Latest on MJJC

MJ's a "businessman"?

forbes only bases their list of info thats already known in the media or info that is given to them by the celebs involved.they stated that themselves. and even if mj has no assets other than the sony/atv well thats worth upto a couple of billion. and mj owns 50% .so maybe the question should be why are forbes ignoring mj? doesnt go with the agenda thats why
 
benscarr said:
We don't know what the exact situation is with Michael's debts, Michael may or may not have problems paying back what he alledgedly owes.



Sony have no control over Michael's music from 1979-88. Michael now owns the masters to all of his albums from Off The Wall to Invincible to Thriller25 etc, plus he owns all of his music videos that are sold on iTunes except for 2 or 3 videos. Just go to iTunes and you will see that all of Michael's albums are licensed to MJJ Productions.Inc, not Sony BMG Entertainments as The Jacksons albums are.
Click to expand...

Confusion abounds because I honestly thought I read something that his full masters don't get returned to him until 2015. So who's really telling the truth? :fear:
 
elusive moonwalker said:
forbes only bases their list of info thats already known in the media or info that is given to them by the celebs involved.they stated that themselves. and even if mj has no assets other than the sony/atv well thats worth upto a couple of billion. and mj owns 50% .so maybe the question should be why are forbes ignoring mj? doesnt go with the agenda thats why
Click to expand...

MJ and his folks don't present their info to Forbes, that could be the reason.
 
cus forbes will twist it. people don't want to realize sometimes that these mags base their sexiest man alive polls, and entertainment tops polls on a political basis. and a lot of media don't like MJ. but that's ok..cus...u aint good unless ur hated. i know people don't act like they understand it, but they do. i mean..how else do u explain the biggest hate going towards those with the biggest money? lol. now the money is comin in from people that do like u, but u know what i'm sayin.

the only time u ain't good is if people don't know u exist while u exist.(if they don't talk about u AT ALL) which means they're not threatened by you. hence an MJ song title. lol
 
Last edited:
lol..we aint lookin at it. its lookin at us..lol...u log on and msn has it splashed across the frontpage of ur homepage whether u like it or not. lol
 
How did ya'l arrive at the amount you claim MJ made last year? How could ya'l possibly know something like that If MJ does not submit his figures to forbes? Shed some light please..
 
How did ya'l arrive at the amount you claim MJ made last year? How could ya'l possibly know something like that If MJ does not submit his figures to forbes? Shed some light please..
Click to expand...
i was wondering that. wondered if i had missed an article or something.i guess u could do a ruff esitmate based on sales from the last year and the money the cats make.regardless of any other income

MJ and his folks don't present their info to Forbes, that could be the reason.
Click to expand...
but if forbes are as credible as they like everyone to think they are then u shouldnt have to submit info and they have said in the past they just get their info from whats available to the gen public. ie they have no inside knowledge. everyone knows about sony/atv lol. so why the selective reporting
 
:glare:

Thread is this close to being put to rest if y'all don't move on from the specifics of Michael's finances.

It's one thing to talk about his business ventures and quite another one to talk about his debt and his current financial situation (which BTW both are pure speculation)
 
Please don't close this thread! I wanna see how many posts we can get haha :p

Btw. what does Forbes mean?
 
yeah...i appreciate the interest in MJ as a businessperson, but i have to say, that the interest seems a little too high at times..lol...

i mean i cringe at the idea of people wanting to know about MY finances..so i surely understand MJ...i don't know why other people are sooo interested. i mean..think about it...would u like people digging in YOUR garbage can?

it just seems like, every time people wanna know about MJ being a businessperson, it's a sliding slope...that leads to people wanting to get all up into his business. He only owes us the music. well..lol..he doesn't OWE us the music...but that's really all we're entitled to. i mean..all the other artists on sites i see....i just don't see fans up all in their business. i don't understand tha big time fascisnation. cus for me..all i can think is.. privacy..privacy...we all want it...even those in the public eye.

so..yes..as many times as it's been answered...MJ is a businessperson. lol. i think that's the answer.
 
Ohhh,please,dont close Daphineas!!!:(

I take some cofe, sitting in front of my computer and enjoy this thread.:D

Troubleman and cia are doing a great job!!!!hahahha
 
Anyway said:
Why everyone forgets Madonna lost so many million with her label Maverik that she was sued by Warner and she had to close her business down and pay back the major with her latest albums.

