Re: label & rumours??

["Sawyer, Keith" <Keith.Sawyer@FMR.Com>]

Len Bullard <cbullard@HiWAAY.net> writes (Sat, 21 Sep 1996 13:40:08 -0500)
Subject: Re: Love-Hounds digest V12 #300

>Everyone in the musical community acknowledges she is a genius
>and attractive lady.  A star, still, but a superstar any longer,
>no.  She gave it away to be a recluse.  You have to tour in
>America to make it.  She wants to have her cake and eat it too.
>They only indulge such until the profit margins fail to match
>the investment.  So, as long as she makes some money, they
>won't drop her, but they won't promote her either.

While I would bet Kate makes the label a very predictable (if low) profit, 
she probably would still only have to break even to keep an album deal. 
  Since there are enough in the musical community who respect and influence 
her, a label like Columbia will use Kate Bush (or Warner's with let's say 
... Robyn Hitchcock) to round out their commerical rosters.  She is a way to 
have a critically acclaimed reputation balance out the one-shot garbage. 
 She is also an attraction to entice other artists into signing with 
EMI/Columbia - those who either have a great deal of respect for Kate and 
wish to be on the same label or those who assume because Kate receives such 
creative flexibility they might also.

As far as promotion you're right ... Kate is not overly helpful in that 
area.  Still, I was relatively pleased with Columbia's push for TRS - hey, 
getting a video on MTV is no easy thing. :)  I was at a minor radio station 
at the time and we got the prerequisite phone calls/promos etc. that we get 
for every normal major-label release, so no let-down there.  Heck, I was 
shocked that they got her to do in-store appearances & interviews - I doubt 
she was overly enthusiastic about coming to NYC to sign autographs ...

>Were it not for her fans and friends, Kate would be washed up in the 
business.

... and so would REM, and The Cure, and ...

>Right now most of the legends of country and western music do not
>have record deals.  That is also true of many 70s rock stars.

Any 'known' artist can get a record deal if they wish to put out their new 
work - they just may have to go with a lower volume indy or self-created 
label without the distribution.  Frampton did so, but most others take the 
Styx/Kansas route and spend their time in the most profitable way - touring 
rather than recording.  I doubt they have any delusions of creating another 
monster hit record.  I can't speak of C&W, but with the number of 'live' TNN 
TV specials out there featuring Willie Nelson, Merle Haggard et al - it 
seems they are making the same decision.

keith