morally blame the person on the receiving end of this deal (AKA scooter) for engaging in a beneficial business deal, especially when he has zero ties to Taylor Swift and she is not his client? he had no allegiance to her, unlike scott borchetta. I always felt taylor's anger was misdirected and she targeted Scooter mainly because he's more famous and the Kanye ties. Edited October 1, 2022 by Freakshowvato
Selenasworld Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 (edited) 43 minutes ago, Freakshowvato said: And how is that Scooter's fault, he isn't the label executive who didn't offer her the deal. you really think lmao no Scooter did speculate with her masters with money he did NOT own, it obviously backfired and Taylor wouldn't pay for her own music and the rest is history Edited October 1, 2022 by Selenasworld
Selenasworld Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 1 minute ago, Freakshowvato said: I will never understand how people answering questions they were asked in interviews or speaking about their feelings makes them a narcissist or a cry baby. He is attacked to this day, people are interested to know his take. girl you stan Demi y'all hate him until is about Taylor Swift/Selena
PoisonedIvy Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 9 minutes ago, Freakshowvato said: I understand but isn't thst scott borchetta's fault for not ethically offering the artist the catalogue before venturing to another industry person? can we morally blame the person on the receiving end of this deal (AKA scooter) for engaging in a beneficial business deal, especially when he has zero ties to Taylor Swift and she is not his client? he had no allegiance to her, unlike scott borchetta. I always felt taylor's anger was misdirected and she targeted Scooter mainly because he's more famous and the Kanye ties. I pointed this out earlier in the thread but she doesn’t really “blame” Scooter for buying her masters, she very clearly blames Scott for selling it to him (and even writes songs that are directed at Scott, not Scooter.) Scooter might have seemed like the public enemy of Taylor during the initial reveal of this debacle but Taylor’s biggest hurt was with Scott and that’s evidenced through quite a few lyrics (my tears ricochet, closure, it’s time to go, etc.)
byzantium Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 Honestly this guy’s passive aggressiveness is kind of proving Taylor right about him.
Jaspurr Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 He asked Taylor to sign an NDA, akin to the one sexual abusers use to silence their victims, before they could even have a chat, so where's the honesty in that? A pathetic man through and through.
Freakshowvato Posted October 1, 2022 Posted October 1, 2022 Just now, Selenasworld said: girl you stan Demi y'all hate him until is about Taylor Swift/Selena I also am a fan of Taylor's music so ? I am ambivalent on Scooter, I do not care for him as a person at all. While I don't think the masters thing is a big deal for a massive millionaire like Taylor Swift, nor do I think Scooter was necessarily evil (Scott Brochetta on the other hand), I am proud of Taylor for re-recording her music. I don't know if it's the best route long-term but at least it's her artistic integrity she's prioritizing (and the additional millions she's making off of it).
Recommended Posts