Babyshambles

I have no desire to listen to their music, I dislike the genre, and the only time I've seen him 'perform' was with Elton John at Live 8. I felt so embarassed for Elton, to share a stage with that talentless moron.

With regards to his personal life, I hope he gets banged up and becomes someones bitch tbh. I resent having to share my oxygen supply with him.
 
Garp said:
I'd reckon you're right. Most people fail to understand how the music industry works.
When you get signed up, as you'll see in places, artists get signed up for £xxxxxxx. That money is given to you by the record label, BUT its actually a loan, not a gift. The record label take everything you make until that loan is paid off. Its not hard to make a guess that quite a bit of the money Babyshambles were given will have gone on drugs etc. etc. Are their record sales enough to have paid back the loan? Not sure, I'd guess possibly not. They're big (god knows why), but not that big.
Click to expand...

one of the larger costs on the most recent Doherty album was damaged studio equipment, all fully recoupable against royalty.

man's a tit and his own worst enemy.

you'd be surprised at quite how little money most artists make from records, touring may well be a different story but records on the whole make the artist sweet f.a. which is why you'll find they throw on a tour every time they need new cash rather than releasing new product.
 
Cookie-Monster said:
one of the larger costs on the most recent Doherty album was damaged studio equipment, all fully recoupable against royalty.

man's a tit and his own worst enemy.

you'd be surprised at quite how little money most artists make from records, touring may well be a different story but records on the whole make the artist sweet f.a. which is why you'll find they throw on a tour every time they need new cash rather than releasing new product.
Click to expand...

Indeed.. U2 made something like 10 or 100 times more money from the Vertigo tour than they made from selling "How to dismantle an atomic bomb" which is their most selling album ever. Can't remember the figures but I remember being gobsmacked by the difference.
 
andi said:
I have no desire to listen to their music, I dislike the genre, and the only time I've seen him 'perform' was with Elton John at Live 8. I felt so embarassed for Elton, to share a stage with that talentless moron.

With regards to his personal life, I hope he gets banged up and becomes someones bitch tbh. I resent having to share my oxygen supply with him.
Click to expand...

to be fair he had just done some crack before going on stage that was not a show of his abilities
 
Cummon guys give him a break, Pete is a good bloke really.
One of the last remaining rockstars, yes they suck, yes they take drugs, yes they are asses in general, but he a rock star in the traditional sense. Doing what he wants with his life, i applaud him, its either one extreme or another, the sanitised bullcarp from *insert generic fame tv prog here* or an out and out rockstar. None of this boring "OMG SAVE *** TREES" from coldplay, or "OMG ANTI Pollution, BUT IM GONNA SEND MY PRIVATE JET 3000miles to pick up my hat from my PA that stole it" from bono. ****

May i take you back to the days of excess and carp taking when Led Zepplin, The Rolling Stones, Hendrix, Pink Floyd., sex drugs and rock an roll!

\O/
 
DanSolo said:
May i take you back to the days of excess and carp taking when Led Zepplin, The Rolling Stones, Hendrix, Pink Floyd., sex drugs and rock an roll!
\O/
Click to expand...

Yeah, if you don't like there music then fair enough... But slagging the guy you have never met because of a drug habit is a little extreme... Especially as almost every great piece of art was created under the influence of some substance or other.
 
mburn_83 said:
Yeah, if you don't like there music then fair enough... But slagging the guy you have never met because of a drug habit is a little extreme... Especially as almost every great piece of art was created under the influence of some substance or other.
Click to expand...

Dude, he was, like, supporting Doherty. Re-read what he wrote.
 
mburn_83 said:
Yeah, if you don't like there music then fair enough... But slagging the guy you have never met because of a drug habit is a little extreme... Especially as almost every great piece of art was created under the influence of some substance or other.
Click to expand...

ok then how about slagging him off because people part with hard earned cash to see him live, then he is incapable of even playing? would that be fair?

wouldnt like to try the comparison between the greatness of the Libertines/shambles with the Greatness of the Beatles/stones/hendrix who also did a lot of drugs but at least had the decency to be in a fit state to perform to their paying fans.
 
chrisd said:
Dude, he was, like, supporting Doherty. Re-read what he wrote.
Click to expand...

Sorry, i was agreeing with him...

Cookie-Monster said:
ok then how about slagging him off because people part with hard earned cash to see him live, then he is incapable of even playing? would that be fair?

wouldnt like to try the comparison between the greatness of the Libertines/shambles with the Greatness of the Beatles/stones/hendrix who also did a lot of drugs but at least had the decency to be in a fit state to perform to their paying fans.
Click to expand...

I think it's shocking when he doesn't show for gigs, though a lot of people still buy tickets to see him (even though he may not turn up).

i wasn't comparing the music, only that artists have used drugs, and many were worse abusers than pete. Also i watched an interview whereby the beatles stated that they played crap due to being so wasted, but that it didn't matter as the majority of there fans showed up to scream at them.
 
mburn_83 said:
i wasn't comparing the music, only that artists have used drugs, and many were worse abusers than pete. Also i watched an interview whereby the beatles stated that they played crap due to being so wasted, but that it didn't matter as the majority of there fans showed up to scream at them.
Click to expand...

The difference is though that the Beatles idea of a crap performance was still light-years ahead of the very best the Babyshambles or indeed most other modern acts can muster. :)
 
Gilly said:
Well I suppose Led Zep did some half decent stuff. And I can see why someone who isn't me might like the Stones.

The last one I can't forgive though.
Click to expand...

the stones were thrown in there jsut for the sake of the era, but you cant argue with the genious of floyd, zepplin and hendrix.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom