MADONNA AND WARNER MUSIC GROUP ANNOUNCE MILESTONE, CAREER-SPANNING PARTNERSHIP!!

[maddy1111 1,790]

3 hours ago, Prayer said:

It's impossible to know, what happened happened anyway. I think she would have suffered a big drop anyway, the world drastically changed in those years (2009-2012) with social media dynamics changing everything forever and new big popstars capturing the general public interest (Gaga, Katy, Kesha for a period of time, Ariana, etc). Then mid 10s pop music changed too and everything became vibes and beats instead of classic pop melodies. Also, youth and beauty is glorified probably more than ever. It was a weird decade anyway.

She navigated through it as best as she could without having a proper big label support machine behind her.

Probably Warner would have done a better job in keeping her up there, but let's remember also how Cher released "Closer To The Truth" (Warner) in 2013 and it did what it did. In the end, trying to get people on their teenage years or their 20s to connect with a 50-60 year old artist is always going to be a challenge now. All you needed before was a huge monster hit ("Believe", "Hung Up") and promote it in a big way, now it's not that easy.

Then, "Popular" became huge last year, so you never know what's going to work with people in the end.

I am not saying she wouldn't have suffered a drop, only saying the eras wouldn't be such a mess as they were, a drop would have been slightly less significant because Warner would have actually cared much more about albums becoming hits (or at least tried to have a few hit singles), which Live Nation did not at all. For them, the albums were just necessary ammendment to the tour and it is pretty obvious they didn't give a poop promoting her music in any way, it was only about tours for them. 

But yeah, what happened happened, we cannot change it. 

[BoyToyMark 473]

13 minutes ago, maddy1111 said:

I am not saying she wouldn't have suffered a drop, only saying the eras wouldn't be such a mess as they were, a drop would have been slightly less significant because Warner would have actually cared much more about albums becoming hits (or at least tried to have a few hit singles), which Live Nation did not at all. For them, the albums were just necessary amendment to the tour and it is pretty obvious they didn't give a poop promoting her music in any way, it was only about tours for them. 

But yeah, what happened happened, we cannot change it. 

Yeah I feel a lot changed after MDNA without the support of Warner. 

[musicinferno 3,790]

Imagine if she didn't have Guy Oseary as a manager and that Live Nation deal never happened. We probably would have had several more hits and impressive albums on top of record breaking world tours. Interscope were completely clueless on how to market her. 

[Cyber-Raga 283]

Initially it was a 360 deal and had LN put their shit together, this Interscope crapfest never would have happened the way it did. 
LN closed the deal with M and only then realized that they had no clue how to distribute her albums. 
So the record deal of that 360 contract was outsourced to Interscope (was it 40 mil worth or am I remembering this wrong?) and this is where the insanity began.
M was bound to a label which didn’t really want her. Live Nation was responsible for promotion, yet they didn’t feel that these peanuts were worth promoting so they only did it for her tours, gyms, perfume etc. 

Warner was bad in the end, people seem to have a selective memory. However, they never wanted her albums to fail. They always pushed for the lead single and the first months of album sales and this is what never happened post Super Bowl. The rest is history. 

[wtg1987 10,422]

Let’s be honest - the live nation deal focused more on her touring revenues - music sales have declined considerably and seeing as her first few tours of the millennium grossed over a billion they were always gonna focus on that more - I don’t know why people STILL blame this deal and Guy o seary on her music sales decline - the fact is she is a lot older now so she has lost a lot of her fan base who aren’t interested in a 50 year old artist and at the end of the day her image and music quality just wasn’t up to par which I squarely blame on her and her alone 

[Cyber-Raga 283]

16 minutes ago, wtg1987 said:

Let’s be honest - the live nation deal focused more on her touring revenues - music sales have declined considerably and seeing as her first few tours of the millennium grossed over a billion they were always gonna focus on that more - I don’t know why people STILL blame this deal and Guy o seary on her music sales decline - the fact is she is a lot older now so she has lost a lot of her fan base who aren’t interested in a 50 year old artist and at the end of the day her image and music quality just wasn’t up to par which I squarely blame on her and her alone 

True but she literally dropped off of the charts post Celebration. It still would have happened with Warner eventually but not over night. 
Oh well it’s bygones at this post. Like so many things. 

[Prayer 15,134]

No one knows what could have happened. Like I said in my previous post, the pop scene changed dramatically between her last big Warner hit in 2009 (the "Celebration" single in Europe, not in the US though) and her new era in 2012. Gaga, Katy, Rihanna, Kesha... they simply took over the charts and captured everyone's imagination.

A standalone Madonna single in between the "Celebration" and "MDNA" campaigns wouldn't have hurt, even if it was only "Masterpiece" in October 2011, to promote "W.E.". She was meant to work with David Guetta in 2010/2011 for his album but that didn't happen - it could have helped her a lot, Guetta was very big then.

And I still maintain the whole Gaga "war" was terrible for Madonna in the long run. She lost a whole generation in the process and that was a first for her - not winning over the next generation.

But of course, it's aways easy to talk when things have already happened, right?

[steady75 9,921]

I mean I don't think the Warner situation was bad. They stuck by her through thick and thin. The whole Erotica debacle, the American Life debacle and managed to put her back on top with Confessions. I couldn't pick a better singles run from any of her Warner albums except for maybe Beat Goes On from Hard Candy and Nobody Knows Me & Mother & Father from American Life but they still supported her with loads of endorsement deals a successful tour and worked on an albeit scrapped boxset. 

So she didn't get to pick Impressive Instant and Candy Shop as singles. I'm sorry...Warner were right on that one and were proved even further right when she had the option to pick singles and A&R the album tracks from her interscope albums. Hard Candy was already proof she had checked out in many aspects. Of course we don't know what was going on behind the scenes there could have of course been other issues. If anyone has any intel that would be interesting. For Madonna to go back to them after diminishing returns out on her own speaks volumes to me. There's a whole load of other labels that would have her but the truth is she know where her bread is buttered. Let's hope the balance of power between them is an equilibrium. Hopefully a, one new album - one re-release ratio.

  

[maddy1111 1,790]

2 hours ago, Cyber-Raga said:

Initially it was a 360 deal and had LN put their shit together, this Interscope crapfest never would have happened the way it did. 
LN closed the deal with M and only then realized that they had no clue how to distribute her albums. 
So the record deal of that 360 contract was outsourced to Interscope (was it 40 mil worth or am I remembering this wrong?) and this is where the insanity began.
M was bound to a label which didn’t really want her. Live Nation was responsible for promotion, yet they didn’t feel that these peanuts were worth promoting so they only did it for her tours, gyms, perfume etc. 

Warner was bad in the end, people seem to have a selective memory. However, they never wanted her albums to fail. They always pushed for the lead single and the first months of album sales and this is what never happened post Super Bowl. The rest is history. 

Thank you, that was exactly my point previously. I am not saying Warner is all about shine and glory, it was probably pretty tough in the background, but at least they were always focused on her music to be successful - their singles choices were actually up to the point from commercial point of view. I know a lot of people would want this or that song to be released as single, but let's be honest, choices made by Madonna are not always the best ones. Warner managed to keep the balance between her artistry and still keeping her relevant. I don't know why everyone is saying she is too old, so she didn't have any chance post Hard Candy. Damn, look at Hung Up! Everyone was saying after American Life that she is done (after controversy) and "too old" and still, she managed to deliver one of the biggest hits of her career back then. Not mentioning 4 Minutes where Warner (again) made an absolutely right choice from commercial point of view pairing her with Justin at that time. So yeah, I really believe she had a chance going further in years 2012-2019. 

I am not saying there wouldn't be a drop in 2012-2019 years, it was probably inevitable, but it wouldn't have happened over night like happened after moving to LiveNation. I know it is only history that cannot be changed now, but I strongly believe that under Warner we would have gotten 1) better albums (more focused albums not just products as happened mainly with MDNA and partly with Rebel Heart) 2) at least a few mildly successful songs/singles during these years that would have been doing some success in the charts. Not like with LiveNation where they did not care at all and Madonna, from chart point of view, dissappeared from there like a fart in a wind. It is obvious that with LiveNation it simply happened too quickly. We are talking about Madonna here, the biggest popstar that has ever lived, she has been chatting for 30 years and then all of a sudden.. Only mess and focus on tours (and quality wise, torus also slightly dropped in comparison with previous ones)

[MikeyK 776]

10 hours ago, Alpha said:

Well, Natalia Kills mentions how they prioritized Gaga over her and kinda implied Gaga had something to do with that as well. Shirley Manson also mentioned not too long ago that apparently she was on a flight and bumped into an unamed big rock star who is influential and that they apparently told her they were in a meeting and that Interscope flat out said they couldn't have two female led bands so they'd rather promote and support No Doubt over Garbage and that led to all the issues the band had.

 

8 hours ago, Brendanlovesu1 said:

Garbage were used to being a big band on Mushroom in the UK/Australia and Almo/Geffen in the US and Almo sold Garbage to Interscope without asking their permission so Garbage became a small band on a big label and sort of floundered there. 

Of course 9/11 didn't help sales of beautiful garbage either, and they had Butch Vig, a well respected producer so he did all of Garbage's A&R himself so they were sort of left to their own devices while at Interscope

This was circa Beautiful Garbage right? I remember that. Their first two had been so big (well, alternative big), and the way that one just came & went was so strange. It even sounded like they were being pushed in a more pop direction. Androgyny sounded like a darkchild track. Sadly interscope prob just thought Gwen & co were an easier sell in the era of Brit, J.Lo, Destiny’s Child. Alt had sorta fallen out at that point.

Their next one a few years later did better though, right? It was treated as a sort of comeback. And it sounded more like them. Of course emo and indie had broken through so guitar rock was more in vogue again, so they were allowed to be themselves.

[steady75 9,921]

Warner would have called a meeting with her and guy once they submitted the MDNA final demos. 

[Brendanlovesu1 12,782]

14 minutes ago, MikeyK said:

 

This was circa Beautiful Garbage right? I remember that. Their first two had been so big (well, alternative big), and the way that one just came & went was so strange. It even sounded like they were being pushed in a more pop direction. Androgyny sounded like a darkchild track. Sadly interscope prob just thought Gwen & co were an easier sell in the era of Brit, J.Lo, Destiny’s Child. Alt had sorta fallen out at that point.

Their next one a few years later did better though, right? It was treated as a sort of comeback. And it sounded more like them. Of course emo and indie had broken through so guitar rock was more in vogue again, so they were allowed to be themselves.

yeah that was Beautiful Garbage, their first release on Interscope, the follow up was Bleed Like Me which was released in 2005 which debuted at number four on the Billboard 200 with 73,000 copies sold in its first week, becoming the band's first top-10 album on the chart, it also debuted at number four on the UK Albums Chart, selling 27,375 copies in its first week

 

[Adonna 18,118]

 

5 hours ago, maddy1111 said:

I am not saying she wouldn't have suffered a drop, only saying the eras wouldn't be such a mess as they were, a drop would have been slightly less significant because Warner would have actually cared much more about albums becoming hits (or at least tried to have a few hit singles), which Live Nation did not at all. For them, the albums were just necessary ammendment to the tour and it is pretty obvious they didn't give a poop promoting her music in any way, it was only about tours for them. 

But yeah, what happened happened, we cannot change it. 

Sure, she didn't sell well, but it's only a "mess" to some fans.  Certainly, we all can sit here now and say, "she should of done this or that", but it doesn't mean it would have made things any better regarding her album sales.  And let's remember Interscope was just the distributor, so of course Warner would have played a more role in the album release and promotion behind it.  However, if they were so great, how come they didn't do that with Hard Candy?  4 Minutes was releaseed with a bang, and a huge hit, but then they pretty much dropped the ball from there.  But even they probably knew her immediately going on tour was the best bet in profiting from that era.

3 hours ago, Cyber-Raga said:

Warner was bad in the end, people seem to have a selective memory. However, they never wanted her albums to fail. They always pushed for the lead single and the first months of album sales and this is what never happened post Super Bowl. The rest is history. 

This!  I've said it before.  They were already dropping the ball with the Music album.  I think most of us would agree, Impressive Instant would have made a great 4th single.  Even Madonna wanted it, but of course Warner wanted Amazing.  So all this talk that Warner knows what to do with her, isn't always necessarily true.  It doesn't mean the single would have done any better than Amazing, but from our perspective we all thought Impressive Instant would have made a great single.  It did give her another #1 Dance club hit.

25 minutes ago, steady75 said:

Warner would have called a meeting with her and guy once they submitted the MDNA final demos. 

That's your perspective.  You really don't know what the Warner people would have done.  Just because some fans may not like the album, doesn't mean everyone agrees it was a bad album.  In many cases, most record companies screw the shit out of their artists.  It's happened to the biggest acts throughout their careers.   Bruce Springsteen, John Mellencamp, Prince, George Michael, Cyndi Lauper, Tina Turner are just a few that could attest to that. 

[MikeyK 776]

3 hours ago, Prayer said:

And I still maintain the whole Gaga "war" was terrible for Madonna in the long run. She lost a whole generation in the process and that was a first for her - not winning over the next generation.

Agree. That combined w/the mediocre MDNA. It was her first big album post-gaga’s hijacking of the pop landscape (and rummaging M’s closet), and really M’s intro to a new generation of young people coming of age w/gaga, and she came back with… that. Sure we got the superbowl, some semi decent album tracks and a couple cute videos but yeah. What a disappointment.

But we all know Billy O’s comments about how checked out she was.

We have to wonder if she was fully aware of and ok with the direction the 360 deal would take her. Maybe she herself realized what an increasingly uphill battle pop success would be. So she pivoted to focusing on touring and other more reliably lucrative endeavors, and new albums just became an excuse to tour a la the Rolling Stones.

The dip in quality a lot of us “legacy fans” feel her last few albums had are on her though, and possibly her own hubris. Bitch, I’M MADONNA.

[Ian 2,351]

Warner about MDNA:

" Cut it in half and call it Regrets "

[steady75 9,921]

1 hour ago, Adonna said:

 

Sure, she didn't sell well, but it's only a "mess" to some fans.  Certainly, we all can sit here now and say, "she should of done this or that", but it doesn't mean it would have made things any better regarding her album sales.  And let's remember Interscope was just the distributor, so of course Warner would have played a more role in the album release and promotion behind it.  However, if they were so great, how come they didn't do that with Hard Candy?  4 Minutes was releaseed with a bang, and a huge hit, but then they pretty much dropped the ball from there.  But even they probably knew her immediately going on tour was the best bet in profiting from that era.

This!  I've said it before.  They were already dropping the ball with the Music album.  I think most of us would agree, Impressive Instant would have made a great 4th single.  Even Madonna wanted it, but of course Warner wanted Amazing.  So all this talk that Warner knows what to do with her, isn't always necessarily true.  It doesn't mean the single would have done any better than Amazing, but from our perspective we all thought Impressive Instant would have made a great single.  It did give her another #1 Dance club hit.

That's your perspective.  You really don't know what the Warner people would have done.  Just because some fans may not like the album, doesn't mean everyone agrees it was a bad album.  In many cases, most record companies screw the shit out of their artists.  It's happened to the biggest acts throughout their careers.   Bruce Springsteen, John Mellencamp, Prince, George Michael, Cyndi Lauper, Tina Turner are just a few that could attest to that. 

Ok well from your quote fest it's clear than any other perspective we have is incorrect unless it's flat out praising Madonna. Which sort of undermines your whole pitch because it's very visibly not objective. And that's fine, it's just a bit futile to read or take your post with any real merit.  You do you but I'll not respond past this point cause I already know the weight of the counter response.

 

[Adonna 18,118]

1 hour ago, steady75 said:

Ok well from your quote fest it's clear than any other perspective we have is incorrect unless it's flat out praising Madonna. Which sort of undermines your whole pitch because it's very visibly not objective. And that's fine, it's just a bit futile to read or take your post with any real merit.  You do you but I'll not respond past this point cause I already know the weight of the counter response.

