from Fox News--

Exclusive: Paul McCartney Leaving Capitol Records After 40 Years

Monday, March 12, 2007

By Roger Friedman


Paul McCartney Leaving Capitol Records After 40 Years

Exclusive: Paul McCartney is splitting with the record company he’s called home for most of the last 43 years.

Except for a brief break in the early 1980s when he skipped to Columbia Records and then back, McCartney has been with Capitol since the Beatles’ first album in 1964.

But he’s leaving, effective immediately, and taking his entire back catalog of solo albums with him. That’s everything including bestsellers like "Band on the Run," "McCartney," "Ram," "Flowers in the Dirt," "Tug of War" and his critically acclaimed most recent album, "Chaos and Creation in the Backyard," nominated for four Grammys, including Album of the Year, in 2006.

That much is news. This much has also been reported: McCartney will be the first artist signed with Starbucks’ new record label. News of the label and McCartney’s potential involvement were first suggested in Sunday’s New York Post.

But I can tell you exclusively: It’s a done deal. It will be announced this week. McCartney will first offer just his new album to Starbucks for a fall release. The rest of the catalog he will sit on for the moment.

Capitol, I can also tell you, is not happy. They are part of the ailing EMI Records empire. EMI, like Warner Music, is suffering and could collapse at any time. This news is a terrible blow to them.

"They knew it was coming," a source says. "They did nothing for the 'Chaos' album, and they were reminded that McCartney’s entire contract was ending. Look, they did nothing for the Beatles’ 'Love' album this winter. It just sold on its own. Everything they do is outdated."

McCartney’s exit from Capitol is interesting in many ways. Every since the Beatles joined Capitol, all their albums and all their solo albums have come from the label.

Capitol’s association with the group since they broke up in 1970 has always been key. McCartney’s Wings albums were with the label, as was John Lennon’s "Imagine," George Harrison’s "All Things Must Pass" and Ringo Starr’s "Ringo!" Even Sean Lennon has released a Capitol album.

But all that may change now that McCartney has flown the coop. Starbucks has proven to be a much more effective seller of CDs and DVDs than record stores, thanks to their amazing retailing and branding.

Starbucks customers have come to regard non-coffee product merchandise as hip and attractive, while record companies have been unable to reach customers at all in recent years.

I never thought I'd see the day where a major artist would be selling his product via coffee houses...

Jeff

Get ready to pony up big bucks for the next wave of McCartney remasters!!

Hey, somebody's got to cover those alimony payments. Why not us?

While I don't believe that the above two paragrpahs are entirely accurate, I'll give Starbucks credit--they do seem to be about the only outfit out there interested in selling music to people who are actually out of their teens.

Here's the thing though--How many albums is McCartney capable of selling these days, anyway? At risk of pissing off Beatles fans (yet again) McCartney may be rock and roll royalty, but as we saw with the Who last year, being a rock and roll legend doesn't automatically translate into platinum records, especially when there's a lot more buzz about a possible announcement concerning Beatles remasters than there is about a new McCartney album by years end. Blaming Capital for the (supposedly) lackluster sales of the "Love" and the "Chaos and Creation in the Backyard" albums seems slightly disingenuous, especially considering the tone of the rest of the article.

I also have to wonder to what extent Sir Paul's imminent (and presuemably massive) divorce settlement is playing into his business decisions right now...

http://www.imwan.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.p ... 297#237297

Very good point; Starbucks doesn't discount, doesn't flood the market with promos & their releases tend to sell for 3-4 times the price of other standard US releases on ebay.

As far as promo's go, I have found every single release of theirs as a promo, when it was released. (not that I bought all of them) but they are available. I simply wait and pick them up for $8. I will never buy them at their ridiculous high prices. Thank God for the independents!

You likely have a local radio station employee or newspaper reviewer who's selling them to the store you frequent.

This news saddens me. The fabs at EMI just seems natural.

I don't think so, because right now there are multiple copies of the Lennon and Doors discs. Not just one each. The interesting thing is they are not your standard issue "promos". They have no indications on the discs they are promos. I have seen that a lot lately, with many promos hitting the stores in big lots but with all of them either not marked at all or barely. Like a slash across the bar code or small nick on it instead of the older promo hole or cut on the jewel case. Either way, they are promos and are out there to be had.

It's official!

http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/news/art ... 1003561098

McCartney To Anchor New Starbucks Label

March 21, 2007, 3:00 PM ET

Jeff Vrabel, Bluffton, S.C.

After weeks of speculation, Paul McCartney is now officially the first artist signed to Hear Music, a new joint label formed by Starbucks and the Concord Music Group. The as-yet-untitled album is due in early June; its release on Hear Music marks the end of McCartney's decades-long association with Capitol.

"This is something I’ve been working on for a little while now," McCartney said of the David Kahne-produced album during a Webcast today (March 21). "A lot of it’s very personal to me.Tthe songs are in some ways a little bit retrospective. Some of them are of now, some of them hark back to the past, but all of them are songs I’m very proud of."

As previously reported, Starbucks will primarily handle A&R for the collaborative initiative, while Concord will head up marketing, promotion and distribution of the label's product outside the coffee shops. The Hear Music name has been used since 1999 for compilations and co-releases at Starbucks; it will now apply exclusively to this partnership.

Starbucks' profile as a music retail outlet has jumped significantly in the past few years, especially following the success of Ray Charles' "Genius Loves Company," a joint production with Concord that scored eight Grammy awards. The company has also struck deals to release exclusive albums by Bob Dylan and Alanis Morissette.

