Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Fingers/Geldof case back in news


Loudmouth

Status: Offline
Posts: 2821
Date:
Fingers/Geldof case back in news
Permalink  
 


Seems things are getting a bit  nasty judging by the details revealed in the weekend newspapers:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3495858/jonnie-fingers-sues-bob-geldof-i-dont-lik

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4476758/Boomtown-Rats-pianist-suing-Geldof-put

http://www.independent.ie/entertainment/music/music-news/boomtown-rats-pianist-suing



__________________


Back To Boomtown

Status: Offline
Posts: 7207
Date:
Permalink  
 

I must admit I don't know why Fingers is pursuing this.  All well and good to put something in the small claims court, but putting your house on the line is a bit much.  I guess there is a few quid involved, especially if you consider back payments, but this seems pretty risky.  I had a case against a surveyor a few years ago, but I didn't pursue it because the projected costs outweighed the sum in dispute; despite being assured I was likely to be successful it simply wouldn't have been worth it in time and effort.  With costs of £1m or so, there need to be big gains to be made to make it worthwhile.  The lawyers must be rubbing their hands in glee at the easy money on offer here.

Still long time until March 2018, so possible it all gets settled behind closed doors; that would make it 13 years since this all started.

PS £4,500/annum in royalties doesn't seem like much - I guess it is all for She's So Modern.  



__________________

 What is this bloke talking about? 


Loudmouth

Status: Offline
Posts: 2631
Date:
Permalink  
 

Let's hope it all gets sorted before the release of the new album. Perish the thought that all of the additional press prattle will circulate at the same time. Nobody would want that.

Would they?

 



__________________


Loudmouth

Status: Offline
Posts: 2821
Date:
Permalink  
 

I'm surprised it's resurfaced (pardon the pun).Didn't expect to hear about this again. I always thought Fingers was the most 'easy going' of the Rats, if one can ever judge from the outside. He certainly needs the money more than Geldof.

Whatever about who  wrote it I wonder too if actually playing on the record counts for anything?It's Fingers piano work, not Geldof on the old joanna so surely this is a factor in any royalty dispute. The piano playing/sound makes the song in many ways.Then there are minor contributions from the rest of the band so maybe all  royalties were shared out equally, or does Geldof as alleged songwriter get the lions share?

All very intriquing and pretty sad as well.



__________________


Loudmouth

Status: Offline
Posts: 2631
Date:
Permalink  
 

Listening again to the rough San Diego version within a month of the tragedy, it is clear the line 'Down, down, down...shoot it all down' has yet to evolve with Geldof clearly stuck for the right words to go in there. So maybe this did come later from Fingers?

 



__________________


Back To Boomtown

Status: Offline
Posts: 7207
Date:
Permalink  
 

Mark L wrote:

Let's hope it all gets sorted before the release of the new album. Perish the thought that all of the additional press prattle will circulate at the same time. Nobody would want that.

Would they?

 


 It would be terrible if they printed lots of stories about the Rats just as they released an album...

... no such thing as bad publicity.  

Plenty of scope for Geldof to insult all and sundry during the summer and get their names in the papers.



__________________

 What is this bloke talking about? 


Back To Boomtown

Status: Offline
Posts: 7207
Date:
Permalink  
 

noelindublin wrote:

...I wonder too if actually playing on the record counts for anything?It's Fingers piano work, not Geldof on the old joanna so surely this is a factor in any royalty dispute. The piano playing/sound makes the song in many ways.Then there are minor contributions from the rest of the band so maybe all  royalties were shared out equally, or does Geldof as alleged songwriter get the lions share?


 I think the other thread on the matter covers this. The lyrics and the melody tune are what counts, the rest is incidental. There is a performance fee but small potatoes compared with the songwriting credit. Andy Scott of Sweet made more on royalties for Love is like Oxygen than any of the big Chinn/Chapman hits he performed on.

I don't know what the annual Rats royalties are, but I would guesstimate around £100k/annum. Even with Mondays forming a good proportion of that, I suspect the best for a co-credit would be around £20K/annum.  Backdated, probably worth a cool million quid, but that would be pre-tax, so betting the house on it seems rash.

Geldof got the lion's share and it's probably a nice fall back, but he probably earns more getting thrown off stage doing an after dinner speech than he does in a year of royalties.

It will be 13 years since it all started come March 2018 and whilst the others have settled, Fingers is still trying to get what he perceives as his due.  I suspect there will be an out of court agreement, but the real winners here are the lawyers.  



__________________

 What is this bloke talking about? 


Loudmouth

Status: Offline
Posts: 2631
Date:
Permalink  
 

ArrGee wrote:
Mark L wrote:

Let's hope it all gets sorted before the release of the new album. Perish the thought that all of the additional press prattle will circulate at the same time. Nobody would want that.

Would they?

 


 It would be terrible if they printed lots of stories about the Rats just as they released an album...

... no such thing as bad publicity.  

Plenty of scope for Geldof to insult all and sundry during the summer and get their names in the papers.


