[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: The Sellout thread



On Thu, 27 Nov 1997, GLEN BOURGEOIS wrote:
> In the case of Sub Pop, the only implication of Warner buying the 
> company was that Sub Pop now had money to do more stuff, but they 
> were never forced to conform. In fact, when the word from the offices 

Yes, well Warner only bought 49% of Subpop, meaning that they don't even
have to power to tell Subpop what to do.  I think this is the same with
Matador and their Columbia deal.  But it does mean that they're no longer
independent (although they remain to operate with a large degree of
autonomy).

my real question was over the issue of major distribution for indies.
Murderecords, for example is distributed by Universal (actually, i think
Universal actually does their manufacturing for them too), but Universal
has no ownership of Murder (or at least, not to my knowledge :).  Murder
can do whatever it wants, and its only risk is that Universal stops liking
them, and doesn't renew the deal, or cancels it, or whatever.

gord