 

You're twisting it.  Looking for right or wrong, when that wasn't my point.  I don't necessarily think there is an exact right or wrong here.  We all have perspectives.  I prefer that then someone coming in and saying, "no, you're wrong" when they clearly have no idea what they are talking about.  But it's possible that we all see it from a different perspective.  I'm fine with that.  Even more, most definitely ours are different as Madonna.  Some fans seem to assume doom and gloom to her career at some particular point, while others don't.  Then we have Madonna who is seemingly having the time of her life and doesn't appear to be toppling from her legacy.  Again, it's all about perspective.  I personally try to see it from where Madonna seems to be in her life. Sure, she isn't as successful and popular as she once was, but at the same time, she still can do pretty much anything she wants.  She still creates on her own terms and is able to find the best way she can to get her art heard and seen.  At the same time, she remains financially ahead.  With that said, I just try to enjoy the input.

Lastly, this is a discussion, not a contest of words!!  You're free to dismiss what I say because it may not agree with you, but it's hardly gonna break my heart.  At the end of the day, I know we're just discussing our opinions.  We're both fans and I know that I will continue to enjoy her work and I suppose you will too.

[maddy1111 1,790]

2 hours ago, Adonna said:

 

Sure, she didn't sell well, but it's only a "mess" to some fans.  Certainly, we all can sit here now and say, "she should of done this or that", but it doesn't mean it would have made things any better regarding her album sales.  And let's remember Interscope was just the distributor, so of course Warner would have played a more role in the album release and promotion behind it.  However, if they were so great, how come they didn't do that with Hard Candy?  4 Minutes was releaseed with a bang, and a huge hit, but then they pretty much dropped the ball from there.  But even they probably knew her immediately going on tour was the best bet in profiting from that era.

At this point I would be only repeating myself, but still... Warner gave her at least 4 minutes, a huge hit in US, one of her biggest, that's more than enough. It would be naive to expect from her to have 3-4 success singles from one album in last 00s and in 10s. Like I said there would've definitely been some sort of drop past Hard Candy, but at least her albums and especially singles would have got a slightly better treatment with Warner than LiveNation gave her and she would have seen some chart success. I am certain of that.. Because clearly, you can barely do any worse than LiveNation did for Madonna. But that's my point of view, we might as well agree to disagree

[Alpha 1,514]

Does anyone remember when she said she wanted to make Falling Free a single but the label didnt want her to? I forget which interview it was. Also Rebel Heart was meant to be a double album that the label refused sooooo...obviously Interscope did have some say in what she was doing but then again Maverick also started appearing on her albums again. Idk all that stuff is confusing to me.

[Andreo 5,530]

I love reading career choices complaints of marketing stuff happened 15 years ago! Keep It up guys! 😍

[Jackie 8,577]

7 hours ago, musicinferno said:

Imagine if she didn't have Guy Oseary as a manager and that Live Nation deal never happened. We probably would have had several more hits and impressive albums on top of record breaking world tours. Interscope were completely clueless on how to market her. 

Not sure - I've said this many times - she promoted the fuck out of Rebel Heart - she was EVERYWHERE - she did an entire week on Ellen - didn't help. MDNA - GMAYL was a hit only because of the deal with airplay - the lack of promotion is interesting - Orbits rambles at the time give insight - she was distracted with too many projects - and it sounds like it was also her decision. 

Madame X she did ok - Crave did well in the UK (not a top 10) but certainly wasn't a flop.

The industry shifted to streaming and her core fan base at the time hadn't kept up - and perhaps inter scope / guy o hadn't looked at that time to maximize that perhaps.

[Prayer 15,134]

15 minutes ago, Alpha said:

Does anyone remember when she said she wanted to make Falling Free a single but the label didnt want her to? I forget which interview it was. Also Rebel Heart was meant to be a double album that the label refused sooooo...obviously Interscope did have some say in what she was doing but then again Maverick also started appearing on her albums again. Idk all that stuff is confusing to me.