Everyone forgets that from the sum the paper reports an artist has earned, you have to calculate that if the album has samples inside the you have half of the incomes, casue the rest goes to those who wrote the orginal tracks, then you have to pay the producer of the album then you have to substract all the costs for the avertising the label spent for the album's pbblicity, and so on...

usually what an artist really earn is the 30% - 20% , after taxes also the 15% of the sum papers are reporting.
Click to expand...

Well noted and I sure didn't forget that .. Madonna is a wealthy & successful woman.. but currently business wise she is in an DEEP hole... and the media does not focus on her negatives like they do Michael so.......................changing the subject back to Mike...
 
Rasta Pasta said:
Well noted and I sure didn't forget that .. Madonna is a wealthy & successful woman.. but currently business wise she is in an DEEP hole... and the media does not focus on her negatives like they do Michael so.......................changing the subject back to Mike...
Click to expand...

yeah...that's the media for u. that's why..i bet...MJ doesn't go to forbes magazine...madonna can feel free to go there.
 
benscarr said:
We don't know what the exact situation is with Michael's debts, Michael may or may not have problems paying back what he alledgedly owes.



Sony have no control over Michael's music from 1979-88. Michael now owns the masters to all of his albums from Off The Wall to Invincible to Thriller25 etc, plus he owns all of his music videos that are sold on iTunes except for 2 or 3 videos. Just go to iTunes and you will see that all of Michael's albums are licensed to MJJ Productions.Inc, not Sony BMG Entertainments as The Jacksons albums are.
Click to expand...


also don't count out J5 royalties.. and I am going to use this excerpt on the Universal/Motown lawsuit to back it up:

Jackson sues Universal Music Group over royalties

Jet, June 2, 2003


Michael Jackson, the King of Pop, has sued Universal Music Group, claiming the world's largest record company owes him royalties for the re-release of songs he made in the 1970s.

The lawsuit accuses Universal Music Group of violating a 1980 agreement to pay Jackson royalties from recordings he made from 1969 to 1976 with the Jackson 5 and as a solo artist for Motown Records, which was acquired by Universal Music Group.

Universal Music Group spokesman Bob Bernstein declined comment at JET press time.


According to the lawsuit that was recently filed in the Los Angeles Superior Court, Jackson reached a settlement with Motown Records in 1980 that forfeited his right to royalties for songs released before that time. But Motown was to pay Jackson royalties for previously unreleased material and songs re-released on the best of compilations, according to the lawsuit.

The lawsuit seeks an accounting of royalties owed and unspecified damages. Jackson also wants the 1980 settlement voided and seeks ownership of his Motown master recordings.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_/ai_102697045
Click to expand...

This lawsuit against Universal faded away.. but the POINT to remember is that there IS an agreement made with Universal/Motown to pay Mike of any music made from 1969 to 1976 with the Jackson 5 and as a solo artist for Motown Records, which was acquired by Universal Music Group..


so to me that means Michael is to be paid on any songs he was involved with from 1969 onwards..
so ... Universal... Sony... is suppose to be paying something to Michael regularly...

seemed like a clever business deal to me to make sure your hard work from childhood can still give you earnings???
 
bgz said:
Forbes is an American "Business and Financial News" magazine. Run by Malcomb Forbes (the son), and not known to be a supporter of Michael.
Click to expand...


thought so. and that makes malcomb irresponsible, because that means he skewers information..even if by omission. and much of the world will decide that what he thinks is the whole truth and nothing but the truth. because of the power of media, and the people who tend to have a hard time not supporting media, even if they know it's biased.
 
I'm not so sure Forbes has elected not to publish Mike in their lists. I think it could be that Mike is not allowing his PR team to divulge this information and keep it on the down low as to how much money he has or makes. We all know he is trying to avoid getting sued by everybody and his brother and feining being broke. What would it look like to all of a sudden publish your actual or inflated worth? It would just be self defeating and pointless. :scratch:

Ticie,
The JACKSONOLOGIST
 
THE JACKSONOLOGIST said:
I'm not so sure Forbes has elected not to publish Mike in their lists. I think it could be that Mike is not allowing his PR team to divulge this information and keep it on the down low as to how much money he has or makes. We all know he is trying to avoid getting sued by everybody and his brother and feining being broke. What would it look like to all of a sudden publish your actual or inflated worth? It would just be self defeating and pointless. :scratch:

Ticie,
The JACKSONOLOGIST
Click to expand...

That's what I thought. It's good he keeps it hidden. I wouldn't want people to know how much I got either, call me broke but you don't know me, ya dig? :lol:
 
Rasta Pasta said:
also don't count out J5 royalties.. and I am going to use this excerpt on the Universal/Motown lawsuit to back it up:



This lawsuit against Universal faded away.. but the POINT to remember is that there IS an agreement made with Universal/Motown to pay Mike of any music made from 1969 to 1976 with the Jackson 5 and as a solo artist for Motown Records, which was acquired by Universal Music Group..


so to me that means Michael is to be paid on any songs he was involved with from 1969 onwards..
so ... Universal... Sony... is suppose to be paying something to Michael regularly...

seemed like a clever business deal to me to make sure your hard work from childhood can still give you earnings???
Click to expand...

Question is does he get PAID the royalties? If not then it didn't go all the way he thought. The Jackson family signed a contract that didn't allow them to get royalties from their Motown singles. The Jackson 5 and Michael's solo Motown work are in the hands of Berry Gordy's Jobete Publishing Co. THAT'S why Michael made the deal he made with Epic in 1991 to assure him royalties. He probably does got the masters, but he's not making the most money off it unless it's songs he wrote.
 
troubleman84 said:
Question is does he get PAID the royalties? If not then it didn't go all the way he thought. The Jackson family signed a contract that didn't allow them to get royalties from their Motown singles. The Jackson 5 and Michael's solo Motown work are in the hands of Berry Gordy's Jobete Publishing Co. THAT'S why Michael made the deal he made with Epic in 1991 to assure him royalties. He probably does got the masters, but he's not making the most money off it unless it's songs he wrote.
Click to expand...

according to the lawsuit.. the deal was made with Motown in 1980...for Mike to be paid "royalties" on all Motown re-releases of J5 and his solo albums from 1969-1976 along with any uses of J5 imagines (IE: TV or radio ads)

yes, the writers of those songs get royalties.. but becuz of that LEGAL agreement.. Mike should get royalties too...

Universal/Motown got sued becuz they weren't paying it.. but that doesn't mean a legal / business agreement don't exsist...

Who knows if Universal is even paying the writers of those songs as they are suppose to as well
 
Last edited:
So if it's Motown re-releases, then mainly that's because he agreed to Motown releasing it in hopes the money made off those albums go to him and his brothers. Other than that, they hardly get royalties from when the songs are played on the radio. Whoever wrote/produce/owns the song gets more money than the artists. Willie Hutch, who wrote "I'll Be There" and arranged that song and "Never Can Say Goodbye" got more royalties on the J5 recordings than the Jacksons did. As far as writers, some of them made deals with Motown to get them royalties on songs. Not everything goes to Berry Gordy. I'm sure DeBarge still gets paid for songs they WROTE that have been sampled on hip-hop songs. The Jackson 5 never got their own penned songs recorded at Motown.
 
troubleman84 said:
So if it's Motown re-releases, then mainly that's because he agreed to Motown releasing it in hopes the money made off those albums go to him and his brothers. Other than that, they hardly get royalties from when the songs are played on the radio. Whoever wrote/produce/owns the song gets more money than the artists. Willie Hutch, who wrote "I'll Be There" and arranged that song and "Never Can Say Goodbye" got more royalties on the J5 recordings than the Jacksons did. As far as writers, some of them made deals with Motown to get them royalties on songs. Not everything goes to Berry Gordy. I'm sure DeBarge still gets paid for songs they WROTE that have been sampled on hip-hop songs. The Jackson 5 never got their own penned songs recorded at Motown.
Click to expand...

you are preaching to the choir... never said the writers Shouldn't get royalties... never even hinted to that...

thats the way the "industry" works...thats why songwriting is key in a continual earnings for an artist's songs.

just the point that Michael signed an agreement with Motown in 1980 that HE ALSO should be getting royalties from his re-released Motown work from 1969-1976...


made to the point that Michael made a business deal.. with a major label to get royalties on songs he didn't even write.. but performed on.. and that deal.. from 1980 should be giving him earnings to this day...

in short, I would say thats a smart business move...
 
Last edited:
Lmao, I'm loving the posts guys. It kind of makes me feel special to know that you guys are taken the time to post in MY thread haha.

Carry on :D I love talking about MJ!
 
LOL, no prob, Shamonee.

Rasta, I may be preaching to the choir but MJ is getting more off from his deals with Epic than he is from Motown. Plus let it be reminded that the original lawsuit (not the 2003 one) was filed by Joseph Jackson since the J5 didn't get much money off the hits they made w/Motown during the Berry Gordy era of the label. Michael and Universal had to settle on a good payment in 2003 but whatever was agreed upon is speculation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top