McCartney's last studio album was 2005's critical favorite "Chaos and Creation in the Backyard," which has sold 533,000 copies in the United States, according to Nielsen SoundScan.

I don't know about you guys. When Capitol/EMI can't re-sign a guy who is an institution to the label, you have to know that they are on extremely shaky ground. I don't know a heck of a lot about business, so I may be coming off as alarmist here. I think it's time to start the countdown for the final collapse of EMI as a record company.

I'm still thinking that they're going to merge with WEA.

Your questions are complicated - yet not complicated. I take no offense to anything you wrote. His writing style & music flavor continues to evolve as the baby boomer generation continues to age and he still writes music reflective of us and our experiences as adults in the baby boomer generation. Contrast his writing to the '60s where it was youth, love and peace. What's more amazing is his albums never sound like the previous one...with maybe the exception of Flowers in the Dirt where over half the songs sounded like they belonged on a Beatles album.

As for selling records: the corporate record companies have turned us completely off for several reasons:

1. They target only the youth market.

2. We all know these companies have music & lyrics departments where songs are usually collated and given to their studio musicians to record in the studio. Then a so-called "artist" to walks in and sing the lyrics.

3. They find a successful band and then promote hundreds of "clone" bands. Really...how many clones of Metallica & Nirvana do we need to be subjected to on hard rock radio?

It's hysterical that oldie acts such as Paul McCartney, The Stones, Who, Elton John, etc go out and fill up stadiums and rack up ticket sales without any promotion from their labels. Meanwhile, the Britney Spears & Justin Timberlakes of the world barely fill arenas. Gee...do ya think the Oldies acts guys create great music and maybe it's what the masses want to listen to???

You would THINK the major record labels would have a clue. But...they point the finger at ripping dvds and lack of record sales.

MEMO TO THE LABELS: we've been copying album to cassette/cassette to cassette and passing them out to our friends for decades. Your lack of record sales is because the bands you promote SUCK and we aren't buying their records.

I saw a report on the news yesterday that stated the Starbucks deal is only for the next album and does NOT include the catalog. I guess the catalog is in limbo, unless EMI has the rights.

So very true.

damnyankee said:

MEMO TO THE LABELS: we've been copying album to cassette/cassette to cassette and passing them out to our friends for decades. Your lack of record sales is because the bands you promote SUCK and we aren't buying their records.



Thanks so much for saying that. Truly, you have said it all in a nutshell.

It's even more hilarious considering that none of the acts you mention have made a studio album worth listening to in 10 (or is it 20) years. (mind you Britney, Justin et al have NEVER made an album worth listening to...)

I did finally come to the conclusion that the last Who cd would have been ok if they'd spent more time on it (some great songs but it sounds like a rough demo to me) & if Daltry still had a voice..........

I can't speak for Justin Timberlake, but Britney Spears has sold something like $150 million dollars worth of concert tickets in the past ten years or so. A "barely" filled arena is still a filled arena. (There I go again, defending Britney--what can I say?)

As to whether or not the record labels are handling any of the promotion for the Stones, the Who, et. al., all I know is that SOMEBODY is promoting the crap out of those tours. In some of the many articles written recently about dwindling CD sales, it is often pointed out that the tours pull in a lot more money than the records they they are supposed to promote. As a result, I don't know if it's fair to say that the record labels even should be promoting the tours--perhaps the tour promoters should be promoting the albums more? McCartney is about as high-profile as an artist can get--if his latest album doesn't sell, is it because the record company didn't promote it or because HE didn't promote it?

The recent thread about Jeff Lynne and the Traveling Wilburys makes me wonder about something else, however, and this sort of goes back to John Mellencamp's pickup truck song and the issue of airplay for aging artists--Would a comeback such as the one Roy Orbison had back before his death in the late 1980's be possible today? McCartney is all over the news and the internet these days, but I haven't heard so much as a note of any of his music more recent than "Freedom". Orbison's voice seemed (to me, anyway) to already be all over the radio when the announcement of his death came over the wire--which made the news that much more shocking. But in this 21st century hip-hop/Clear Channel age, would a Roy Orbison have any chance of resurfacing? Although, come to think of it, Johnny Cash managed to do exactly that before he died...enough of my rambling.

Totally disagree!

McCartney's Flaming Pie is one of his best going all the way back to the first one. Off the Ground and Flowers are strong B+ records as well. The last three Stones records all had about 50-70% good songs on each. And Elton's Songs From the West Coast and Peachtree Road are also two excellant records. I agree w/ you about The Who (sad).

Of course this is my opinion but many who follow these three agree the ones I just mentioned are worth any fans collection. Mind you all have released some dogs in recent past as well but to say they released nothing is saying you dismissed them w/o really listening to them.
Try again with a sustained back to back to back listen and I'll bet you have a new and better perspective. If not then ok, you tried. If you don't want to try then all you are left with is the tenny bopper stuff the record comps try and shove down our throats. Good luck with that.

While I am very much a Beatles fan, The only McCartney solo track I can stomach is Maybe I'm Amazed (which I think is as good as any Beatles track). For me John Lennon's comment on PM's solo carrer in How Do You Sleep pretty much sums it up, "The sound you make is muzak to my ears". For me just about all solo McCartney is bubble gum. I'm also aware that I'm in the minority on this.

I remember during the Beatles era feeling that Lennon's bitterness & McCartney's syrupiness balanced each other out. I guess I prefer bitterness if I have to take them seperately! I enjoyed Lennon's first few solo albums; & the odd track or 3 from the later ones.

I'm also not overly fond of Elton John, & probably haven't enjoyed anything since Good Bye YBR of which I liked about 1/3.