Sometimes she just says things for the sake of it, I think. The "Falling Free" reference, I wouldn't read too much into that, she was just explaining how sometimes a great song won't have enough commercial appleal. If she loved it that much it would have been included on the "MDNA Tour"... and that wasn't the case.

The double "Rebel/Heart" album and the label don't allowing it, she talked about in very early within her album promotion interviews, just a couple of times I think. Later it was just the same old "two sides of my personality" story.

[Adonna 18,118]

1 hour ago, maddy1111 said:

At this point I would be only repeating myself, but still... Warner gave her at least 4 minutes, a huge hit in US, one of her biggest, that's more than enough. It would be naive to expect from her to have 3-4 success singles from one album in last 00s and in 10s. Like I said there would've definitely been some sort of drop past Hard Candy, but at least her albums and especially singles would have got a slightly better treatment with Warner than LiveNation gave her and she would have seen some chart success. I am certain of that.. Because clearly, you can barely do any worse than LiveNation did for Madonna. But that's my point of view, we might as well agree to disagree

Beyond whatever we do or don't agree on... we can't forget the impact Warner (or anyone that matters) knew 4 Minutes would have because Justin was involved as well.  It would have been foolish for Warner to dismiss that.  That song really became her biggest hit only because the song was pulling from two huge fan bases. (Not to say, it couldn't have been a hit without Justin, but he definitely helped in making it the "biggest selling hit" of her career. The big difference here is the fact Warner had a bigger stake and role in promoting her while Interscope pretty much served as a distributor. 

LIVE NATION seem to be about the money she would make.  And that's fine, but I also see that her artistic output did not get enough attention through them. Obviously, their intent was to get her back on the road and profit from merchandising and her selling perfumes, etc.

[maddy1111 1,790]

10 minutes ago, Adonna said:

Beyond whatever we do or don't agree on... we can't forget the impact Warner (or anyone that matters) knew 4 Minutes would have because Justin was involved as well.  It would have been foolish for Warner to dismiss that.  That song really became her biggest hit only because the song was pulling from two huge fan bases. (Not to say, it couldn't have been a hit without Justin, but he definitely helped in making it the "biggest selling hit" of her career. The big difference here is the fact Warner had a bigger stake and role in promoting her while Interscope pretty much served as a distributor. 

Well, that's what I wrote few posts back 

"Not mentioning 4 Minutes where Warner (again) made an absolutely right choice from commercial point of view pairing her with Justin at that time. So yeah, I really believe she had a chance going further in years 2012-2019." 

And I don't see anything wrong with that, it was still Madonna's song featuring Justin, Warner did a right choice and delivered a mega hit for her. 

[Adonna 18,118]

14 minutes ago, maddy1111 said:

Well, that's what I wrote few posts back 

"Not mentioning 4 Minutes where Warner (again) made an absolutely right choice from commercial point of view pairing her with Justin at that time. So yeah, I really believe she had a chance going further in years 2012-2019." 

And I don't see anything wrong with that, it was still Madonna's song featuring Justin, Warner did a right choice and delivered a mega hit for her. 

Yes, but I don't think that necessarily guaranteed her a free ride to success after that.  Of course we agree, LiveNation or Interscope really didn't help highlight her artistic efforts with her last three albums.  At the same time, it left Madonna and her management responsible for all the promotion.  MDNA had the Superbowl, but that unfortunately was short lived.  But I do think it still served a purpose in boosting a positive public perception of her.  They obviously knew that attention could help sell concert tickets. We must admit, that's where everyone is making the most money from an artist, including the artist.  As for REBEL HEART, there seemed to be a hell of a lot of promotion behind it, but it just really didn't seem to make an impact.  At the end of the day, it's risky to leave the promotional efforts up to the artist and the management of a huge artist like Madonna.  In most cases, a record label (beyond being just a distributor) would be far more beneficial because they are going to be far more involved in trying to sell an album.  But we can't forget that those three interscope albums came at a time the music industry was in turmoil.  Touring ended up being the best way to go for Madonna because that is where she was going to make her money.