 

It would be really dreadful. 

Glad someone got my drift! 



__________________


Back To Boomtown

Status: Offline
Posts: 7207
Date:
Permalink  
 

Mark L wrote:
ArrGee wrote:
Mark L wrote:

Let's hope it all gets sorted before the release of the new album. Perish the thought that all of the additional press prattle will circulate at the same time. Nobody would want that.

Would they?

 


 It would be terrible if they printed lots of stories about the Rats just as they released an album...

... no such thing as bad publicity.  

Plenty of scope for Geldof to insult all and sundry during the summer and get their names in the papers.


 

It would be really dreadful. 

Glad someone got my drift! 


As long as he continues to say stupid things like When she [May] pimps the Queen [to Trump], she pimps the nation  then there will be a few more headlines.   There must be journalists who just follow him around the after dinner circuit recording these.  Easy news.  And easy money for these speaking engagements.

 

 



__________________

 What is this bloke talking about? 


Loudmouth

Status: Offline
Posts: 2821
Date:
Permalink  
 

Mark L wrote:
ArrGee wrote:
Mark L wrote:

Let's hope it all gets sorted before the release of the new album. Perish the thought that all of the additional press prattle will circulate at the same time. Nobody would want that.

Would they?

 


 It would be terrible if they printed lots of stories about the Rats just as they released an album...

... no such thing as bad publicity.  

Plenty of scope for Geldof to insult all and sundry during the summer and get their names in the papers.


 

It would be really dreadful. 

Glad someone got my drift! 


 Lucy Bannerman of The Times no less, not some gutter publication starts her take on the story with the following :

'Some might say that its not just his greatest hit but his only one. Now Bob Geldof and a former bandmate with the Boomtown Rats are taking their battle over royalties from the song I Dont Like Mondays to the High Court'.

Not sure why a Times writer would use that as an opening line.Taking a well  known hit by a band and then half implying  that it was their only hit.Why  she wishes to  speak on behalf of 'some' is curious, is it her own  ignorance or malice? I suspect she means that it's the song most people  associate with Geldof/the Rats and none of the others matter. It's just a weird way to introduce an article on a band that had a whole string of Top 40 hits .

This is an example of 'publicity' from a newspaper which should know better. Full article below:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/geldof-fights-over-rats-song-royalties-9hnmnczvs

 

 

 



-- Edited by noelindublin on Wednesday 10th of May 2017 12:34:54 PM

__________________


Back To Boomtown

Status: Offline
Posts: 7207
Date:
Permalink  
 

noelindublin wrote:

 Lucy Bannerman of The Times no less, not some gutter publication starts her take on the story with the following :

'Some might say that its not just his greatest hit but his only one. Now Bob Geldof and a former bandmate with the Boomtown Rats are taking their battle over royalties from the song I Dont Like Mondays to the High Court'.

Not sure why a Times writer would use that as an opening line.Taking a well  known hit by a band and then half implying  that it was their only hit.Why  she wishes to  speak on behalf of 'some' is curious, is it her own  ignorance or malice? I suspect she means that it's the song most people  associate with Geldof/the Rats and none of the others matter. It's just a weird way to introduce an article on a band that had a whole string of Top 40 hits .


They are the only one hit wonders with two #1s though Dexys are similar with Come On Eileen (some might forget Geno being #1).   More #1s than The Clash, The Stranglers, Sex Pistols et al combined.  More than Madness. More than Mariah Carey. More than Fleetwood Mac. More than Kings of Leon.  More than Simon and Garfunkel. More than The Who.  More than Prince. More then Led Zeppelin. More then Pink Floyd. More than Pulp. As many as Arctic Monkeys.  As many as Blur.  As many as Coldplay.

But 11 less than Westlife.  Maybe that's what they are being compared with.  The journalist is probably too young to remember. and too lazy to research it.

PS Chuck in the Christmas song as well if referring to "his" hits.  That makes it 3 #1s



__________________

 What is this bloke talking about? 


Loudmouth

Status: Offline
Posts: 2631
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lazy or spiteful journalism (more likely the latter) but but ultimately a totally superfluous opening line. 

If she does too much of this, which adds no value, she might find herself superfluous to the Times' requirements. 



__________________


Back To Boomtown

Status: Offline
Posts: 7207
Date:
Permalink  
 

Mark L wrote:

...she might find herself superfluous to the Times' requirements. 


The Times will soon find itself superfluous to their readers like much of the press.  Would be interesting to know how many newspapers are actually paid for these days.  I get two free in the morning, an occasional freebie from Waitrose at lunchtime and a freebie in the evening.  In the last seven years circulation of the "paid for" papers has dropped from over 10 million to around 6.5 million. And given a substantial amount of that 6.5 million are given away (via Waitrose or in hotels), it is a wonder there are still nine UK newspapers left.  I suspect two or three will be gone within a couple of years.  Guardian looks like it is on its last legs with the begging on the website.



__________________

 What is this bloke talking about? 
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard